Posted on August 23rd, 2014

Chanaka Bandarage, Lawyer

Establishment of OISL – first step towards creating the Eelam?

As pointed out by us in previous articles, the final objective of the West, who are heavily indoctrinated with false accusations against Sri Lanka by the most powerful Tamil Diaspora and their allies, wishes to split Sri Lanka into two and create a Tamil Eelam in the North and East. The establishment of OISL can be seen as a further step towards that direction. OISL in its report may falsely say that Sri Lanka is not safe for Tamils, the Sri Lankan Government continues to violate human rights of the Tamils; in order to alleviate Tamil discrimination, the only solution available is to create a separate state for Tamils (and Muslims) in the North East of Sri Lanka, after a referendum is conducted in those two provinces.

Per OHRC Resolution, A/HRC/25/1, OHCHR appointed three experts to hold the investigation against Sri Lanka: They consist of Mr. Martti Ahtisaari (President – Finland), Ms. Silvia Cartwright (New Zealand) and Ms. Asma Jahangir (Pakistan). They are required to provide a comprehensive written report on the outcome of the investigation to the HRC in March 2015. The credentials of some of the panel members have been questioned by patriotic groups. They have raised alarm that the panel members, handpicked by Ms Navi Pillai, are be biased against Sri Lanka. For example, Mr Ahtisaari (President of Finland from 1994 to 2000) is criticised as a leading figure who worked to create Kosovo. Through OISL, one wonders whether or not he will try to create a 2nd Kosovo in Sri Lanka. It is alleged that Ms Cartwright was criticised by the Cambodian Government in regards to her handling of the war crimes enquiry in that country.

Some say another motive of the West in establishing OISL is to put pressure on the Sri Lankan Government to hold a South Sudan style referendum to create the Tamil Eelam in Northern and Eastern Sri Lanka.

OHRC pathway to take Sri Lankans to the Hague

After receiving written submissions, OISL will promptly conduct enquiries. At the moment, it is likely that only adversaries of Sri Lanka will adduce evidence before OISL. This is not good. The writer believes that Channel 4, Gordon Weiss, Mr Darusman and his team, Stephen Rapp (he allegedly collected evidence in Mulatiwu during his visit to Sri Lanka), Eric Solheim, Tamil Diaspora, TNA, Northern and Eastern Tamils (people like Ms Anandi Sasitharan, Messrs Rayapppu Joseph, Sambandhan, Sumanthiran and hundreds or possibly thousands of other Tamils), many other enemies of Sri Lanka, will adduce evidence before the Commission. True, most of the evidence against Sri Lanka will be dubious, due to nil participation of Sri Lanka at the investigation and veracity of the evidence against Sri Lanka being very high, it is likely that OISL will make a recommendation that criminal proceedings should be initiated against certain Sri Lankan Government (and LTTE) military leaders and soldiers in the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the Hague, for alleged War Crimes atrocities (OSIL will name the alleged perpetrators – largely Sri Lanka’s Ranaviruwos). Needless to say it will be a real blow to Sri Lanka, the end result could be the incarceration of patriotic Sri Lankans in a jail in the Hague or another country, most likely for crimes that they never committed.

UN Security Council

The referral of Sri Lankan nationals to the ICC must be determined by the UN Security Council. The only consolation for Sri Lanka is that it has two strong allies, China and Russia who may use their veto power in favour of Sri Lanka. But, we must not forget that when the UN Security Council approved the referral of Mr Omar Al Bashir of Sudan to the ICC in the Hague (ICC-02/05-01/09; the Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir), his best friends, China and Russia abstained from voting – they did not veto against the proposal. After he was indicted by the ICC, Mr Al Bashir agreed to hold a referendum to determine whether or not Sudan should be divided into two. South Sudanese voted overwhelmingly at the Referendum in favour of the creation of new ‘South Sudan’. Furthermore, the President and the Vice President of Kenya are currently facing charges in the ICC for alleged crimes committed during and after the 2007 Kenyan Presidential election – the Prosecutor v. Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta ((ICC-01/09-02/11).

Like in Kenya and Sudan (and also in Libya) situations, it is possible for China and Russia to abstain at a crucial Security Council voting against Sri Lanka, resulting the referral of Sri Lankan political and military leaders to the ICC.

If our leaders and military commanders are referred to the ICC in the Hague to face war crimes charges, in ICC, quick indictments will be issued against them and warrants will be issued for their arrest if they do not turn up for court proceedings in the Hague. This is how the ICC acted in relation to Sudan, Kenya and former political and military leaders of former Yugoslavia, Serbia and Bosnia Herzegovina.

