Dayan Jayatilake replies to Mangala
Posted on August 2nd, 2016

Dayan Jayatilake Courtesy The Daily Mirror

 Sri Lanka’s former Permanent Representative to the UN in Geneva, Dayan Jayatilake has sent the following statement as a right of reply to the statement made by Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera since Mr. Jayatilake’s name has been mentioned.

I write to refute a statement made with direct reference to me, by Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera in the course of his response to former President Rajapaksa in the newspapers of Monday August 1, 2016 under the caption Enough is Enough,” he said.

The following is his reply: “I have no intention of replying to Minister Samaraweera’s counter-critique of President Rajapaksa’s critical remarks on the structure of the Office of Missing Persons. However, as a student of comparative international politics I cannot help but note that Minister Samaraweera’s model of the OMP derives from contexts that are very different to that of Sri Lanka and thus has little relevance to us. The OMP derives from mechanisms for investigation into persons missing under military juntas in Latin America or mechanisms set up, also mainly in Latin America, in consequence of negotiated settlements arrived at, usually with external mediation/facilitation, between guerrilla movements and incumbent regimes.

Sri Lanka’s context is drastically different, i.e. that of a democratic state, with democratically elected governments, and whose legitimate armed forces fought a war strictly within its borders, against a terrorist enemy and won an outright victory. In no such context has there been a mechanism structured as the OMP is.

Nowhere in Asia, in the aftermath of war or even transitions from prolonged military regimes, has a mechanism such as the OMP been set up. Quite apart from Asia, even in liberal democratic Spain, an EU and NATO member, there isn’t anything remotely like the OMP to investigate into disappearances during the Civil War.

One cannot help but point out that the morally laudable and ethically necessary quest –from any humanistic and humanitarian perspective–for closure for the families and loved ones of missing persons, has already been carried out by the Maxwell Paranagama Commission. Any lacuna could have addressed by a renewed and modified mandate for that Commission. One fails to grasp the logic of the new structure, the OMP.

That said, may I move on to the point made with direct reference to me by the Hon. Minister. He writes:

This was also evident when he [President Mahinda Rajapaksa] and UN Secretary-General Ban-Ki Moon agreed to an accountability process in their 2009 Joint Communique, which was later made into a formal commitment to the entire international community via the 2009 Geneva resolution when Dayan Jayatilleka was Sri Lanka’s ambassador in Geneva.”

To use diplomatic language, I shall content myself by saying that the Honorable Minister’s statement is entirely without foundation in fact and fails to either correspond with empirical reality or accord with logic.

A smidgeon of logic alone should make Minister Samaraweera wonder why the resolutions moved by the US in the UNHRC on Sri Lanka in 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015, made no mention whatsoever to the Resolution of May 2009. Surely, if Minister Samaraweera were right and he is grappling with a legacy of President Rajapaksa’s and my commitments to the international community in May 2009, then the subsequent resolutions, all of which commence with a preamble establishing continuity and locating itself in an institutional context, should have made some reference to the UNHRC resolution of May 2009. The fact that they do not, make amply clear to any logical mind, that there is no continuity with the UNHRC resolution of May 2009.

Foreign Minister Samaraweera and his Prime Minister must stop telling untruths on the public record that President Mahinda Rajapaksa agreed to an accountability mechanism-they sometimes say an international investigation – in his May 23, 2009 Joint Statement with Ban Ki Moon and later in the May 2009 Resolution in favor of Sri Lanka which obtained a near-two thirds majority in the UN Human Right Council.

The understandings contained therein” (in that Joint Statement) were that the Government would take unspecified measures to address grievances regarding an accountability process with regard to human rights and humanitarian law violations. It merely and blandly stated that the Government will take measures to address those grievances”. This is hardly a smoking gun! There is no statement to the effect that the UN S-G and the Government of Sri Lanka agreed” on any accountability approach or measures. There is no evidence of any commitment to an accountability mechanism, domestic, international or hybrid. Indeed it is a semantic model of anodyne diplomatic ambiguity.

Our victory in the vote in May 2009 did not put or retain Sri Lanka on the agenda of the UN HRC. The EU driven Special Session did, but our diplomatic victory removed it from the agenda and there was no further action mandated– not even the need to report back to the Council.

That is why even Callum Macrae of Channel 4 laments as late as November 2014 that …the Rajapaksa regime pulled off a stunning coup when it gained 29 votes for a resolution congratulating them on their victory”.

