By : A.A.M.NIZAM  – MATARA.

It was in 1980, the Government took the first step to enact the Voluntary Social Services Organisations (Registration and Supervision) Act. It sought to introduce a system of registration and supervision of activities of NGOs. However, this Act was not strictly implemented and the registration of NGOs was not strictly followed.

In 1990, a Commission was appointed to go into the activities of NGOs and to make recommendations for their proper functioning. The Commission made some recommendations and accordingly, regulations were passed under the Public Security Ordinance obligating compulsory registration of NGOs which have a turnover of Rs.50,000 and above. However, with the lapse of the Emergency Regulations, this system too lapsed.

In 1995 the Government introduced certain draft amendments to the 1980 Act providing for the establishment of an NGO Advisory Council and appointment of Interim Boards of Management to administer the affairs of NGOs. There were vehement protests against these provisions and implementation got stalled. However, a Secretariat for NGOs was established in 1996. Finally, it was only in 1998 the Parliament approved the draft legislation (Act No.8 of 1998).

Around April last year, the Government again introduced a draft legislation to amend the Voluntary Social Service Organizations (Registration and Supervision) Act, No 31 of 1980. The draft amendment was subjected to severe criticism by the NGOs. As a result, it was withdrawn.

As we can see from historical records, Sri Lanka has not been successful in their efforts to introduce regulations to supervise and scrutinise the NGOs in Sri Lanka. It is obvious that the extraordinary power” behind the NGOs is a real force to reckon with.

In many occasions NGO clout had caused deep annoyance to the Sri Lankan Government. We can take comfort because such experiences are not confined to Sri Lanka only. It has happened to many other countries.

Uganda has introduced a new Bill restricting the activities of NGOs, making registration compulsory and obliging them to be transparent about their reeipt and

In Cambodia a mew new law requires registration and annual reports to be filed with expenditure of foreign funds. NGOs can be disbanded if their activities jeopardise peace, stability and public order or harm the national security, national unity, culture and traditions of Cambodian society”.

Israel has passed a NGO Law” t to stigmatize left-wing and human rights organizations in

Israel as agents of foreign powers. The law singles out NGOs that receive the majority of their funding from foreign state entities, and is -fascistic law that harms democracy and silences dissent Israeli NGOs critical of the government – in particular the country’s continued occupation of the Palestinian territories – are facing severe new restrictions amid a toxic political climate on the right that has sought to label them as disloyal.

There are many reports indicating that the so-called NGO promoters, advocates of cooked up human rights violations, fund providers for subversive activities and who claim that they are more open to civil society such as the UK, Ireland, Australia also have restrictive measures against public opinion and against groups advocating accountability and .fair dealings.

In response to these Laws and Regulations the UN has appointed Maina Kiai as a special rapporteur to focus on freedom of expression and assembly. The EU organised a global forum of more than 200 civil society participants last December. Development branches of western governments, foundations and global NGOs are training and advising local groups on how to respond to new restrictions. Amnesty International has identified defending NGOs and human rights campaigners as one of its five strategic goals, and will launch a global campaign next year.

Similar to restrictions aforementioned exist in many countries elaboration restricted for space control and now let us concentrate on the reprehensive activities being carried out by foreign and terrorist servile NGOs in Sri Lanka.

The biggest folly of the Ranil/TNA government was making leading persons financially sound and their cronies who are keenly interested on certain fields the Minister of such subjects similar to the adage seeking divine solutions from the mother of the thief” (Horage ammagen Pena ahanawa).  Mano Ganeshan reportedly was a NGO head allegedly receiving funds from the terrorist diaspora and was responsible for inventing the diatribe relating to the absurd story about abduction of Northern by white vans when they visit Colombo.  When the joint opposition MP Udaya Gammanpila persistently raised the question in Parliament and demand to furnish details of white van abductions, names of victims and dates andplaces of such abductions the official government spokesman responded having dodged the questions several times saying that there had been no such abductions reported. 

When Minister of Justice Mr. Wijedasa proposed that the NGOs and INGOs must be regulated, this NGO-wala said that he preferred the term facilitated instead of regulated.

Ganeshan said that after he took office he has taken very many steps to ease the pressures in them as earlier the NGOs were considered as ‘traitors’ and ‘enemies’. He said that he has given strict instructions to the Director-General of the NGO Secretariat and his staff to consider NGOs and INGOs as partners in the state building. He stated that he has blessings from the Prime Minister Ranil Wickramasinghe who has clearly stated that this country is open to anyone and is not a fascist or autocratic country.