In regards to the former Sierra Leon leader, Charles Taylor, the ICC imposed a 50 year custodial sentence upon him.

Written and other Submissions to OISL

OISL has called for individuals, organisations and governments to provide written submissions about serious violations and abuses of human rights and related crimes in Sri Lanka,allegedly committed by the Sri Lankan Government, LTTE or other parties to the conflict during the period of 21 February 2002 to 15 November 2011. Such submissions are required to be made by midnight, Geneva time, on 30 October 2014.

The Sri Lankan Government has made a policy decision not to become involved in OISL proceedings. Sri Lanka has announced that it will not allow OISL to conduct investigations within Sri Lanka.

Given the history of creating the OISL by HRC, bias that has shown towards Sri Lanka by the OHCHR, the decision by the Sri Lankan Government is understandable.

It is not the intention of this article to analyse whether the decision taken by the Sri Lankan government is correct or not.

One big drawback in the Government’s decision of not becoming a party to the OSIL proceedings is that it will miss the opportunity to cross examine witnesses who will give evidence against Sri Lanka. This is crucial because most of the evidnce that will be adduced against Sri Lanka would be dubious, suspicious and fraudulent.

We, patriots, are allowed to adduce evidence in OISL, but since we are not a party to the proceedings, we will not be able to cross examine witnesses. Only the Government is able to do this or individuals who are specifically accused of serious human rights violations.

This article stresses that though Sri Lankan Government will have no involvement with OISL, we patriots, need not necessarily follow the same pathway. If we also boycott the OISL proceedings, that will not assist Sri Lanka, but the enemies of Sri Lanka.

As stated before, many pro-separatist groups will make written submissions to OISL against Sri Lanka. Likewise, we, patriots, must also make strong written submissions to OISL in support of Sri Lanka. We should stress the human rights violations perpetrated against Sri Lanka and her people by the LTTE, Tamil political parties, Tamil Diaspora, NGOs (local and international), foreign governments and others. Our written submissions should emphasis the good works done by Sri Lanka to curb Tamil Terrorism, settle Tamil IDPs, massive infrastructure and social development projects in the North and East started since ending the war etc. We must also seek permission from OISL to adduce verbal evidence in support of Sri Lanka. In this regard, we must start preparing witnesses who will give genuine, authentic evidence. They include civilians who were affected by the LTTE terror and those who were rescued from the LTTE by the Government (both Sinhalese and Tamil) soldiers and military officers who were involved in wars, humanitarian operations during the investigation period (2002 to 2011) and friends of Sri Lanka living in various countries, especially in the West, who can provide expert reports on Sri Lanka.

Sri Lanka Support Group (SLSG), of which writer is the President, after very careful consideration, has taken a decision to provide a detailed written submission to the OISL. We will follow that up with verbal submissions/evidence, if leave is granted to adduce them.

Why have SLSG taken this decision?

Given the extreme bias that OHCHR has shown against Sri Lanka, we believe that based on the OISL report, it is likely that OHCHR, in March 2015 will pass another Resolution stating that our leaders (military and political) must be referred to the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the Hague for alleged War Crimes atrocities (as stated before, OSIL will specifically name them). We believe we should not merely hand the victory to our enemies on a platter – we must tell the real truth to the world – that Sri Lanka did not deliberately or recklessly commit war crimes (eg.as alleged, it did not kill up to 40,00 Tamil civilians during the last stages of the war). We should say that any isolated incidents that occurred (human rights violations), the Government has already taken action or will take action against errand soldiers/officials.


If we continue to maintain silence (like in the past), the enemy will continue to take the upper hand. They will win not on merit, but due to our default.

Some of the facts that we must tell the whole world including OISL:

