KAMALIKA PIERIS

Yahapalana government signed resolution 30/1 in September 2015, and then it signed resolution 34/1 in March 2017 and in November 2017 reiterated a “very firm” commitment to fully implement the resolution within two years.  The commitment was made by the Head of Delegation to the HRC’s Universal Periodic Review in Geneva, Harsha de Silva, Deputy Minister of National Policies and Economic Affairs.

But after the electoral defeat of February 2018, Yahapalana changed its stance. At the Geneva meeting of March 2018, Minister Tilak Marapana did not refer to the 2015 Geneva resolution at all. Tilak Marapana told Human Rights Council all reconciliation mechanisms will be implemented in accordance with our Constitution”

Minister Sarath Amunugama, who was also in the delegation, said they had clearly explained to the UNHRC that they would not allow any international interference which violated the Constitution.” We have clearly told the HRC that the government will not allow any foreign judges to come to Sri Lanka and interfere with the local judicial system. Sri Lanka has enough lawyers and a completely independent judiciary to look into its matters,” said Amunugama. It was unfair to categorize Sri Lanka as one of the countries that had to face war crime charges, Sri Lanka defeated a very powerful terrorist organization.  Sri Lanka was very different to the other countries which had war crime charges at UNHRC.

The intelligentsia are now getting restless over Resolution 30/1.They are starting to probe the matter. Mahinda Samarasinghe was questioned. He stated that Sri Lanka’s decision to co-sponsor the Geneva Resolution 30/1 in Oct 2015 had not been discussed by the Cabinet of Ministers,  the Foreign Ministry had handled the  matter. There was no requirement to take it up at the Cabinet, he said. The Rajapaksa government had adopted a similar strategy in respect of the 2009 resolution. Tamara Kunanayagam said this was a very serious lapse on the part of government. The matter should have been first submitted to parliament to which the government is accountable.

The media wanted to know from Samarasinghe whether the Naseby information had been conveyed to Geneva. Samarasinghe said the Naseby information has not been discussed at the Cabinet. Lord Naseby during a meeting with President Sirisena in London had also commented on Sri Lanka’s failure to present its case in Geneva and to European countries. Sarath Amunugama said that the Foreign Affairs Ministry should have used the statement to deny allegations. .  However, Foreign Minister Tilak Marapana had assured Parliament in November 2017 that Lord Naseby’s statement would be used at the appropriate time.

The intelligentsia are now considering how to get out of this Resolution. Mahinda Samarasinghe said that Geneva Resolutions were not binding.  The Island pointed out that though the government had repeatedly claimed that Geneva Resolution wasn’t binding, it was in the process of implementing its recommendations. Samarasinghe said that Sri Lanka would only implement what was acceptable.

Sri Lanka should address the issues relating to Geneva from a legal perspective and call on the Human Rights Council to withdraw Resolution 30/1 and re-visit the stand taken regarding Sri Lanka said one critic. It was possible for UNHRC to revisit a Resolution. That decision was solely in the hands of the members of the Human Rights Council. It would be up to the member states of the Human Rights Council to decide whether to revisit Sri Lanka’s case on the basis of representations made by a country,   said an UN official.

The only hope for Sri Lanka is for a future government to sit with the Office of the Human Rights Council and renegotiate the resolution, so that Sri Lanka’s obligations are fulfilled within the context of its own Constitution as well as within the internationally recognized laws, said Ladduwahetty.

Whether the fact that the Sri Lankan government cosponsored the Resolution makes its implementation obligatory is debatable, said N.A. de S Amaratunge. For one thing, the government may have been coerced by the western powers that helped the government to come to power.

Under the UN Charter, resolutions adopted by the General Assembly, including subsidiary bodies such as the Human Rights Council, are recommendations only and not legally binding on Member States. Numerous resolutions are never ever implemented. The US, for instance, has never implemented the annual resolutions calling for lifting of its criminal blockade against Cuba, nor has Israel the hundreds of resolutions on Occupied Palestine,  a critic said.

The simple solution, therefore, is  ignore the resolution and mobilize the support of Sri Lanka’s natural allies to take Sri Lanka off the Council’s agenda the critic said. This would mean ensuring there is no resolution against Sri Lanka or one that does not have an operative paragraph requiring the Council to consider the matter at a future session. The resolution is binding only because Yahapalana wants it to be binding, concluded Tamara Kunanayagam.

