Current governance lacks credibility - Dr Sara

(October, 19, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) “My criticism is that whether it is the Rwanda, the Balkans, Iraq, Palestine, Darfur or Sri Lanka, the international community has not done enough to protect human rights or to prevent human rights abuses.” Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu, well known political thinker and specialist on Human Rights said an exclusive interview with Sri Lanka Guardian. He also reveals his opinion on current political developments , human rights abuses and close down panel of human rights to the Ministry of Human Rights in Sri Lanka

Excerpt of an Exclusive Interview,

By: Nilantha Ilangamuwa with Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu

Q. Please comment on the current political situation in Sri Lanka, the realities, hopes and despairs of it.

A. Current political developments in Sri Lanka are dominated by the fact of protracted and intensifying conflict. To this should be added the pervasive culture of impunity in respect of human rights and flagrant violation of international humanitarian standards. Consequently, the regime and the LTTE are the mirror images of each other. Both, the current regime and the LTTE are caught in a trap of their own making in which there is a preponderant reliance on military victory. The result that each one hopes for is defeat of the other.

"Continuing undermining of institutions"

Against this backdrop are the rising costs of war in particular, translating into a rising cost of living and the other problems of governance pertaining to corruption and political patronage. There is a continuing undermining of the institutions of governance – for instance the Seventeenth Amendment which set up the Constitutional Council and independent commissions has been violated and commissions that were set up to act as checks and balances on the exercise of executive authority are now subjected to political patronage through unilateral presidential appointments to them. They lack independence and credibility. In short, there is a situation of conflict compounded by a crisis in and of governance.

Q. Government of Sri Lanka says it is involved in a war on terror? How credible is this claim when the ethnic issue remains unsolved?

A. Certainly, terrorism should be defeated and the way in which it is done should not sow the seeds of further terrorism and conflict. Defeating the terrorism of the LTTE is in itself insufficient to resolve the ethnic conflict. The LTTE is a symptom of this conflict. What is required to resolve it and for political stability, is a new constitutional settlement which addresses the grievances and meets the aspirations of all the peoples of this country.

"Political settlement is not being pursued in earnest."

I strongly believe that this should be a federal settlement combining "self rule" and "shared rule" or put another way, the desire for autonomy in certain areas with the simple fact of interdependence in others. The great danger in the current position of the GOSL is that a political settlement is not being pursued in earnest and that if the current government was to defeat the LTTE militarily, it would not consider a political settlement but consolidate the unitary state founded on majoritarianism. The latter is at the root of the conflict. Take the APRC and the majority within it for a power sharing settlement. Why cannot the government endorse this instead of being hostage to the JVP/JHU line about the unitary state?

Q. How do you reckon LTTE’s goal of Eelam?

A.I do not think very much of this because I have always believed and continue to do so, that there has never been a majority of the Tamil polity in Sri Lanka in favour of a separate state. I think Tamil grievances and aspirations can be met in a united and federal Sri Lanka.

Q. You would therefore consider this as a mythical dream!

A. My previous answer deals with it.

Q. How is Sri Lanka performing on Human Rights while being involved in a brutal War, even is its fighting terrorism?

A. Much has been written, said and done about LTTE human rights violations. As a consequence the organization has been banned and labeled a terrorist by a number of countries. What is not acceptable as well is that the current regime is not fulfilling its primary responsibility of protecting the human rights of all of its citizens. I cannot accept the argument that nothing can be done about human rights in a fight against terrorism however brutal. The failure of the regime to protect human rights and to reverse the pervasive culture of impunity with regard to human rights violations, compounds the brutality of this conflict.

The Government has the primary responsibility for human rights protection. The security forces will be strengthened in the eyes of the people on whose behalf they are supposed to be fighting, if allegations against sections of them are investigated, arrests made, indictments filed and prosecutions pursued.

The number of disappearances, abductions and killings is appalling. The number of humanitarian workers killed is amongst the highest, if not the highest in the world at the moment. Government ministers castigated the UN Under-Secretary General for Humanitarian Affairs as a "terrorist" for pointing this out. Days after he left more humanitarian workers were killed. The regime first denies and then goes on the offensive. Ultimately commissions are appointed, the findings of which are not made public. People have "disappeared" in broad daylight in high security zones and during curfew hours. Every day at least one person is disappeared, abducted or killed on the peninsula.

Over 60 persons have voluntarily sought protective custody in jail, in Jaffna, for fear that if they were allowed out they would be "disappeared". The Commission of Inquiry (COI) set up to look at 16 cases of human rights violations and the International Independent Group of Eminent Persons (IIGEP) attached to it have not been able to progress on a single case before them. The latter are on record saying that the COI does not meet international standards. It will soon be one year since they were set up. What has happened to the Mahanama Tillekeratne Commission on Disappearances? To the cases of the Vice Chancellor of the Eastern University and to Father Jim Brown amongst others? Is it not the case that people are too frightened to come before commissions because of fear of their lives?