1.War Crimes atrocities

  • There is expert technical analysis to prove that some Channel 4 videos are unauthentic. Sri Lanka Support Group has identified 38 blatant errors/untruth in the ‘Sri Lanka Killing Fields’ video, it now states there are more. The 1st Channel 4 video alleged that the Sri Lankan Army shot dead a number of Tamil Tigers extra-judicially, in pointblank range – this is a totally fabricated allegation. It is now proven that that video was prepared by the LTTE in Tamil language much earlier than end of the war in May 2009. Channel 4 concealed this from its viewers. The 3rd and 4th videos are also full of inaccuracies. The Channel 4 videos contain number of sub-videos that have been highly edited, thus are extremely dubious. Channel 4 stated that the original videos provided to them were proper records of the battlefront and the videos were taken using mobile phones. Expert technical analysis very well show that some of the videos have been made using sophisticated video cameras that have zoom lenses. Everyone knows that mobile phone cameras do not have zoom lenses. It is highly believed that some scenes of the ‘Sri Lanka Killing Fields’ (the 2nd and the most controversial video) had been shot in Thamilnadu using Tamil actors. Sri Lanka Support Group is in possession of evidence against Channel 4 and they are many.
  • During the war Mr Gordon Weiss (the then UN Spokesman in Colombo) stated that up to 7,000 people were killed (this was also a high number and the Sri Lankan Government denied this high number). Mr Weiss waited for 9 months after the end of the war to state that the actual number of deaths may be 40,000. He wanted to sell his book. The London Times also picked up the 7, 000 figure and later published a big headline story that Sri Lanka killed 40,000 innocent Tamils. The news travelled like wildfire. Channel 4 later produced a number of dubious videos.
  • Mr Darusman went ahead and wrote the report based on such hearsay evidence (inadmissible evidence).
  • The TNA MP, Mr Sumanthirian stated about 15 months ago that the Sri Lankan Army killed 75,000 Tamils!
  • According to Stephen Rapp thousands of Tamils were massacred in St Anthony’s Park in Padumathalan. He made this ‘finding’ solely on the basis of hearsay evidence, when no investigation into such a massacre had been conducted by anyone including Mr Rapp himself. This is the first time that such an allegation had been made against Sri Lanka (the alleged St Anthony’s Park massacre)..
  • It is estimated that since end of the war at least 10,000 Tamils migrated to Australia illegally in boats. Many thousands of Tamils fled to other European countries like Italy, the UK, US etc. Without disclosing these facts Channel 4 and the Tamil separatists say that since end of the war thousands of Tamils have disappeared in Sri Lanka. Those people who migrated in boats illegally have been included in the lists of missing Tamils of Sri Lanka.
  • If Sri Lanka killed so many innocent Tamils during last stages of the war (intentionally or recklessly), would India, or for that matter Thamilnadu (located only 30 km away from the war zone), maintained a silence at that time?
  • That time, India offered full support for the war. India knew how the war was conducted. If Tamil civilians were massacred, it would not have supported Sri Lanka
  • If 40,000 Tamil civilians were killed in such a small area of land (the no fire zone was less than 3 sq. km), where were the dead bodies buried, what are the names of the dead 40,000 people, who are their relatives, why cannot the TNA/Tamil Diaspora., ordinary Tamils in the North give the list of the victims’ names to the Government?
  • People like Messrs Weiss, Sumanthirian etc who come up with fanciful allegations against Sri Lanka also agree that Tamil civilians were killed by the LTTE weapons and thousands of Tamil terrorists were legitimately killed by the Sri Lankan Army. They should be included in the dead Tamil numbers (during last stages of the war, the Tamil Tigers deliberately killed Tamils who were fleeing the no fire zone. Even Mr Weiss agreed in his book that the LTTE were holding heavy armory inside the no-fire zone and they fired at the civilians who fled it. The number of civilians died from LTTE gunfire amounts to few hundred, not thousands. Then, in the last stages of the war about 12,000 Tamil Tigers were killed by the Sri Lankan Army and about 5,000 Army soldiers also died. So there were ‘legitimate’ combative killings happened in the war areas. But, even these killings did not reach the very high 40,000 mark as alleged by the country’s adversaries).
  • To save civilians, Sri Lankan Army did not fire at the no-fire zone, thus, large numbers of Sri Lankan soldiers got killed as a result of the Tamil Tiger gun/artillery fire. This shows the waging of a ‘just war’ by Sri Lanka (it was called a humanitarian operation than a war). Mr Weiss, Channel 4, The London Times, Mr Sumanthirian or other enemies of Sri Lanka would not admit this truth. This is because then they cannot a create a bad impression about Sri Lanka worldwide.
  • The world famous cricketer Mr Muraltharan,. a Tamil, clearly stated that the British Prime Minister, Mr Cameron was misled by the Tamil Diaspora and Channel 4 about Sri Lanka.