This series ends with reference to a new Human Rights issue facing Sri Lanka in Geneva, the emergence of the Muslim factor in the UN arena. This is clearly connected to the Resolution At a side event at HRC sessions In Geneva, at which paper presenters and audience conducted themselves admirably, moderate yet critical representatives of the Muslim community rationally presented their case, their grievances and their apprehensions said Dayan Jayatilleke.

Tamara Kunanayagam looked at it differently. Recent attacks on Muslims had helped advance the UN-US agenda in respect of Sri Lanka. The attacks coincided with the sessions of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, Washington has been concerned that its resolution has been widely contested by the Sri Lankan people, including at the highest level of State, said Tamara Kunanayagam speaking at ‘Eliya’.

The maiden appearance of the local Muslims at the HRC session in Geneva is on YouTube. We have all seen it.  It is very clear that these Muslim representatives have been brought in to   show that Sri Lanka is simultaneously anti Muslim as well as anti Tamil. They have been brought for a purpose. The west finds that the case for Tamil Eelam is about to be exposed and weakened at Geneva. That is due to the Global Sri Lanka Forum, starting to invade   the HRC sessions In Geneva, well primed and ready to demolish the case for a bogus Eelam. It was necessary   therefore to substitute another ethnic issue” on to the stage and make Global Sri Lanka Forum battle both ethnic issues.   ( continued)

  KAMALIKA PIERIS

revised 24.8.21

The government of Sri Lanka defeated the LTTE in May 2009, and the Eelam War IV came to an end. Soon after, the separatist movement went into its next phase of attack, which was UN action against Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka was to be punished for defeating the LTTE and the LTTE was to be exonerated.

UN action was attempted in 2007 when United Nations Security Council was asked to approve sanctions against Sri Lanka. This was the very first time, said analysts, that there had been a censure motion against Sri Lanka in any international body, since it became independent. This sanction is   about the use of children in armed conflict. Reference is S/2007/758. Security Council was not very enthusiastic about this. I am not sure, but I think this was dropped.

In May 2009, as soon as the war ended, these western countries struck again. The west   has clearly had their UN move ready, to be used in case the Government of Sri Lanka actually won the war. That was a sound possibility. The state army was always far superior to the LTTE. What the LTTE had over the army was superior weapons, given to them by the west. The accusations and allegations against Eelam war IV were prepared in advance even before the war ended, observed Shenali Waduge.

In 2009, US, working through Britain, France and Austria, tried to get the UN Security Council to examine the deaths in the last stage of the Eelam War. This was to be at a Security Council briefing.  But US was not able to secure the 16 signatures needed   and UN Security Council refused to discuss the situation in Sri Lanka.

The move was ‘strenuously warded’ off by seven countries led by China and Russia. These seven, China, Russia, Japan, Turkey, Uganda, Vietnam and Libya,   said that the current situation in Sri Lanka did not warrant a briefing in the Security Council. China vehemently” opposed any discussion in the Security Council on the issue of civilians trapped in the fighting between government Security Forces and the LTTE arguing that it was “purely an internal matter”.

The US then turned to the UN Human Rights Council (HRC). The Human Rights Council, unlike Security Council, could be manipulated easily by the US. In May 2009 UN Human Rights Council in Geneva held a special session, called at the request of US, UK, EU and Denmark  to discuss a Swiss-EU resolution against Sri Lanka.  The sponsor was the United States, and the resolution was known as the US resolution on Sri Lanka.

The request for convening the special session was made by Germany on 19th May, the very day hostilities came to an end. The initiative for the resolution however, was taken by the European Union. The resolution called for a comprehensive international investigation of the conduct of Sri Lanka forces in the last phase of the war. Both government and LTTE were accused of killing thousands of civilians. The reference is A/HRC/RES/S-11/. Switzerland had brought   amendments to the Sri Lanka resolution at a closed door meeting held earlier.    The EU was very secretive in its actions,  said Rajiva Wijesinghe. EU was trying for a War Crimes probe, said analysts.

Many NGOs had supported the EU resolution.  The NGO website, Inner City Press presented what it said were UN statistics of civilian killings in the Wanni since January 2009, and quoted the UN Human Rights High Commissioner Navaneethan Pillay as saying that war crimes “may” have been committed in Sri Lanka by both the LTTE and the Sri Lankan government.