"What of the attempted eviction of Tamils from Colombo?"

How were two Red Cross workers abducted in broad daylight at the Fort Railway Station and their bodies found in Kiriella in the Ratnapura district some two days later? And what of the attempted eviction of Tamil citizens in lodges in the city of Colombo? Did the regime treat them as citizens of Sri Lanka? Who gave the orders and what has happened? What about Gajanayake who is supposed to be responsible for the abductions in Colombo? What about Karuna and his links to the security forces? And what about the treatment of journalists and civil society activists who dare to dissent?

Q. Four Members of Sri Lanka's Human Rights panel including you have now resigned. Can you explain to us the reasons behind your decision?

A. We joined this committee because we felt that we should try to engage constructively with the government on human rights. Unfortunately we found that this was not possible and that the government was either unwilling or unable to heed our advice. Furthermore, we found that the government was using our membership of this committee for the propaganda purpose of demonstrating its bona fides on human rights protection when in fact nothing effective was being done to strengthen human rights protection. We also found out that at the last session of the Human Rights Council in Geneva the government actively lobbied against and vetoed the participation of one of the committee members on a high level panel on gender issues. The member in question, Sunila Abeysekera, was awarded a prize by the UN to mark the 50th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. She has just been awarded the Human Rights Prize by Human Rights Watch as well.

Q. Can you explain the role and status of the Human Rights Panel formed by the Minister of Human Rights in Sri Lanka?

A. My understanding of this committee was that it would provide a forum in which civil society concerns on human rights could be brought to the attention of the government including representatives from the Attorney General's Department, the police and security services with a view to positive and construction action being taken to strengthen human rights protection. The committee was to articulate civil society concerns, advice and come up with recommendations.

Q. Are you satisfied with what you were able to do as an adviser on the panel for Human Rights in Sri Lanka?

A.No, but I am satisfied to the extent that I have had the experience of trying to engage with the government in this advisory capacity on this all important issue. Consequently, I cannot be accused of not trying to engage constructively.

Q. One of the members of the panel says, "We noticed that the government was not serious about improving the Human Rights situation," please explain to us that point with some of the latest examples faced by your panel members?

A.Whilst we succeeded in getting the presidential directives on arrest reissued, implementation was problematic. Continued advice with regard to arrests, indictments and prosecutions did not lead to any action. It seemed at points that the ministry itself was being sidelined and expected to engage in public relations on human rights.

Q. Why does Sri Lanka need the Human Rights Monitoring Mission?

A. What Sri Lanka needs is a field based presence of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights because there is no national institution that commands public respect and inspires public confidence and trust to provide for human rights protection in this country. Once this is established and the Seventeenth Amendment reactivated and an independent Human Rights Commission appointed, the two institutions can work together. Human Rights protection in Sri Lanka cannot be exclusively national or international. It has to combine the two and in complementary ways. At present the priority is to reverse the culture of impunity – international monitoring is necessary for this.

Q. Please comment on the position taken by Louise Arbour the current UN High Commissioner for Human Rights during her recent visit to this country.

A.What Louise Arbour pointed out was that the weakness of the rule of law and the prevalence of impunity in Sri Lanka is alarming. She also pointed out that problems with regard to how the national Human Rights Commission is constituted, its efficacy and independence has created a crisis of confidence in it locally and internationally. Consequently, it may lose its accreditation to the international body governing these institutions.

Q. Eastern Scholars say using "Human Rights" is a means of external elements to involve into the affairs of poorer countries. Please comment.

A.The basic point is that government has the primary responsibility for the protection of the human rights of all its citizens. The issue of international assistance or intervention arises when the government is unable or unwilling to fulfill its basic responsibility. When people live in fear and insecurity and when their government cannot or will not do anything about it, thank god there is an international community to turn to. My criticism is that whether it is the Rwanda, the Balkans, Iraq, Palestine, Darfur or Sri Lanka, the international community has not done enough to protect human rights or to prevent human rights abuses. The international community commonly referred to is highly statist and sovereignty conscious – the UN being no exception. After all, Louise Arbour came to Sri Lanka because the government invited her. She can only set up an office here if the government agrees. Why is international military assistance any less interventionary than assistance on human rights ?

Q.Why does the international community focus on the human rights violations in the Third World and not on those in the West ?

A.The international community is a political body and at any given point in time, it will reflect the global balance of power. It has focused on human rights violations in Western countries. The point about the latter is that credible institutions and processes exist for the investigation of these violations and the indictment and prosecution of perpetrators of human rights violations. For instance, has anything been done in Sri Lanka in respect of allegations against members of the security forces that can be remotely compared to what has been done in the US for instance with regard to allegations against members of the US military for human rights violations in Iraq ? Even if it were the case that nothing is done about violations in the West, I do not think that in any way justifies or excuses nothing being done about violations in the Third World. We are talking about human beings and human rights - we are not participating in some high school debate in which the main objective is to score debating points. Do two wrongs make a right?