At a press conference organized by the Collective of Civil Society Organizations Executive Director of the Center for Policy Alternatives (CPA) and a Co-Convener of the Platform for Freedom, the notorious foreign servile anti-Sri Lankan Dr Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu, said that civil society was ‘shocked’ and ‘stunned’ that such a Cabinet paper could be presented and endorsed by the Government.  He said that the effect of the Cabinet Paper was to consider legislation that was so extensive and comprehensive in terms of all civil society actors.  He said the restrictions envisaged by the amendment would have had a chilling effect on civil society and would run completely contrary to the promises and commitments made by the Government with respect to good governance.

According to the draft amendment the NGO Secretariat is able to investigate complaints of misconduct in NGOs, criminal activities including terrorist financing and money laundering.  The Secretariat also has the powers to enter and inspect premises of NGOs.   Further, the Secretariat can obtain information related to financial activities of NGOs from banks.  The draft has also proposed further offences  for NGOs for actions, such as non-registration, not giving a publication of the organization and not providing information, that could have been administratively corrected.

Nishantha Prithviraj of the Sarvodaya Shramadana Movement said that the proposed draft amendment weakened people’s sovereignty. He pointed out the draft amendment was drafted without consulting civil society and was an injustice to civil society and the public at large. (Just see the actual status of the peo[;e’s sovereignity under the Ranil/TNA government?  Amendment or introduction of legislation should be drafted in consultation with civil society!)  He said existing laws could be used to deal with malpractices within organizations if there were any.  

The NGO named National Peace Council (NPC) is one of the worst anti Sri Lankan, anti

Buddhist and anti-Sinhalese NGOs in this country. Activities of NPC in the past are well known and Jehan Perera, who is the  Executive Director of the NPC, and is reportedly employed by the Norwegian government, for several years were attending the UNHRC sessions in Geneva lecturing against Sri Lanka and holding special meetings with foreign representatives attending the UNHRC  sessions attempting to convince them that the LTTE is only a people’s liberation organization, not a terrorist organization, and they are fighting to liberate the Tamil people of Sri Lanka from what he called oppressions, discriminations and  inhuman  treatment of the Sri Lankan security forces which he claimed are forcibly occupying the lands belonging to Tamils  and denying them freedom to pursue with their livelihoods. 

Even on 7^th January, this Norway employed Jehan Perera writing an article to the Island newspaper under the title Uniformity in governance is important for development drawing attention to President Gotabhaya Rajapaksa’s Throne Speech stated that although the first month of the new government has had many positive features to it, some of the government’s recent actions will not inspire confidence that the government is focused on implementing consistent policies. Instead it is giving the impression that it is tailoring policies to fit a political agenda, and they are  tend to engage in actions that have short term gains in mind even at the cost of the country’s long term future. He stated that there are several negative actions currently taking place that could potentially detract from the positive motivations of the government in seeking to enhance national security and promote development. He claims the president’s vision of rapid economic development as the solution to the country’s problems, including its ethnic conflict, will become more difficult to achieve under these circumstances.

In this article, he strongly criticises Police actions against certain offensive MPs, delivering the inaugural address from Anurdhapura, and constitutional amendments being envisaged by the President and the President’s promise to be the he sarcastically says that it ought to be his destiny to lead Sri Lanka on the right path instead of permitting partisan politics to lead the country astray, as it led his predecessors astray.

The NPC, whose annual funding is said to be in excess of 126 millions SL Rupees is funded by the USAID (Main contributor), MISEREOR  (The German Catholic Bishops’ Organisation for Development Coorporation), Asia Foundation, European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR) ,US Department of State ,Catholic Agency for Overseas Development (CAFOD),  SPICE-MSI, FOKUS (based on the information provided in NPC website, Financial Report 2017).

The website of the above funding agency the Catholic Agency for Overseas Development gives CAFOD’s mission as promoting human development and social justice in witness to Christian faith and Gospel values. Depending entirely on foreign governments and agencies they carry on the White Man’s Burden and have a function similar to Christian missionaries during the high colonial era. The 10 member Governing Council of this NGO has only 2 members with Sinhala names.

Most of the foreign funded NGOs were established in Sri Lanka during the war against LTTE terrorism.  Most of these NGOs have engaged in brainwashing the people of Sri Lanka promoting federalism (or indirectly separatism).  For example, National Peace Council (NPC), considered in their vision statement published prior to the defeat of terrorism, the LTTE as an integral part of ‘their so-called solution’.  Clearly the NPC and similar ilk wanted to whitewash the LTTE and bring it out as a civilised entity.

These peace mongers and their colonial masters in the West were behind the propaganda on behalf of Tamil racism in general and the LTTE in particular. Their activities parallel the LTTE’s global propaganda campaign against the government of Sri Lanka and its people.

The Island dated March 4, 2011 under the heading Foreign funds galore for three NGOs” stated that 3 Sri Lankan NGOs received over Rs. 600million in 3 years and Norway was the leading donor”, The article revealed how a section of the international community was pouring money into Sri Lankan NGOs like the Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) and National Peace Council (NPC), Transparency International Sri Lanka, in spite of the conclusion of war against by our gallant security forces in May, 2009.