There was also vigorous lobbying by the Tamil Diaspora. Many  a Special Rapporteur who had not previously been interested in Sri Lanka, issued a press release calling for an independent inquiry into the situation in Sri Lanka, said Dayan Jayatilleke. Rajiva Wijesinghe added, hordes of LTTE sympathizers turned up to buttonhole various ambassadors, and to brief the UN Commissioner for Human rights, and to make aggressive interventions in the debate. They were aided and abetted by a number of NGOs.  But some pro-Eelamists were not satisfied with the text. ‘This text is too little,   they said, ‘it is also toothless’.

The EU assumed that since they were about a dozen themselves, they could get the 16 signatures easily, but the attempt failed. EU was not able to secure the 16 signatures needed. Sri Lanka briefed all states interested in Sri Lanka and got the motion scratched. The Non-Aligned Movement, its chairman, Cuba, and Chairman elect, Egypt as well as China, Russia,   Bangladesh, and Pakistan supported Sri Lanka. 

Sri Lanka then submitted a counter resolution, to the EU resolution, Resolution S-11/1 ‘Assistance to Sri Lanka in the promotion and protection of human rights’. The resolution   showed that LTTE kept civilians as hostages against their will and that the Government liberated almost 300,000 citizens kept by the LTTE. The resolution was commended.

The resolution was passed by 29 for with 12 against and 6 abstaining. Those who voted for Sri Lanka included India, Pakistan, China, Russia, Malaysia, Brazil Cuba, Egypt, Ghana and Indonesia. Those against included Canada, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Switzerland and UK. Countries supporting Sri Lanka   criticized the EU resolution. Cuba, who co-sponsored the Sri Lanka resolution, commented on the double standards, and the undesirable politicization of the Human Rights Council.

Sri Lanka’s counter resolution was described as ‘a rare and perhaps unprecedented move,’ by analysts. There could not be a similar instance in the UNHRC history, said the jubilant Sri Lanka group. In fact there had been only 10 previous special sessions like this.  ‘Sri Lanka negotiators never showed their hand while dumbfounding even the most seasoned diplomatic wizards seated round the Geneva table. There was no bubbling over with emotion as they approached the vote. They had poker faces till they triumphed’, reported the media. 

Sri Lanka was able to resist successfully and then prevail over the concerted global efforts of the massive, well funded and thoroughly professional foreign offices of the UK, France, Germany, and Denmark, together with their access to the media, their proxies the INGOs, and their well placed supporters in the upper reaches of the UN system, said Dayan Jayatilleke. 

The Sri Lanka team was spoken of highly, reported the media.  UNHCR president also spoke highly of Sri Lanka attitude to discussing human rights issues, continued the media.  The well orchestrated cohesion of the three fighting forces also came in for praise. While army faced the matter on the ground, the air force dealt with the bunker hopping LTTE. The navy sealed of the supply lines well. Jane’s Defence Weekly of London noted that cutting off the Tigers fortified supply along the nearly 200 mile long beach from form Batticaloa –Trincomalee -Mullativu in the east to Mannar and Puttalam on the west was crucial to the war.

After much protest from Sri Lanka, the web cast of the special session was uploaded to the archive of the UN Human Rights Council. These live webcasts are usually uploaded in a few hours but in this case they said that there had been a technical glitch, complained the government of Sri Lanka, ‘but you can now watch it on http://www.un.org/webcast/unhrc/archive.asp?go=0111’

This ‘victory’ was certainly seen by the public in Sri Lanka. A huge number watched the proceedings on the live webcast. This was also picked up by at least one popular TV channel. There was also a full length colored advertisement in Daily News of 4.6.09 (p 11) listing the 29 countries that spoke in favor of Sri Lanka at Geneva. 

The US thereafter sponsored three resolutions against Sri Lanka at the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) in 2012, 2013 and 2014. They were all challenged by the government of Sri Lanka and they were all voted in and accepted by the HRC. The US subsequently said that if Sri Lanka wanted to permanently close its dark chapter it cannot walk alone. Analysts observed that in all these resolutions the US was able to influence the votes and get reluctant countries to at least abstain. Those countries that refrained from voting made speeches in Sri Lanka’s favor and then refrained from voting – which was their way of indicating that they were refraining from voting in favor of Sri Lanka only under duress.