 11. Eradication of the three decades of Tamil Tiger terrorism

  • In Sri Lanka, for over 30 years, the Tamil Tigers bombed, killed and maimed people and committed other horrendous crimes. During the period of Tamil terrorism, Sri Lankans hardly had a day of peace, having to suffer terrible carnage at the hands of Tamil Tigers. Hundreds and thousands of innocent Sri Lankans died due to Tamil Tiger terror and many thousands were maimed. Husbands and wives did not travel together in the same train compartment (they travelled in separate compartments) due to the fear that the train may be bombed (a recurring occurrence at the time). They knew at least one of them should live to provide for the children.
  • In 2009, the Tamil Tigers were successfully defeated by the Sri Lankan security forces, with overwhelming support from the peace loving citizens of all communities of Sri Lanka.
  • It is indeed an achievement without any parallel where 21 million of Sri Lankans were liberated from the Tamil Tiger terror. The Tamil Tigers held the country to ransom for many years. The whole world witnessed on electronic media how nearly 300,000 Tamils ran towards the Sri Lankan forces seeking shelter and protection; after freeing themselves from the LTTE.
  • The US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in their publication dated 10 January 2008, under the title Taming the Tamil Tigers’ identified Tamil Tigers as the most dangerous and deadliest extremists among all of the terrorist groups in the world. The Tamil Tigers invented the suicide belt, used women in suicide attacks and extensively used child soldiers. All the LTTE cadres wore a cyanide capsule around their neck. The LTTE launched many civilian suicide attacks – frequent bombings in Colombo and other major cities, attacked Sinhalese villages in the North and the East where they raped women and killed infants. They assassinated politicians (including scores of Tamils, Government ministers, a Sri Lankan President and the then Indian Prime Minister). They also committed other forms of crimes. such as, armed robberies, human trafficking, drug peddling and money laundering.
  • The Tamil Tigers had fund raising organisations established throughout the world, especially in the West. Although the US, UK, EU, Canada, India, Malaysia and several other countries proscribed the Tigers (Australia made a limited listing of them under the Charter of the United Nations Act), it is well known that displaced LTTE members, Tamil separatists and their sympathisers, continued with fund raising, and used those funds to buy arms/ammunitions and war equipment to continue with its brutal war against Sri Lanka.
  • Now after the war, expatriate Tamil separatists, Tamil separatist sympathisers and their cohorts have started another war (by pen) – to exert pressure on politicians and intellectuals in their respective domiciled countries to garner support to achieve their final goal of carving out a separate, racist state exclusively for the Tamils in the North and East of Sri Lanka, the ‘Tamil Eelam’. It is estimated Tamils constitute less than 14%, of Sri Lanka’s total population, but they claim more than 1/3 of Sri Lanka’s landmass and ¾ of the coastal area. In Sri Lanka, majority of the Tamils live outside of the claimed area – it is believed that in Greater Colombo, at least 40% of the population is Tamil.
  1. Progress made in Human Rights/Reconciliation
  • Soon after the conclusion of terrorism in May 2009, the Sri Lankan government appointed the LLRC and the Government did all it could do to implement its recommendations (the National Plan of Action). The areas of action taken by the Government, apart from the massive infrastructure development (over US$ 3 billion worth of projects in the North alone), included resettlement of people, providing compensation/relief to people and implementing policies of reconciliation.
  • A key progress was achieved via restoration of the democratic rights of the people by conducting elections in the areas affected by the war (North and the East), appointment of a Commission of Enquiry into the alleged disappearances (in co-operation with the ICRC) and conduct of a Census on deaths/injuries to civilians and property damages due to the war. The status as at December 2013 of the Government’s progressive actions in the North in brief are as follows (the statistics provided hereunder are authentic and can be substantiated):
  • Tracing of missing/disappeared persons: – A survey on the tracing of missing/disappeared persons, especially those who were forcibly abducted by the LTTE, was completed with the corporation of the Family Tracing and Reunification (FTR) Unit of the UNICEF.
  • The President, appointed a Commission to investigate cases of missing persons in the Northern and Eastern Provinces, particularly those who allegedly went missing during and after the war. The Commission has been given the authority to conduct inquires and investigations as necessary, and submit a report to the President. The President stressed the necessity to identify the persons responsible in cases where abductions or disappearances were found to have taken place and to take legal action where necessary.
  • It is noted that a well over 100,000 Tamil citizens left Sri Lanka between 2007-2013, seeking refugee status in Canada, Europe, Australia, India and some using illegal means (boat people). It has been reported that these people have also been included in the ‘missing persons’ lists by those who have prepared such lists. It is estimated that about 10,000 Tamils travelled to Australia alone in boats in the past 6 years.
  • Rehabilitation of the Ex-LTTE cadres – out of the total of about 12,000 ex-LTTE cadres surrendered/captured, 97% have already been rehabilitated and released to the society. A further 2% is currently under rehabilitation. This gesture on the part of the Government shows that the Government is keen on rehabilitation rather than retribution. This also rebuts the accusation that the Government deliberately killed Tamil civilians; if wanted, it could have easily killed those captured LTTE cadres.
  • Resettlement of IDPs: – Out of the total of 224,432 Tamil families who were residing in temporary accommodation 96.9% have already been resettled. There are 22,134 Muslims registered for resettlement in the Northern Province and are in the process of being resettled. Out of the 100,000 Sinhalese displaced from the Northern province since early 1980s, about 90% are still living in areas outside of the Northern Province.
  • Re-establishing of democracy: – Presidential, Parliamentary, Local Government and Provincial Council elections were held since the eradication of terrorism. A Tamil political party (TNA) won the election and are currently governing the Northern province.
  • Land released by Security Forces and the reduction of troops: – out of the 34.561 acres of private lands occupied by the security forces, 78% has already been released. The army battalions have been reduced from 152 to 104 since May 2009. These numbers continue to come down.
  • Demining – According to the data available up to September 2013, only 4.2% of land is yet to be cleared.
  • LLRC – some of the recommendations of the LLRC require an evolving/progressive consensus among the ethnic, religious, regional and political diversity of the nation, the Government has commenced grassroot level activities to achieve these.

