The Lessons Learn and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC), after dragging on their deliberations for more than 18 months, released its results on the 16 December 2011. The Western countries were quick with their views on LLRC. They commended the LLRC on its positive recommendations but pointed out its short comings.
They took satisfaction that the Commission has called for a "comprehensive approach" to address the issue of missing persons as a matter of urgency. The next of kin continue to complain that the whereabouts of many of those missing persons are still unknown. The Government therefore is duty bound to direct the law enforcement authorities to take immediate steps to ensure that these allegations are properly investigated into and perpetrators brought to justice.
The disarming of paramilitary groups figured high on the Commission's recommendations but they were disappointed that no roadmap was set with time limits. Paramilitaries, who operate under orders of the Sri Lankan army and the Defence Secretary, were responsible for most of the abductions and disappearances. The Commission recommended that a Special Commissioner of Investigation be appointed to investigate alleged disappearances and provide material to the Attorney General to initiate criminal proceedings as appropriate.
The Commission recommends that an Independent Advisory Committee be appointed to monitor and examine detention and arrest of persons taken into custody under any regulation made under the Public Security Ordinance or the Prevention of Terrorist Act (PTA). Most of these prisoners, who were arrested under some flimsy pretexts, are languishing in Sri Lankan prisons without trial for more than 10 years; nor do they have any other recourse to demand a fair trial.
The Commission acknowledges "that the root cause of the ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka lies in the failure of successive Governments to address the genuine grievances of the Tamil people." "The conflict could have been avoided had the southern [Sinhalese] political leaders … acted in the national interest and … offered an acceptable solution to the Tamil people.
Here again the Commission balanced their statement by blaming the victims. "Tamil political leaders were equally responsible for this conflict, which could have been avoided had the Tamil leaders refrained from promoting an armed campaign towards secession, acquiescing in the violence and the terrorist methods used by the Tamil Tigers." After thirty years of peaceful protestations what choice had the Tamils other than to resort to armed rebellion?
The commission also stated that discriminations against the Tamils in matters of education and their livelihoods be removed. A Tamil student has to score very high marks to enter institutions of higher education or earn a scholarship.
The Western governments totally disagreed with LLRC's statement that "the Commission is satisfied that the military strategy that was adopted to secure the LTTE held areas was one that was carefully conceived, in which the protection of the civilian population was given the highest priority."
In the few cases of potential Government wrongdoing "the Commission stresses that there is a duty on the part of the State to ascertain more fully, the circumstances under which such incidents could have occurred, and if such investigations disclose wrongful conduct, to prosecute and punish the wrong doers."
LLRC was also inconclusive on who was responsible for the shelling of hospitals and loss of lives and damage to property. The Commission was of the view that the Government of Sri Lanka with the co-operation of the international community, in particular the agencies as well as civil society groups had, in a spirit of international co-operation and solidarity, taken all possible steps in getting food and medical supplies and other essential items across to the entrapped civilians despite enormous logistical difficulties of the operation.
Although Rajapaksa made sure that the war was conducted without witnesses by evicting the media personal from the war zone, satellite images and evidence from doctors and others in the war zone clearly indicated that the Sri Lankan armed forces were involved in the carnage with a vicious intent of causing maximum damage to life and property before the conflict ended. As the LLRC failed to expose the culprits responsible for the genocide, the Western powers now insist on international accountability.
Tamil Partys' Response
On 20 December 2011 Tamil leaders roundly condemned the LLRC report. TNA leader R.Sampanthan said "the findings of the LLRC offend the dignity of these (Tamil) victims". The TNA insisted that the allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by both the Tamil Tigers and the government forces needed to be fully investigated. Calling upon the international community to establish a "mechanism for accountability" to bring to book the perpetrators of war crimes during the last stages of the Eelam War that ended in May 2009, the Tamil National Alliance on Monday said the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission report "categorically fails to effectively and meaningfully deal with issues of accountability".