The LLRC and the Disappearances Commission are the measures that the previous Government took, as promised, to address those grievances. That Government’s lapse was in failing to fully implement the LLRC report. That is pretty much all the new government had to do. The return of Sri Lanka to the UN HRC agenda has therefore to be sourced in the actions or inactions – the sins of commission and omission– in the years following the UNHRC success of May 2009, i.e. the post-war years. It has nothing to do with the UNHRC resolution of May 2009.”

– See more at: http://www.dailymirror.lk/113452/Dayan-Jayatilake-replies-to-Mangala#sthash.rBW20Kgl.dpuf

5 Responses to “Dayan Jayatilake replies to Mangala”

  1. plumblossom Says:

    Mangala must be replaced by a patriotic foreign minister. Actually Ranil, Sirisena, CBK traitors must be replaced too. However Mangala must be replaced as soon as possible. A country’s government should first and foremost look after the country’s security. sovereignty, territorial integrity and in the case of a small country such as Sri Lanka its unitary status. Mangala has betrayed Sri Lanka by accepting the UNHRC resolution which no country with any integrity will accept. Mangala must realise that those LTTE terrorists who massacred the citizens of this country for over 26 years simply because they wanted a large chunk of this island for themselves, illegally, that they should be dealt with in a very careful manner without betraying the security. sovereignty, territorial integrity and in the case of a small country such as Sri Lanka its unitary status, even if extremely powerful forces such as the US,UK, EU, Canada, Sweden, Norway and India are behind the LTTE terrorists. In addition, we must place forth the argument that those who settled in the island quite recently only during the past few hundred years i.e. the Sri Lankan Tamils who are only but 11.2% of the population do not have any rights whatsoever to demand over 28% of the land area, 66% of the coastline and 66% of the vast ocean resources which belong to Sri Lanka. This message should be conveyed to the TNA, the separatist terrorists and those who support them i.e. the US,UK, EU, Canada, Sweden, Norway and India as soon as possible so that they understand our position. This is the task of a foreign minister. Mangala therefore has betrayed Sri Lanka and must go. Sri Lanka cannot afford large self ruling entities which are illegal anyway since this island as a whole belong to all its people in total. It is the foreign minister’s task to covey this message to everyone concerned.

  2. plumblossom Says:

    The missing persons commission, the name is a misnomer. it should be called ‘those combatants on all sides who died in the war i.e. Sri Lankan Forces, Police Force. Civil Defence Forces, IPKF, Tamil Armed Groups against the LTTE and the LTTE terrorists themselves and whose bodies have not be found’. Therefore the name itself is wrong and invented by the UNHRC to tarnish the image of the armed forces of Sri Lanka.

    The missing persons commission to date has receive 24,000 complaints from 1983-2009 period. Of this number over 5,000 are regarding missing Sri Lankan Forces members, whereabouts unknown, almost certainly executed by the LTTE terrorists. Over 12,000 complaints are against the LTTE itself recruiting young persons by coercion. Therefore over 70% of complaints are against the LTTE itself which amounts to over 17,000 complaints. The rest of the complaints are I am sure about the whereabouts of LTTE combatants or terrorists who died while fighting but whose bodies have not been found.

    My question is, why cannot the UNHRC the US,UK, EU, Canada, Norway, Sweden and India accept that Sri Lankan Forces, Police Force, Civil Defence Forces, IPKF, Tamil Armed Groups against the LTTE and the LTTE terrorists themselves died fighting in this war and leave it at that. What is the point in looking for these combatants now? Why is it that the UNHRC the US,UK, EU, Canada, Norway, Sweden and India never ever talk about the over 35,000 Sri Lankan Forces, Police Force, civil Defence Force members who died in the war? or the 1,200 IPKF members or the over 2,000 Tamils Armed Groups against the LTTE members who died in the war? or the over 6,000-7,000 Sinhala civilians and even Muslims civilians who were massacred by the LTTE? or the around (my estimate) over 3,000 Tamil civilians massacred by the LTTE?

    Why is it that the UNHRC the US,UK, EU, Canada, Norway, Sweden and India is not concerned about the over 10,000 Sri Lankan Forces members permanently disabled by the war, or the over 23,000 Sri Lankan Forces members both temporarily and permanently disabled by the war? or the over 136,000 Sri Lankan Forces members who were injured due to the war?

    Why is it that the UNHRC the US,UK, EU, Canada, Norway, Sweden and India not concerned about the over 65,000 Sinhala people and over 75,000 muslims ethnically cleansed from the North?