Let’s respect the Government’s decision to not become involved in the OISL investigation; that does not mean, we patriots, should also follow the same pathway. We believe it will be in the best interests of the country to present true facts to OISL, thereby the whole world. No doubt OISL will make adverse recommendations about Sri Lanka, but, it is worth losing the battle after giving it a fight. Surrendering to the enemy without putting up any resistance.is not the Sri Lankan way of life.


  1. Nanda Says:

    “» Re-establishing of democracy: – Presidential, Parliamentary, Local Government and Provincial Council elections were held since the eradication of terrorism. A Tamil political party (TNA) won the election and are currently governing the Northern province.”

    That made the problem to grow 10 fold. A LTTE council was formed. TNA + LTTE Council went to Geneva to cry. Currently TNA+LTTE council crying in front of Modi. Hakeem joined in to generalise the cry to all minorities ( or simply another name to parasites).
    Surrendering to the enemy gradually has been started by MR. We MUST STOP THIS PROCESS.

  2. Lorenzo Says:

    GOSL boycotts the UNHRC investigation. Good.

    But that does not mean patriots should boycott it.

    Please write to the LOSERS and TAMIL RACISTS. Does not matter. Still write and tell them the truth.



    8-14 Rue de la Paix
    CH-1211 Geneva 10

  3. douglas Says:

    As per the “Framework and Methodology of OHCHR Investigation on Sri Lanka” published it is stated: “In order to establish the facts and circumstances of alleged violations, abuses and crimes by both parties, the OHCHR Investigation on Sri Lanak (OISL) will conduct a desk review of existing documents and information, including government and civil society reports, collect and document victims’ testimonies and the account of survivors, witnesses and alleged perpetrators, as well as seeking information from other relevant sources such as satellite imagaes, authenticated video and photographic material and official documents”.

    Also it has stated: ” Any State, individual or organization may submit information in writing to OISL. Submissions to the OISL may be sent to : oisl_submissions@orchr.org.

    So here is an opportunity to all the patriots and patriotic organizations to do their duty as very well timed suggestion by Chanaka Bandarage.

  4. douglas Says:


    I understand that the Government of Sri Lanka cannot get involved in this Investigation as that would go against the decision made. Therefore it is for the patriots to take it and make submissions.

    I read in this page an organization in Perth has expressed concerns over the “time frame” this investigation has been mandated to investigate. Here is what is stated: “The period under investigation is that covered by the LLRC, that is from 21 February 2011, when it presented its report to the President of Sri Lanka. The OISL will also take into consideration any contextual and other relevant information that may fall outside this timeframe which may provide a better understanding of events of which may be pertinent regarding continuing human rights violations”.

    In my opinion, it is an opportunity for those in possession of valuable information as regards the atrocities committed by the LTTE to record it for investigative purposes. I know our friend Mr. Asoka Weerasinghe writing from Canada has a “store full” of such information and would earnestly request him to do his bit by our country.Please note that this appeal is not only to him, but to all who have information and exposing those for the last so many years. Thank you all.

  5. AnuD Says:

    This article is correct. The other side also should present evidence to prove that all these are lies and to incriminate LTTE diaspora and TNA etc.,

  6. Mr. Bernard Wijeyasingha Says:

    Next month (September 2014) Scotland will be voting on a referendum whether they want to remain part of the United Kingdom or become an independent state. Most likely due to many factors Scotland has all the reasons to become an independent nation. It was an act of unification that created the United Kingdom in the first place.

    President Woodrow Wilson at the Versaille Treaty brought up the issue of “self determination”. it basically was an idea that any group can demand self determination. It does not have to because of any past grievance or cultural distinction. But at the same time this ideal was created under an older ideal of a sovereign state which started with the American Revolution and gained traction during the French Revolution and the reign of Napoleon Bonaparte.