Tamil National People Front (TNPF) said it totally rejected the report and added that the report is a deliberate attempt to whitewash the egregious crimes committed against the Tamil people. "The report places the blame on the LTTE and other Tamil groups. We can no longer remain patient. There is urgent need for the International Community to conduct an independent investigation. What happened is genocide. While the war ended two and a half years ago, structural genocide against Tamil people is continuing, and International community should not hesitate to raise its voices," Gajendrakumar Ponnambalam, vice president of TNPF told the media.
"While Colombo regards any independent investigation into war crimes as a threat its sovereignty, we demand that all dastardly crimes and instruments of oppression carried out against the Tamil people from 1948, the year of independence, need to be presented as evidence before an independent panel, and perpetrators of the crimes should be brought to justice," Gajendrakumar said.
Human Rights' Views
A trio of international human rights NGOs, International Crisis Group (ICG), Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, were invited to make representations before the LLRC but they refused to do so. They found fundamental flaws in the composition of the Commission, which consisted mostly of former government officials and also in its mandate, which was too restrictive in terms of investigating human rights violations. They adopted a common position that there continues to be a need for an independent international investigation into the issues of human rights violations and war crimes. So far, the response of international governments has been rather muted.
"Governments and UN bodies have held back (their moves) for the past 18 months to allow the Sri Lankan commission to make progress on accountability," said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. "The commission's failure to provide a road map for investigating and prosecuting wartime perpetrators shows the dire need for an independent, international commission."
The LLRC's findings, largely exonerating government forces for laws-of-war violations, stand in stark contrast to those by the UN Panel of Experts, the UN special envoy on extrajudicial executions, and other independent organizations. The UN Panel of Experts concluded that both government forces and the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) conducted military operations "with flagrant disregard for the protection, rights, welfare and lives of civilians and failed to respect the norms of international law."
Western Views
On 19 December 2011 the United States government which, had been one of the first foreign governments to respond, said there are gaps in the LLRC report. The US has also noted that the Commission has addressed a number of the crucial areas of concern to Sri Lankans, in particular in the areas of reconciliation, devolution of authority, demilitarization, rule of law, media freedom, disappearances, and human rights violations. With regard to an independent international inquiry the US State Department spokesperson, Victoria Nuland, has expressed the view that "it is better for Sri Lankans to take these issues themselves and address them fully. That remains our position, so now we want to see if the Sri Lankan Government will lead their country in the next step to ensure that there is full implementation of the recommendations that we have and filling in of the gaps"; the gaps here refers to full accountability.
Canada also opined that the report does not "adequately address" the allegations of human rights violations relating to the final stages of the war.
"The final report of the LLRC released on December 16 is a potentially important contribution to Sri Lanka's much-needed political reconciliation. The Commission can be commended for making substantive recommendations in many sensitive and far-reaching areas," Canada's High Commissioner to Sri Lanka Bruce Levy told the Daily Mirror.
"At the same time, however, our initial reading of the report supports the view that the serious allegations of intentional wrong-doing on the part of some elements of Sri Lanka's military have yet to be adequately addressed," High Commissioner Levy said. Australian also gave a similar response.
During a trip to Sri Lanka in September 2011, for example, US Assistant Secretary of State Robert Blake said, referring to the LLRC, "There will be pressure if it's not a credible process [leading to accountability], there will be pressure for some sort of alternative mechanism."
"It is clear that justice for conflict-related abuses is not going to happen within Sri Lanka's domestic institutions," Adams said. "The government has been playing for time by appointing the LLRC. That time has now run out."
Ms Nuland's remarks on accountability drew an angry response from External Affairs Minister, Peiris. He told media personnel at the news briefing with President Rajapaksa, "I want to point out that the US State Department has put out a statement yesterday. It is not a fair statement. They have raised the question about accountability saying matters related to accountability have been left open, that there is no comprehensive plan to implement the recommendations and that it does not fully address the human rights issues in the closing stages of the conflict. The issue of accountability has been addressed and it has been explained in the report. The demand about the comprehensive plan is not a reasonable demand. (In Sri Lanka any recommendation takes decades to implement, or perhaps never.)