As per the report, the CPA has received Rs. 272.31 million during the 2008-2010 periods. The NPC and TI have received Rs. 171.23 million and 174.79 million, respectively. However, it is said that the country’s banking system has no records of the exact amount of funds received by NGOs over the past two to three decades. Some sources said that an enormous amount of funds had been received by NGOs since Feb. 2002, with some countries and the UNDP providing funds to the LTTE Peace Secretariat.

Pakyasothy Sarawanamuttu, the CEO of the Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) also has a similar reprehensive record of carrying out various activities against Sri Lanka.  Even during the recent Swiss Hoax he had made statements to NewYork Times accusing the Sri Lanka government and justifying the Swiss allegations saying that the Swiss Embassy employee Garnier Barrister Francis could have been abducted by the agents of the government.

Popular opinion indicate that although the NPC and other NGOs were playing lead roles during the Chandrika-Ranil failed regimes, and later during the Ranil-Sirisena yamapalana regime, attempting to brainwash the country from top political hierarchy to grass roots level, spending billions of rupees, the mass support received from the general public to eradicate terrorism in 2009 and to chase away  the above notorious regimes at the end of their terms  are clear proofs that the peace loving people of Sri Lanka are wiser than the so-called foreign servile and foreign funded PEACE prophets.

A regular contributor to the Island newspaper Mr. M. Arukgoda in his latest article to the Island states that the latest mission, after the failure of earlier vision, of these NGOs is said to be the work towards a political solution to the so-called ethnic conflict, reconciliation etc. He says that a few months after the elimination of the LTTE terror from our soil, we had every reason to believe that some notable elements of the US and their allies were rapidly making a case of war crimes against Sri Lanka on the basis of the conduct of her armed forces as well as political leadership. One of the motivations of this action is to cover-up their own continuing armed conflicts on large scales, involving major humanitarian catastrophes and causing the death of large numbers of civilians due to military actions in Iraq, Afghanistan and in some areas of Pakistan.

Mr. Arukgoda reveals that on 28th August 2009, the two kingpins of NGOs were reported addressing a close-door meeting convened by the US Institute of Peace (USIP). Another notable participant of this discussion was Teresita Schaffer of The Centre for Strategic and international Studies, one of the former US Ambassadors to Sri Lanka, who was very critical of the Sri Lankan government during her tenure of office in Sri Lanka. As per media reports, the duos from the two NGOs basically said at a meeting, in Washington D.C. with former Ambassador to Sri Lanka, Mr. Robert Blake, was what Blake wanted them to say.

After few months of these meetings, Ban Ki-moon appointed a panel to advice him on Sri Lanka’s alleged war crime charges and European Union gave conditional ultimatum on GSP

Plus. Thus these NGOs are the promoters of the notorious UNHCR Resolution welcomed by their yahapalanaya government and soon after the appointment of Ban Ki-moon panel, these Peace Vendors were back in the business by issuing statements one after the other to the foreign and local press supporting the Ban KI-moon’s panel and the EU’s conditions and condemning the actions of the Sri Lankan Government and its people as was usually done by them during the past and they started, once again, advocating solutions. The solutions they seek are from outside including foreign intervention. It is not surprising at all to learn that those who live on foreign funding are for foreign intervention.

Mr. Arukgoda in conclusion of his article claims that three years ago Modi’s government in India revoked licences of 25 foreign funded NGOs over ‘anti-national activities’ and the  pool of foreign-funded bodies shrunk there by almost half in two years.

The Government needs to be more concerned about the International NGOs (or INGOs). These INGOs have two in-built components. There is the foreign funding principal and the local NGO agent. The donor functions from overseas and provides the funds. The agent is engaged in the operations which could vary from building up a School for Blind to conducting seminars (mainly in English) at the five-star hotels.

One of the most important aspects about these foreign donors is that the donor NGO’s are not always non-governmental. For example, in Europe, there are many INGOs who receive 100% of its funds from their governments. In Canada, the Government has increasingly taken over the funding of Canadian NGOs. In Germany there are the ‘foundations’ linked with the political parties. Invariably, all of them thus have definite political agendas of their own. Just look around.  You will be surprised to note the number of foreign aided foundations” are being held by UNP MPs. It is hard to find a UNP MP without a foreign funded foundation in his name or in the name of their spouses. 

The time is very opportune for the government of President Gotabhaya Rajapaksa to ban immediately all leading anti-national NGOs, confiscate their assets, freezr their bank accounts and prosecute the leading figures for spreading anti-Sri Lankan propaganda and causing damage to the image of the country.  It is the wish of all peace loving, patriotic masses since a long time and it now lies as an obligation to be fulfilled by the Prersident..

(concluded)