    That idea of a sovereign nation goes against the fundamental belief of “self determination”. Sri Lanka is unique in this regard. Being an island nation and a nation with a long established written history Sri Lanka stand above the rest of the ancient world including the modern world with the exception of China.

    Unlike the region called “India’ ( a foreign name with no meaning as India’s real name is Bharat or the name of an ancient Hindu sage. It is as foreign as the word Hindu which also means nothing for that religion real name is Sanatana Darhma “eternal law”) Sri Lanka has always had a sense of a national identity. For India the concept of the notion of an Indian nation is relatively new. It was due to the fact that most Indians still see themselves along the lines of religion, language, ethnicity and region that the creation of Pakistan was relatively easy and fitted neatly into Woodrow Wilson’s concept of “self Determination”

    However that cannot be applied to the collective mindset of Sri Lankans who see the island nation as indivisible. Any attempt to use Woodrow Wilson’s concept of Self determination by the minority Tamils would be an anathema to the majority Sinhalese Any attempt to use a referendum to cut through this mindset would back fire on the Tamils as the specter of their annihilation would be the lesser of two evils. See Sri Lanka divided due to the narrow minded interests of the Tamils or exterminate the Tamils in order to preserve the integrity of Sri Lanka which is founded on an unbroken written history that justifies that. It is also substantiated by one of India’s greatest epics the Ramayana where again Sri Lanka is the only nation mentioned independent of Bharat (India) and by insinuation treated as a nation unto itself.

    Even geologically Sri Lanka remained a separate landmass when the Indian plate broke of from the main continent Billions of years ago before it collided with the Asian landmass.

  7. Mr. Bernard Wijeyasingha Says:

    Regarding the solution of a separate Elam nation. For 30 years the Tamil Tigers or LTTE have used any means to get that nation including genocide, child slavery on a massive scale, a human shield on a massive scale, the liberal use of cyanide pills and terror terror terror that was fully supported by India without which the Tamil Tigers would never have the capacity or resources to create a navy (including submarines), an air force and a lethal military made up of suicide bombers and child soldiers all armed with a cyanide pill in the event of capture.

    That is now an indisputable fact, but yet India refuses to acknowledge any of it, Tamil Nadu refuses to also do so, the Tamil Diaspora makes sure that fact is buried in a mountain of propaganda, and the UN Human right Council have gone out of their way to circumvent all of the issues stated in my first paragraph of this comment.

    By doing so they have inadvertently validated that these acts that should be considered crimes against humanity is alright for one community. By doing that they have validated such methods for any other community. If the UNHRC, to New Delhi to Chennai to London to Washington D.C. thinks that anything justifies the ends, then they have set up a template or a blue print for the nation of Sri Lanka to use the same methods to justify the integrity of Sri Lanka.

    If the UNHRC refuses to address these issues as a gross violation of human rights then by inference they have given it legitimacy and then it can be used by the state too. If the UNHRC or New Delhi then demands such actions stop they cannot base it on anything since they have given legitimacy to the crimes against humanity committed by the Tamil Tigers by simply ignoring them

    If the actions of ISIS to that of Nazi Germany were not treated as crimes against humanity then the world by not acting on them, gave them the legitimate right to practice it by their silence. When China invaded and annexed Tibet and by that act did acts of genocide including the wanton destruction of six thousand Tibetan monasteries the world did not react. By that Tibet was effectively annexed and China never held accountable for it.

    When the Russian revolution eventually claimed the lives of 20 million Russians the world did nothing about it and by that legitimized the use of Autocratic force upon its people. The consequences of both China and Russia set the stage for other crimes such as the great leap forward and the cultural revolution which eventually claimed the lives of a 100 million Chinese. The gross actions of Stalinist Russia found echoes in Pol Pots’ Cambodia.

    Even when the US nuked Japan with the only available excuse that by using the nuclear weapon it shortened a protracted war. Now it turns out that excuse is the only excuse any Nuclear armed nation can use. Of course the use of Nuclear weapons would shorten a war and save a nation of the expense and time of a conventional war. It legitimized the use of wiping out an entire city with one single bomb.

    That is what the western world to India to the UNHRC to the Tamil Diaspora are foolishly doing. They are deliberately ignoring the decades long acts of wanton crimes against humanity that the Tamil Tigers did in order to achieve Elam. Now it is legitimate to use the same tactics to save a nation. Either the UNHRC address these issue or stay silent and give it a valid reason. It cannot do both. Her decision would possibly be one of the instruments that Colombo can legitimately use to justify the integrity of Sri Lanka and that is the means do justify the ends.