    Why is it that the only the around 35,000 LTTE terrorists who died inclusive of Prabhakaran are the concern of the UNHRC the US,UK, EU, Canada, Norway, Sweden and India? Perhaps this missing persons commission should answer that question first.

  3. plumblossom Says:

    Even if the constitution will be changed since this idiotic government follows whatever instructions the US, UK, EU, Norway, Canada, Sweden, India, the TNA and the separatist terrorists tell it to do, we must ensure that the unitary status of the country is not compromised in any way whatsoever. The clause in the 13th amendment which says that ‘the North and the East is the homeland of the Tamil speaking people’ must be deleted since it is totally false when looking at the history of the island. This clause must be replaced with the clause ‘the entire island is the homeland of all its peoples’. The provision which allows for the merger between two provinces should be deleted. As much subjects from the concurrent list should be included in the national list. Under no circumstances should land, police or fiscal powers be given to provincial councils. All of us need to ensure that the above happens since if the system reverts back to a parliamentary system and the presidential system is scrapped, the only way to ensure the unitary status of the country is the make sure that the provincial councils do not get any more powers than they have at present. The Public Security Ordinance should not be amended in anyway as well. If any provincial councils acts out of line, the head of government should dissolved such a provincial council and direct rule by the head of government should be enforced under those circumstances.

  4. plumblossom Says:

    I would please urge any person who has any influence whatsoever with Ranil, Mangala, Sirisena, CBK to let them know that these Western Countries i.e. the US,UK, EU, Canada, Sweden, Norway and India will only back off if Sri Lanka takes a very firm stance and refuses to carry out this unjust UNHRC resolution. Sri Lanka must do this without any fear since I am sure if Sri Lanka takes a very firm stance and refuses to carry out this unjust resolution the UNHRC, the US,UK, EU, Canada, Sweden, Norway and India will back off. I can guarantee that will happen. So it is up to Sri Lanka or rather Ranil, Mangala, Sirisena, CBK whether they are going to place our Sri Lankan armed forces in jeopardy for crimes they did not commit or whether they are going to defend the country’s armed forces and the country’s sovereignty, independence, freedom, integrity, unitary status etc. by refusing to carry out this unjust UNHRC resolution which no country on this planet earth with any integrity will carry out. However, if they keep complying with whatever unjust demands are made by the US,UK, EU, Canada, Sweden, Norway and India, they will have to keep complying with those unjust demands at the expense of Sri Lanka breaking up into pieces and placing the Sri Lankan people’s security in jeopardy. Sri Lanka will end up being partitioned too.

  5. Fran Diaz Says:

    Dr Dayan Jayatilleke,
    With you in your analysis re the UN Resolution of May 2009 ! Thank you.
    How subsequent UN Resolutions were so very different and contradictory to the first UN Resolution of May 2009, we cannot fathom – unless, of course, the Powers that Be wants it so.

    ————–

    The situation in a nutshell :

    In the subsequent UN Resolutions they have never taken into account :

    That Tamil Separatism in Sri Lanka started in the 1930s, transferred into Lanka even more after PM Nehru’s Anti-Secessionist Laws in INDIA (1963), which stopped Tamil Nadu Southern States Separatist movement in INDIA.

    That the Tamil Caste Wars in the North of Lanka morphed into war with the govt of Sri Lanka with the Vadukoddai Resolution of 1976 (Eelam through Violence).

    Next, the LTTE was formed in Lanka and INDIA trained the LTTE in Tamil Nadu.

    The 1983 Riots were trumped up during the JRJ govt time, with INDIAN Envoy J.N. Dixit in charge (he was called the Viceroy of Lanka). This enabled Tamils of Lanka to go west as REFUGEES – there was no other way to enter the west.
    They form the Tamil Diaspora of today, lobbying the west for a Separate state in Lanka.

    The LTTE starts in earnest their TERRORISM in Sri Lanka. The trumped up 1983 Riots enables the LTTE to do just that.

    INDIA imposed the 13-A ILLEGALLY on the JRJ govt (1987).

    The rest is History.

    It is time to stop further damage to Lanka & her People. We demand a lasting Peace in Lanka !

    ———-

    * It is time to REMOVE the ILLEGAL 13-A.
    * It is time for Tamil Leaders to REVOKE OFFICIALLY the VADUKODDAI RESOLUTION of 1976 (Eelam through Violence).

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

 

 


Copyright © 2018 LankaWeb.com. All Rights Reserved. Powered by Wordpress