Resolution HRC 19/2 of 22 March 2012, asked Sri Lanka to implement the recommendations of its own Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) and to take steps ‘to ensure justice, equity, accountability and reconciliation.’ It called for an action plan” and for the UN Human Rights Commissioner to work ‘in consultation with, and with the concurrence’ of the Sri Lankan government in implementing the LLRC proposals. The US initially wanted a co-sponsor from the Third World for the resolution. Though we lost, we got 15 votes and 8 abstentions, which is good, said Sri Lanka.

This resolution was presented amidst much fanfare .A resolution calling upon Sri Lanka to fully investigate who was responsible for the deaths of thousands of Tamil civilians and to establish genuine reconciliation is to be tabled during a meeting of the UN Human Rights Council (UNHCR), which opens tomorrow, shouted the media. Britain and the US are preparing for a bitter showdown with Sri Lanka as the two countries engage in a major effort to pass an international resolution rebuking Colombo over alleged war crimes said to have been committed during military operations against ethnic rebels.

Many thousands of Sri Lankan civilians died or suffered other violations in the final weeks of the long-running civil war in 2009. There has been no complete accounting of those deaths or other violations and no pursuit of accountability for them,” said Eileen Donahoe, the US ambassador to the UNHCR in Geneva. We believe that real reconciliation must be based on accountability, not impunity. There cannot be impunity for large-scale civilian casualties, and that if there is to be real reconciliation it must be based on an accounting of the truth and serious implementation of changes,” concluded Donahoe”

Diplomats said the wording of the resolution was likely to be modest, because USA wanted to obtain the support of as many of the 47 UNHCR member countries as possible. ” It is unlikely the phrase war crimes” will appear. No-one wants to see the resolution defeated. Those campaigning for the resolution said that given the sensitivity of the issue, even a modest resolution would be a success.

Fred Carver of the Sri Lanka Campaign for Peace and Justice, said, If successful, this motion will show that  the opinion of the world, and in particular the opinion of nations in the global south, has shifted and that the Sri Lankan government can no longer turn a blind eye to war crimes and crimes against humanity. The army has always insisted it adopted a zero civilian casualty policy and for some time claimed no civilians had been killed. After Sri Lanka lost the vote some INGOs and NGOs had thrown grand parties.

 Pakiasothy Saravanamuttu, Sunila Abeyesekera and Nimalka Fernando were in Geneva at the time, reported the media.  They attacked the Rajapaksa administration as undemocratic, repressive and militarized, with abductions and open killings. They called Sri Lanka a ‘hell hole’. It was evident that all three wanted a regime change in Sri Lanka. Sunila Abeyesekera was described as a NGO activist who is heavily funded by the west. Sunanda Deshapriya was also there. Diplomats had privately wondered how these people were tolerated in Sri Lanka, said the media.

However, Sri Lanka representative, Tamara Kunanayagam had   informed the Office of the Commissioner for Human Rights that the OHCHR had acted outside its mandate in facilitating the US resolution. OCHCR has played to the political agenda of the USA, raising serious doubts about the impartiality of the OHCHR.The OHCHR is bound by the UN Charter to be neutral, she said.

Kunanayagam observed that an aide at OHCHR, Mungoven, had emailed that the US victory was a ’culmination of the sustained and determined work by many in the team over the past few years.’  He had thanked OCHCR representative in Sri Lanka,   the Secretary General’s advisory panel, the Special Rapporteur on Extra judicial execution, and the Special procedures Branch of the UN.

TNA   welcomed the US resolution against Sri Lanka.TNA said that this is the first step in the pursuit of justice and accountability   and thanked those organizations which showed a firm commitment to the achievement of a future for the Tamils in Sri Lanka  that is marked by equality, dignity, justice and self respect.

Elsewhere in Sri Lanka the resolution was condemned as interference in the internal affairs of Sri Lanka by the Committee of Vice Chancellors of Sri Lanka. It was also condemned by the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation Engineers Association. Rev. Cyril Fernando, of the Diocese of Colombo, said that the action was equal to a direct intervention against Sri Lanka’s independence and sovereignty and an insult to the intelligence of the people.

Nalin de Silva said that some countries were trying to build puppet regimes around the world that is why they created separatist leaders and funded them. S. L. Gunasekera stated that there was a danger of President Rajapaksa being assassinated and a pro-western government set in place.  America’s final aim was to install a pro western person in power here after destabilizing the county and ousting President Rajapaksa, making human rights violations the battle cry.