"Why does it concentrate only on the final stages of the conflict? We also wish to question whether the US position applies on other issues in other parts of the world. For instance they have introduced 'Enhanced Techniques of Interrogation.' What does this mean?" If US can receive such rude remarks like this, what do you expect the poor Tamils to get?
Indian Response
The Indian response came belatedly on 26 December 2011.India called upon Sri Lanka to "act decisively and with vision" to achieve "meaningful devolution of powers and genuine national reconciliation." The Indian press statement was very well crafted. The delay could have been due to the fact that they were in a fix on how to respond.
New Delhi also said it was important for Colombo to ensure that "an independent and credible mechanism" is put in place to investigate allegations of human rights violations, as brought out by the Lessons Learn and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC), in "a time-bound manner." Here India was careful not to mention about external or international mechanism. Also they are to investigate war crimes that are reported in the LLRC and nothing more. The LLRC hardly touched on any of the war crimes, including sexual assault on women, indicated by the UN Panel of Experts
Reacting to the report of the LLRC tabled by the Sri Lankan Government in its Parliament on December 16, a spokesperson of the Ministry of External Affairs said: "We will remain engaged with them through this process and offer our support in the spirit of partnership." In the spirit of partnership both India and Sri Lanka conducted the genocide in Mullivaaikkal in May 2009 and now in the same spirit, they have to brush the crimes under the carpet.
He said the Government of India welcomes the public release of the LLRC report and takes note of the assurance given by the Government of Sri Lanka in Parliament about implementation of many of its recommendations. What is recommended is the barest minimum. If many of its recommendations are to be implemented, than even the barest minimum will not be implemented
He pointed out that India has been assured by Sri Lanka on several occasions in the past, of its commitment towards pursuit of a political process, through a broader dialogue with all parties, including the Tamil National Alliance (TNA), leading to the full implementation of the 13th Amendment to the Sri Lankan Constitution, and to go beyond, so as to achieve meaningful devolution of powers and genuine national reconciliation.
India should be fully aware that Sri Lanka is unwilling to implement the 13th Amendment in full. In particular they are not willing to part with land and police rights to the provincial councils. It is wishful thinking on the part of India that Rajapaksa will ever go beyond the 13th Amendment - that is 13+. Then the official gave some advice to Sri Lanka.
"We hope that the Government of Sri Lanka, recognising the critical importance of this issue, acts decisively and with vision in this regard. We will remain engaged with them through this process and offer our support in the spirit of partnership," he added
India also noted the Sri Lankan government's intention to set up mechanism to carry out further investigations relating to instances of alleged human rights violations and incidents involving loss of civilian life.
"In particular, we have noted the proposed measures pertaining to information on missing persons and detainees, investigation of cases of disappearances and abductions, promotion of a trilingual policy, deployment of Tamil-speaking officers in all offices, curbing activities of illegal armed groups, reduction of high security zones, return of private lands by the military and demilitarization , including phasing out of the involvement of the security forces in civilian activities and restoration of civilian administration in the Northern Province." Disappearances and abductions is continuing even to this day.
"We have noted the assurance given by the Government of Sri Lanka in Parliament that it will ensure the withdrawal of security forces from all aspects of community life and confine their role exclusively to security matters," the spokesperson added.
He went on to say that implementation of assurances to ensure speedy resettlement and genuine reconciliation, including early completion of the process of the return of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) and refugees to their respective homes, restoration of normal civilian life in affected areas will "mark a major step forward in the process of reconciliation."
India has also welcomed the fact that the LLRC report underlines that the present situation provides a great window of opportunity to forge a consensual way forward towards reconciliation through a political settlement based on devolution of power.
The spokesperson pointed out that the LLRC report recognises that a political solution is imperative to addressing the root cause of the conflict, and calls upon the Sri Lankan Government to provide "leadership to a political process which must be pursued for the purpose of establishing a framework for ensuring sustainable peace and security in the post-conflict environment." Successive Sri Lankan governments that had failed to give "leadership to a political process" for the last 63 years are not likely to do so now in their hour of 'victory' over the Tamils. It is not naivety on the part of India to make such statements; it is just a stubborn refusal to accept the reality on the ground.