  8. Mr. Bernard Wijeyasingha Says:

    One more example when 2.1 Million Armenians were systematically killed by the Turkish Ottoman empire after world war one around 1915 and now known as The Armenian Genocide” the world did not care. No one even made an issue of it. Hitler later commented and to paraphrase “no one would remember the genocide of the Armenians”. Did that genocide influence the Nazi Regime? one could only conclude it did.

    Now India, Tamil Nadu, The TNA, the UNHRC, London, Washington D.C. are doing their level best to ignore the genocidal acts of the Tamil Tigers. I would say “That the world will not remember the genocide of Muslim and Christian Tamils, the whole scale abduction of Tamil children and the enslavement of them to the wanton destruction of Buddhist holy sites to the slaughter of Buddhist priests and Sinhalese people for no one will even recognize them”

    By not recognizing these horrors then it allows the powers of Sri Lanka to use these same methods against any force be it in Sri Lanka or Tamil Nadu or among the Tamil Diaspora to crush them using any means as long as it justifies the integrity of Sri Lanka.

  9. Chanaka B Says:

    OHCHR Resolution (2014) against Sri Lanka was sponsored by the West, not India. Majority of those who voted against Sri Lanka were from the West; Asian nations voted for Sri Lanka. In 2014, India abstained from voting

  10. Christie Says:

    Please tear Gota’s war to see how the US and Israel helped us defeat India terrorist arm that
    was branded Tamil Tigers.

  11. Marco Says:

    It would be interesting to submit the same written submissions accompanied by affidavits and evidence to both the OISL and the domestic Commission of Inquiry on Missing Persons (which has been redundant for the past 5 years now resurrected by the appointment of 5 international advisers and enhanced mandate) to ascertain if they come to the same conclusion/recommendation or not.
    As a citizen of Sri Lanka living in Sri Lanka i’m giving serious thought to re-visiting my submission to the LLRC.

  12. Lorenzo Says:

    Endia did the damage in 2012 and 2013 by VOTING AGAINST SL. South Korea also voted against SL. Japan NEVER voted for us.

    It was Endia that trained and armed Tamil terrorists and introduced the 13 amendment which is the ROOT CAUSE of all problems during peace time.

    Endia, not the west, is our biggest enemy. USA, UK and Israel helped us wipe out Tamil tigers. Not Endia.

    Now that old fart Karunanidhi has held another TESO (Tamil Elam support org) meeting yesterday. What is Modi doing? What if SL holds a Kashmir Nation support organization meeting?

  13. Lorenzo Says:

    Not to say west is our friend post-war. West is our second enemy followed by Jihadists.

    Saudi voted for us. But is Saudi our friend? I don’t think so. Saudi funds all Thawheed and Wahab Islamic terrorists in SL.

  14. Chanaka B Says:

    I am not saying India is irrelevant. India problem is separate from the West. Foolish to think Solheim etc are agents of India. (Current Indian Government is good for us). We have to handle both India and the West well to come out victorious

  15. Marco Says:

    I disagree with your statement “India problem is separate from the West”.
    If Sri Lanka was to establish a good working relationship both politically and economically (without the lies and the obfuscation) with India (with real benefits to SL), the West & the IC will leave Sri Lanka alone.
    The past 6 years has clearly shown the exasperation of India and hence the heavy handed interference of the West in Sri Lanka. The West would not dare to interfere if India was on Sri Lankans side.

  16. Marco Says:

    On a slightly unrelated matter, “sanction clauses” appear to make an appearance on a regular basis from Banks and Insurance Companies in Sr Lanka.
    On 4 separate occasions i have noticed these clauses appearing on legal documents presented to 2 companies that i’m associated with. On the first occasion (June) i resisted and negotiated the removal of the said clause but thereafter we had to circumvent this at financial cost.

    See below the report in the Sunday Times over the weekend. As usual and as expected the Daily News editorial in its own style poured scorn on it as “Alarmist”.

    Sri Lankan insurers, like their international counterparts, have begun stating in their contracts that policy cover will be suspended in case of the United States, the European Union or the United Nations imposes sanctions against the country. The Government and sections of the private sector are fighting back—but experts warn that ‘sanction clauses’ are here to stay.