There were large demonstrations in Sri Lanka against the US resolution. The public voiced their anger over attempts by US and western countries to meddle in the internal affairs of the country under cover of human rights, observed the media.  The Resolution was also condemned by the ‘cream of the business community’ who thronged to Nelum Pokuna roundabout, reported the media. They included representatives from John Keels Holdings, Aitken Spence, Sri Lanka Telecom, Mobitel, Lanka Bell, dialog, Etisalat, Hilton Colombo, Mount Lavinia Hotel, Commercial Bank and Hatton National Bank.

The Geneva resolution of 2012 is nothing new, said Sri Lanka.  We knew that some western and European countries had launched a conspiracy against Sri Lanka. We saw this at the time of the humanitarian operation in Eelam War IV. At that time these same parties used various tactics to turn the operation back. They took the position that Sri Lanka should give in to LTTE terrorism and divide the country. These agents will continue their project aimed at dividing Sri Lanka into two like Sudan. The project will continue from foreign lands and they will try to create instability and anarchy within the country.

US resolution at Geneva 2012 isn’t an end in itself it is as scène setter, it sets the scene in which the case for external inquiry and interference can be made beyond reasonable doubt. However making that case depend upon proin that domestic remedies are not forthcoming within the time frame given by the UN, if so then the case for an international inquiry is already pretty much made, if  Sri Lanka refuses to cooperate then the process will move to the next level of the escalation ladder.

The 2013 US sponsored resolution was about accountability and promoting reconciliation in Sri Lanka (A/HRC/22/L.1/Rev.1). Robert O. Blake, Assistant Secretary of State for south and central Asia said in an interview with BBC Sinhala service that US had closely consulted with India on this resolution. The resolution was adopted by 23 votes with 13 against and 8 abstentions. During the Council’s proceedings, Sri Lanka’s representative spoke out against the resolution.

UN’s Human Rights Council has passed a resolution highly critical of Sri Lanka’s record, reported the BBC in 2013. The resolution encourages Sri Lanka to conduct an independent and credible investigation into alleged war crimes. Though milder than its initial drafts, this resolution is more detailed, and tougher than last year’s. Although it suggests Sri Lanka set up a “truth-seeking mechanism” on abuses and calls for an investigation, it does not demand an international one. It also asks Colombo to extend invitations to some of the UN’s special rapporteurs.

In 2014, the US again put forward a resolution   against Sri Lanka to the HRC (HRC 25/1 of 27 March 2014). The resolution was to open an international inquiry into alleged war crimes committed by both the Sri Lankan Government and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in the final stages of a decades-long conflict that ended in 2009. 

Unlike the resolutions of 2009, 2012 and 2013, this resolution asked the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) to ‘investigate, assess and monitor’ the human rights situation in Sri Lanka. This undermines national sovereignty, observed the media. The resolution was adopted with 23 members voting in favor of the resolution, while 12 voted against. Russia, Cuba, Venezuela, China, Russia, Maldives voted against it. India, South Africa, Japan, and Indonesia voted for. There were 12 abstentions. Which showed that those who supported the Resolution numbered less than half of the HRC, commented G.L.Pieris

Both groups of countries, for Sri Lanka and against Sri Lanka, commented on the resolution. The intrusive manner in which the investigations are carried on against Sri Lanka is unwarranted they said. The resolution ‘went beyond the mandate of the High Commissioner said Russia,  ‘double standard of play” (Cuba), “aimed at developing countries forcing them into submission” (Philippines), intolerable interference in the internal affairs of Sri Lanka” (Pakistan)  “people have the right to choose their own path” (China), serious risks created by intervention” (Venezuela), “the biased approach to specific countries” (Ecuador).failure “to take into account continuing progress” (Thailand)  and ‘ attempt to stifle the “energy” (Indonesia).

UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navaneeethan Pillay noted that in recent years, the Sri Lanka Government has established various mechanisms with the task to investigate past violations. But none have had the independence to be effective or inspire confidence among victims and witnesses,” she stated. New evidence continues to emerge, and witnesses are willing to come forward to testify before international mechanisms in which they have confidence and which can guarantee their protection, the High Commissioner added.

This shows that an international inquiry is not only warranted, but also possible, and can play a positive role in eliciting new information and establishing the truth where domestic inquiry mechanisms have failed.”The Council has in the past called on the Sri Lankan Government to take credible steps to ensure accountability for alleged serious violations committed during the final months of the conflict  see Appendix 2.