President Mahinda Rajapaksa has not commented yet on the report. The LLRC itself has noted that recommendations made by previous commissions of inquiry had not been implemented. The failure of the government to implement even the LLRC's own interim recommendations in a conclusive manner has led to an exacerbation of the problem of credibility. The challenge is to ensure that there will be governmental follow-up to the final recommendations of the Commission. If that happens, it will be the first in 63 years that recommendations are implemented.
For example, the report of the All Party Representatives Conference headed by Prof.Tissa Vitharana, which was submitted to the President last year, would-be a suitable starting point in finding a political solution. Unfortunately, this report which was over two years and over a hundred meetings in the making has still not been released to the public by the President who appointed the Committee.
The past actions of the government cannot dispel concerns that the LLRC report will suffer the same fate of the countless other commission reports that are yet to be implemented. Although the government has won itself a breathing space from the international community, thanks to the LLRC report, it cannot rest on its laurels.
Land issues, minority rights and the possibility that militarization in the North might be a bit too much are all mentioned. And yet "The Commission however recognizes the fact that considering the protracted nature of the conflict spanning a period of thirty years, resolving all such issues would naturally take time and require significant resources and financing." Hopefully, the time taken doesn't stretch to decades.
It didn't take long for Sinhalese leaders to reject the LLRC report. Minister of the Western Province Udaya Gammanpila told journalists in Colombo on 27 December 2011, "it is incorrect to say that the Sri Lankan government has assured India that it will fully implement the 13th amendment". An Indian Government spokesman has said that the Government of Sri Lanka has assured on several occasions to fully implement the 13 amendment 'and to go beyond' in order to 'achieve a meaningful devolution and genuine reconciliation'.
Responding to the Indian statement, Minister Gammanpila said "the Government of President Mahinda Rajapaksa clearly stated that it is against devolving police and land powers to the provincial councils as well as the unification of the north and eastern provinces as proposed in the 13th amendment." "Therefore we ask India to clarify which Sri Lankan government has given this assurance," he added.
An announcement was made in Colombo that the External Affairs Minister S M Krishna "is to make an official visit to Sri Lanka on the 16th of this month," to discuss bilateral ties and security in the region, besides reviewing progress of a massive project undertaken by India for building 50,000 houses in the war-ravaged north for internally-displaced people. Tamil party sources, meanwhile, said Krishna would be keen to follow the progress of ongoing talks between the TNA and the government here. The Indian government had last week expressed keenness to see full implementation of Sri Lanka's 13th amendment to the Constitution on devolution of powers and further efforts as part of the political negotiations towards reconciliation. Analysts said the Sri Lankan government's latest statement highlighting its relaxed stance on the Tamil party demand for police and land powers to provinces is being viewed with interest in the light of Krishna's proposed visit. Cabinet spokesman Keheliya Rambukwella, in the statement, said that the government was willing to consider a proposal by the Tamil National Alliance on police and land powers.
Meanwhile on 26 December 2011, Sri Lankan Colonial Governor of the Northern Province, Major General (retired ) G.A.Chandrasiri, diverted 500 of the 2,000 Indian donated bicycles for resettled Tamils in the five districts of North, to Sinhala colonisers who had occupied the Ma'naalaa'ru division in Vanni. Earlier the India-donated tractors for the Tamil refugees was also siphoned off to the Sinhalese . "Even the aid provided by India to the people of North, as a public relations manoeuvre in camouflaging its anti-Tamil collaboration with the Sinhalese to commit genocide in Tamil Eelam, was used to colonise Tamil lands by the SL military-led civil administration," commented civil officials in Jaffna.
Mr. R. Sampanthan of Tamil National Allliance, observed the following in a press statement issued on 18th July 2011. "The callous actions of the Government in regard to the allocation of the 500 tractors gifted for the benefit of the affected people in the Vanni by India, the politically motivated bias showed in the choice of persons to whom land masters gifted by a Humanitarian Organization were distributed and the inordinate delay again for political reasons in the commencement of implementation of the 50,000 Houses programme gifted by India, are a few instances which clearly demonstrate the [Sri Lankan] government's lack of sincere commitment to the welfare of the affected people and the overwhelming desire for cheap political gain."
The Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC), which Rajapaksa has proposed to handle the negotiations with TNA, is another example of Sinhala shrewdness. It is composed of parliamentarians, who were had picked by Rajapaksa, will sit on the negotiations for years with no end result in sight. If by chance if an agreement is struck and it is presented in the parliament it will be more likely rejected by the majority Sinhalese and the Tamils will return to square one. The whole process will restart again with a new committee. This has been going on for the last sixty odd years and that is Sri Lankan democracy
This is Rajapaksa's personal view on the 13th Amendment. "They (Tamils) demand impossible things - merger of the north and the east, land policy and police. See what happened in your country when Rahul Gandhi was travelling in Uttar Pradesh. Chief minister Mayawati tried to get him arrested. Do you think I want to get arrested by these people (by giving the Tamils a police force)?"
On the militarisation in the north, where 100,000 Sinhalese soldiers are stationed among a population of 300.000, Rajapaksa said, "The military is playing a significant role in building infrastructure as the locals lack skills. Also, large sections of the north are yet to be de-mined. It is not true that school functions or library meetings and such activities require the permission of the military. But there could be cautious surveillance, knowing the nature of the defeated enemy. We are still getting hidden arms caches of the LTTE. The presence of the military will be phased out in keeping with security needs," and this phasing out could take decades.
S.M.Krishna's visit on 16 January will be basically to baby sit Sri Lanka. The Indian government has sent him to Sri Lanka to pressurize Rajapaksa to yield some concessions to the Tamils to ward off international pressure for accountability. If Rajapaksa and all those involved in the in the genocide are hurled up in Hague, India is in deep trouble. Gotabaya Rajapaksa has already said Sri Lanka fought India's war. India's contribution to the Tamil genocide in Vanni is not negligible. If India is exposed, they will not only be humiliated internationally, but also have to face the wrath of the people in Tamil Nadu.
Another reason for Krishna's visit to Sri Lanka is to wrap up commercial deals to feed the corporate greed in India. Rajapaksa knows what most countries require is commercial opportunities and he is very liberal in rewarding those countries that aided and abetted in the genocide of Tamils. China made heavy inroads into Sri Lanka. Similarly, India was also rewarded, but they do not have as deep a pocket as the Chinese; as a result they cannot throw around money as China could do.
On 3 January 2011, Sri Lanka and China signed a deal to build a 350 meter high communication tower, the tallest building in South Asia and 19th tallest tower in the world, to grace the Skyline of Colombo. The tower will host 50 television services providers, 50 broadcasting service providers and 10 telecommunications service providers - having a major impact on the nation's communication and information technology sectors, according to Sri Lanka's Telecommunications Regulatory Commission Director General Anusha Pelpita. This will be one more stab on India's southern flanks and the US may not take this lightly, as it is likely to affect their sea lanes.
One may be surprised at the coolness with which Rajapaksa conducts his daily affair, in spite of the worldwide clamour for accountability and genocide trial. In the past he had been playing one country against the other. India was forced to support him when China made heavy inroad into Sri Lanka. Michael H. Posner, Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor at the Department of State, has stated "international accountability mechanisms can become appropriate in circumstances in which a government is unable or unwilling to meet its obligations."
Finally the New York Times on 31 December 2011 noting that the "regarding the war's terrible final weeks, it [the LLRC Report] is largely an apologia for the army," a report appearing in New York Times Saturday says that "while the commission makes sensible recommendations and exposes grave atrocities committed by the Tigers against ordinary people, it also demonstrates that government troops shelled no-fire zones in order to neutralize rebel attacks from within," and adds, "Sri Lankans no longer need to pretend that the army didn't shell zones where civilians were encouraged to gather, or subscribe to the fantasy that no innocents died when shells landed on or near hospitals."
Visvanathan
By: Visvanathan
Source: TWG
Date: 10 January 2012
|
