No foreign intervention allowed to SL internal affairs-FM

Courtesy : Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Foreign Minister Rohitha Bogollagama told parliament yesterday (08th ), that the government of President Mahinda Rajapaksa will leave no room for any foreign countries to interfere in the internal affairs of Sri Lanka or to compromise by letter or deed the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the country.

The Minister made this observation in winding up a six hour adjournment debate held today in the Sri Lanka Parliament to discuss, an earlier adjournment debate on Sri Lanka held in the British House of Commons on 2 May 2007. The debate was called by the Janatha Vimukthi Premanuma (JVP) MP Wimal Weerawansa, and members from the UNP, the JVP, the JHU, the TNA, as well Government members participated in it.

Minister Bogollagama who observed that he did not think that this debate should have taken place in the British Parliament in the first place, however held that parliaments were the best judges of what they did. He said the current debate in the Sri Lanka parliament mirrored to some extent that seen in the British House of Commons, where those who held different points of view could express themselves. He emphasized that the holding of this debate in the UK had not in anyway hurt the very positive bi-lateral relations that existed between Sri Lanka and the UK.

The Minister said notwithstanding some negative comments made by a group of MPs who spoke, who had styled themselves as the All Party Parliamentary Group for Tamils (APPG - T), a clear message that came out as a result of this debate was that the British Government rejected totally the suggestion by some of the APPG-T members to lift the proscription of the LTTE that currently operates in the UK. He quoted the British Minister of State at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Dr. Kim Howells, as stating during the course of the debate "we have repeatedly urged the LTTE to move away from the path of violence.

In the absence of a full renunciation of terrorism in deed and word, there can be no questions of reconsidering their proscribed status." He added that Dr Howells had also acknowledged that "the ability of the LTTE to raise funds overseas helps to sustain its ability to carry out violent acts and reduces the incentive to move away from the path of violence", that "LTTE fundraising activity in the United Kingdom encourages war, not peace", and that he had recently met British security authorities "to discuss how we [the U.K.] could counter the bullying, threats and acts of fraud that are used regularly to extract money from the Tamil population and others in the country".

The Minister said the Sri Lanka government was continuing in its quest to press the British authorities to crack down on the activities of the LTTE and its Front Organization in the UK. He said recent actions taken against LTTE activists not only in the UK, but also in the US, France and Australia showed clearly that the present government's diplomatic efforts were bearing fruit. He assured parliament that the government's quest to deny the LTTE operational freedom internationally will continue. At the same time the Minister said the government was also continuing its effort to bring the LTTE to the negotiating table and to a path of democracy. The government was of the view that the experience of countries like the U.K. which had faced similar terrorist situations and had emerged from them, had much positive experience to offer Sri Lanka.

Earlier in the day, opening the debate on behalf of the Government, Deputy Foreign Minister Hussein A. Bhaila emphasized that this debate should be understood in the context in which parliaments of this world function. Just as much as Sri Lanka's parliament would engage in adjournment debates on issues ranging from the situation in Iraq, developments in Palestine or on other issues concerning far flung regions, it is the practice in Britain too to discuss such issues. However, none of these are binding .

He said having perused the comment made by some of the people in this debate one must acknowledge that there are many well meaning comments. At the same time, he recognized that the main contributors to the debate, the members of the recently formed All Party Parliamentary Group for Tamils (APPG - T) have clearly had a different agenda. He said this group is nothing but a grouping of members formed as, what in Sri Lankan parlance would amount to an inter-country friendship Society of Parliamentarians. He said unfortunately this group had chosen to establish a parliamentary group polarizing the Sri Lankan Diaspora in the UK, where for long years the All Party Parliamentary Group on Sri Lanka (APPGSL) exists and had initiated constructive and balanced parliamentary debates relating to Sri Lankan issues, which has been helpful in strengthening relations between British parliamentarians and their counterparts in Sri Lanka.

The Deputy Minister noted that while speaker after speaker representing the APPG - T were at pains to state that they were reflecting the views of their constituents, a question arises, whether parliamentarians should merely reflect the views of their constituents divorced from the ground realities about which they are making pronouncements. He said unfortunately, this appears to have be the case with most speakers in the recent Sri Lanka debate in the British House of Commons. He said it may not be a coincidence that this debate was secured by a largely Labour group, only a day before all of the UK other that the City of London were to face local government and municipal elections - where incidentally, the Labour Party fared poorly. He added it is not unusual in parliamentary democracies, to seek to swing marginal voters in the run up to closely contested electoral processes.