HRC requested the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) to undertake a comprehensive investigation” into alleged serious violations and abuses of human rights and related crimes by both parties, and hold perpetrators accountable.  A move to remove the paragraph empowering an international investigation was defeated. The OCHRC did as it was told and prepared a report, known today as OISL report.

HRC also reiterated its call on the government of Sri Lanka to implement the constructive recommendations made in the report of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission. It also called on the Government to release publicly the results of its investigations into alleged violations by security forces, including the attack on unarmed protesters in Weliweriya in August 2013.

 Godfrey Goonetilleke and Asoka Gunawardene of Marga Institute and Jeevan Thangarajah of Consortium of Humanitarian agencies   attended this event, to hear the US plaint against Sri Lanka. They opposed the position taken by the UN Secretary General’s Panel of experts, (known as Darusman Report) and the International Crimes Evidence project that said the army deliberately killed Tamil civilians. The evidence used is limited and sources not given, they observed.

in 2015, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights issued a report on Sri Lanka .He said the report is ‘rather unique’ . it is the first of its kind by his office in respect of anay country.

 The report makes drastic recommendations relating to demilitarization of the north and east,.downsizing the military, removing the indispensable security mechanism embedded in the Public Security Ordinance and impinging on the command structures of the military. 

 other recommendations are breathtaking in the degree of intrusive impact. They include fundamental land reforms, distributing political and administration powers within the country, and the estaboihemnt  of special courts outside the country legal system. 

 193 countries are exhorted to prosecute Sri Lanka ‘under universal jurisdiction.’ Sri Lanka is castigated for delays in resettling persons without mentioning the presence of land mines.  All member states of the UN are asked to consider applications by Sri Lanka military and police for participation in peace keeping and training programmes across the world, concluded analysts. 

In 2015,   the Yahapalana government of Sri Lanka co-sponsored a resolution against itself at the Human Rights Council in Geneva. This is   HRC Resolution 30/1 of 2015 on Promoting reconciliation, accountability and human rights in Sri Lanka. This resolution was based on a report prepared by Sandra Beidas, formerly of the Amnesty International. 

 The text says the resolution was sponsored by Macedonia, Montenegro, the United Kingdom, Northern Ireland and the United States of America. Sri Lanka is not named in the text as a sponsor. Sri Lanka representative in Geneva, Ravinatha Ariyasinha refused to accept the Resolution and tried to negotiate different terms.  Yahapalana government overruled the Ambassador’s objections and ordered him to accept the draft resolution  ‘just as it was.’ The Resolution was passed without a vote. ( see Appendix 1)

However, Pakistan observed that no self respecting country would agree to the intrusive measures advocated in this resolution. He wanted to know how this resolution was to be funded and whether the funders were the same as those who had sponsored the resolution.  If so the whole process will be tainted. He got no  answer to his inquiry.  India warned that an intrusive approach would undermine national sovereignty. The final resolution had only the support of 23 of the 47 members.

Resolution 30/1 is not a Human Rights resolution. It is a political document supporting Tamil separatism. It  starts by recognizing the now despised Yahapalana government, saying the resolution  welcomes ‘the historic free and fair democratic elections in January and August 2015’. The resolution then went on to emphasize the need for Devolution, to recognize the need for a ‘Political Settlement’   by which it meant a new Constitution. The resolution then called for the continuance of Provincial Councils and the 13th Amendment and finally announced that land in the High Security Zones in Jaffna must be returned to the rightful civilian owners.

The Resolution then goes on to make some deadly suggestions. It calls for individual prosecutions, reparations, truth-seeking, institutional reform, vetting of public employees and officials, provide remedies to victims, promote healing and reconciliation. It points out the need to recognize international human rights law, international refugee law and international humanitarian law.

The Resolution   then prescribes four specific actions the Yahapalana government has to take.  Firstly, a judicial mechanism to investigate allegations of violations and abuses of human rights.  Secondly, A Commission for truth, justice, reconciliation and non-recurrence. Thirdly, an Office for Missing Persons (OMP) and fourthly an Office for Reparations. The Resolution also permits the government to remove military officers suspected of having violated HR even if there is no evidence. This is actually a purge of the armed forces, declared analysts.