    Some weeks ago, a leading Sri Lankan insurance firm gave a local construction company a draft agreement to provide cover for a government building contract it had secured. One of its provisions took the company and the relevant State agency by surprise.
    It was titled ‘Sanction Limitation and Exclusion Clause’ and held: “No insurer shall be deemed to provide cover and no insurer shall be liable to pay any claim or provide any benefit hereunder to the extent that the provision of such cover, payment of such claim or provision of such benefit would expose that insurer to any sanction, prohibition or restriction under United Nations Resolutions or the trade or economic sanctions, laws or regulations of the European Union, United Kingdom or United States of America”.

    The construction company and the State agency rejected the provision outright, forcing the insurer to drop it. This pattern —with insurers adding these clauses to their policies and the Government and private sector dismissing them, as and when — could continue until a uniform approach to the contentious subject is agreed upon.

    The Attorney General’s Department has also been objecting to similar provisions in agreements drafted by European credit agencies. Their precise wording is not known. Finance Ministry officials and the AG’s Department did not respond to requests for information.
    According to highly placed Government sources, however, the clauses state that export credit insurance cover will not apply in the event of economic, trade and financial sanctions or embargoes. After negotiations, the sections could be amended or dropped.
    The Sunday Times wrote to Bank Austria, one of the credit agencies Sri Lanka did business with last year, asking about sanctions clauses in their agreements. A spokesman replied that they understood the “sensitivity of the relatively new topic of sanctions”. However, Austrian laws precluded them from revealing details of their contractual relationships with third parties.

    While unfamiliar to Sri Lankans, sanctions clauses have been imposed for several years and will crop up more frequently in coming months. “In the long term, it could well be harmful to keep objecting,” said Clive O’Connell, a partner with the London-based Goldberg Segalla law firm.

    “The current position, as we understand it from discussions within our market committees, is that most policies issued in the London Market will normally include a sanctions clause as a standard,” said Scott Farley, Director of Communications of the International Underwriting Association, in an email interview.

    Even certain classes of business that had not previously included these clauses are now working towards factoring them in. “There is a lot of work ongoing around sanctions clauses at present,” Mr. Farley said. They are on the agenda of many committees. This is because the adoption of sanctions as a political tool has become more widespread.

    “There is probably more reliance on sanctions now than in any time in history,” said Mr. O’Connell, one of the world’s leading insurance and reinsurance lawyers, in a telephone interview. “The reason is that they are a means of effectively exercising political control over parts of the world where military intervention is not appropriate or possible.”

    These sanctions are being enforced largely through financial services such as banks and insurance. And global reinsurers are a key tool. All leading insurers in Sri Lanka have “reinsured” some of their risks with global reinsurers for a premium. This means that, in the event of large claims, their dues will be shared by these international firms.

    “About four or five years ago, reinsurance companies imposed clauses on their primary insurers saying no cover will be given if payment of a claim would be a breach of sanctions,” said Mr. O’Connell.

    Thus, Sri Lankan insurers — like the one mentioned above — are probably adding sanctions clauses into their contracts because the global reinsurers they share their risks with insist on it. This practice will only grow in future. And, while all contracts are open to negotiation, fighting it could lead to other complications.

    If sanction clauses are repeatedly turned down, only those insurers who are not reinsured by large global or other Western reinsurers would be able to write the business, Mr. O’Connell said. “This would have the effect of concentrating risk in a geographic area and make it more susceptible to accumulations.”

    “Ultimately, it could expose Sri Lanka to significant peril from a natural catastrophe or other disaster,” he explained. “The risk would not be spread around the world but focused on a number of more local reinsurers.” In the event of a tsunami, for instance, Sri Lanka’s local insurers could be faced with massive payouts that will not be shared by global reinsurers.

    Experts pointed out that the inclusion of sanction clauses did not necessarily mean that such penalties were expected or anticipated. “It is not necessarily the case that the use of such clauses indicates a belief that there is a danger of sanctions being imposed on a particular country,” Mr. Farley asserted.

    Sanction clauses will crop up in future export credit insurance agreements that the Government hopes to sign. “I would be very surprised to see contracts like that without sanction clauses,” Mr. O’Connell admitted.

    However, it may be possible for the Sri Lankan Government to demonstrate that an insurance contract has no likelihood of running afoul of sanctions. Sanctions clauses might also be avoided if an insurer had no reinsurance with reinsurers bound by sanctions, said Mr. O’Connell. In the case of export credit insurance, the second option seems unviable.

    It is not known what tools the Government had used to avoid sanction clauses in its export credit insurance agreements. Whether it will continue to adopt the same strategies — and how successful these will be — remains to be seen. What the private sector will do remains an entirely different story.

  17. Chanaka B Says:

    I agree, the West would less interfere if India is on Sri Lanka’s side

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.



Copyright © 2020 LankaWeb.com. All Rights Reserved. Powered by Wordpress