Laksiri Fernando noted that there are two tricky points at the end of the resolution, regarding the involvement of the High Commissioner and the High Commissioner’s Office. This is where the ‘neo-liberal human rights interventionism’ is apparent. The government of Sri Lanka, or its delegation in Geneva, should be extremely careful in endorsing such a resolution again, he warned. The HRC has unveiled a political agenda meant to transform the country, at the expense of its unitary status, observed Shamindra Ferdinando.

The resolution has been drafted craftily to make it marketable to public opinion in Sri Lanka said Tamara Kunanayagam and also to ease the fears of developing countries in the Human Rights Council, who will otherwise object to a precedent that could endanger their own independence and sovereignty,. The text is scattered with references to voluntary commitments made by the Government of Sri Lanka and to domestic initiatives. International involvement is presented as support to these domestic processes, not a substitute.

To the astonishment of Sri Lanka, Yahapalana government openly embraced the Resolution. The President said that the implementation of the resolution will result in promoting democracy, reconciliation and respect for our armed forces. SLFP officially announced at a press conference that the UNP and the SLFP had jointly agreed on the implementation of the Resolution.”

Mangala Samaraweera, then foreign minister wrote an open letter to Mahinda Rajapaksa where he said that the Resolution was a victory for Sri Lanka’s new foreign policy, Sri Lanka and Sri Lankans. The Resolution was not an isolated one. It was based on Yahapalana government plans for good governance. These plans had been carefully developed by the government over many months.  The bold decision to co sponsor the UNHRC resolution last October was a massive foreign policy victory for Sri Lanka. It was adopted without a vote by consensus. Under Mahinda Rajapaksa the world was divided over Sri Lanka, because of the dismantling of democracy and abuse of human rights . Under Yahapalana   the world which was divided towards Sri Lanka unanimously rallied round Sri Lanka,  he said.

The Foreign Ministry published on its website a Sinhala translation of the resolution, leaving out the sensitive parts so that any Sinhala speaking person reading it would be completely misled as to the contents of the UNHRC resolution. The Island chanced upon the discrepancies between the original resolution and its Sinhala version and exposed the matter.

This UNHRC Resolution of 2015 is an unprecedented resolution, observed the media. There hadn’t been a previous instance, at Geneva, where an elected government co-sponsored a Resolution against its own country, said Island, where a country welcomed punitive action proposed on the basis of unsubstantiated allegations. Sri Lanka created history by co-sponsoring a resolution against itself, which was totally against its interests.

Why the government has opted for co sponsoring this resolution defies comprehension said the media. What decided the Yahapalana   government to sponsor this Resolution, they asked. The earlier government put up a good fight all these years in the face of tremendous pressure from the US led western bloc, commented Island editorial.  The present government had betrayed the country in co- sponsoring the UN resolution with the US said N.AS.de S Amaratunga. Dayan Jayatilleke observed that the Resolution had not received the approval of Parliament and it had not been   endorsed by the Cabinet therefore the Government of Sri Lanka was not bound by it.

However, M.A. Sumanthiran had told   the   USA Congressional Caucus for Ethnic and religious freedom in Sri Lanka in Washington that  ‘the text of the 2015 Resolution is a negotiated text.’ There had been a tripartite consensus. TNA negotiated with the Yahapalana government with the United States of America also participating. .’I was personally involved in the negotiations, TNA had settled for a hybrid model though they had originally asked for an international inquiry. TNA wanted the full implementation of the resolution.   The Global Tamil Forum spokesperson, Suren Surendiran told Island that agreement on the text of the resolution has been reached following negotiations among what he called ‘core group members at the UNHRC’, the government of Sri Lanka, and representatives of the Tamils.

Yahapalana Government’s meek acceptance of resolution 30/1 in Geneva, in 2015 is an abdication of its sacred responsibilities toward nation, people and its armed forces. It is the responsibility and duty of the Government to safeguard the sovereignty, integrity and independence of the State, and to ensure that the dignity of the nation is respected, said Tamara Kunanayagam and Palitha Kohona.  Supportive nations were prevented from raising their voices in our defenses because we joined with the USA in the resolution, observed G.L.Pieris.

Some thought that having accepted the 2015 resolution the country would become a target at the subsequent sessions of HRC. At the annual sessions of the Human Rights Council on June 28, 2016, the Human Rights Commissioner dealt extensively with Sri Lanka. In his speech, ‘Promoting reconciliation, accountability and human rights in Sri Lanka’, he explained, in no uncertain terms, what Geneva expected Sri Lanka to do.

Yet another resolution on Sri Lanka, supported by the US, was adopted at the 2017 sessions of the HRC, Resolution A/HRC/34/L.1. This too was co-sponsored by Sri Lanka and passed without a vote. This resolution reaffirmed the UNHRC resolution 30/1 of 1 October 2015. The UN Human Rights Commissioner wanted Sri Lanka to implement recommendations contained   in the 2015   resolution, and the investigation undertaken by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR).

The resolution gave the government of Sri Lanka two years to deliver on the commitments made in UNHRC Resolution No 30/1 of October 2015. It also requested the Commissioner and his special procedure mandate holders to strengthen their technical assistance to Sri Lanka on the promotion and protection of human rights, truth, justice, reconciliation and accountability. The Commissioner called on the international community to investigate and prosecute those allegedly responsible for war crimes. He also wanted other countries to abide by the recommendations. The Commissioner also stated that if Sri Lanka did not deliver the goods, Geneva would be compelled to explore measures such as ‘universal jurisdiction’. Universal Jurisdiction allows the courts of another country to prosecute a Sri Lankan citizen for alleged violations of crimes against humanity normally outside its national jurisdiction.

For the first time, there was NGO representation from the anti-Eelamist group at Geneva. Global Forum of Sri Lanka  led by Ven. Bemgmuwe Nalaka , consisting of  Rear Admiral Sarath Weerasekera,  Nalaka Godahewa, Anuradha Yahampath and several others including Wasantha Keerthiratne, Chairman of the Global Forum, participated in this session as a non government agency of Sri Lanka. Nalaka Godahewa, Sarath Weerasekera and Anuradha Yahampath, spoke at the session. They said that the Tamils were a well assimilated group in Sri Lanka. They were not discriminated against. They criticized the High Commissioner for his bias against Sri Lanka.

Earlier, at a side event, the Transnational Government of Tamil Eelam (TGTE) called for the arrest of Weerasekara accusing him of being involved in war crimes in Sri Lanka. A heated exchange then ensued as Weerasekara rubbished the claims and in return, called for the arrest of the LTTE supporters in Geneva. In media interviews given from Geneva, Weerasekara criticized Nimalka Fernando and Pakiasothy Saravanamuttu, who were also in Geneva, for pushing for action against Sri Lanka.

Analysts noted, with contempt, that Sri Lanka had stayed silent when Sri Lanka came up for discussion at the HRC session. Other countries used their ‘Right of Reply’ to answer allegations, clarify any confusion and deny charges.  Sri Lanka’s official representatives did not do so, observed Sanja Jayatilleke. During the ‘General debate on Racism, racial discrimination, Xenophobia and related intolerance,’ 14 NGOs spoke critically of Sri Lanka .Again Sri Lanka did not reply.

Yahapalana government had actually thanked those who had brought this resolution, observed shocked critics. The Director of Information, on behalf of the government, issued a one page statement thanking the US-UK led countries for backing the second resolution, which inter alia, wanted foreign judges, observed Shamindra Ferdinando.

What exactly did the UN Human Rights Commissioner say in his report on Sri Lanka, to make Sri Lanka declare its ‘appreciation’ asked Chandraprema. Firstly, the Commissioner referred to findings of the OHCHR investigation of September 2015. This investigation was outside the established procedure of the UNHRC. In the report, the OHCHR had accused the Sri Lankan government of every conceivable war crime including unlawful killings, torture, rape, illegal incarceration, enforced disappearances, abduction, deprivation of humanitarian assistance and soon.

Secondly, the UN Human Rights Commissioner has stated that the report of the Consultative Task Force on Reconciliation Mechanisms, be implemented. (This is the task force appointed by President Sirisena, chaired by Manouri Muttetuwegama) speaker after speaker among the originators and the sponsors of the latest resolution against Sri Lanka – the UN Human Rights Commissioner Zeid Al Hussein, the EU representative and the representative of Britain were all harping on the need to implement the recommendations of the Consultative Task Force on Reconciliation Mechanisms, said Chandraprema. Implementing this Task Force report would have even worse implications than implementing Resolution 30/1, he observed.

Thirdly, the UN Human Rights Commissioner wants the establishment of a specialized court which should include international judges, defence lawyers, prosecutors and investigators, to investigate allegations of war crimes. His justification included the lack of progress into certain cases such as the killing of Lasantha Wickrematunga and the acquittal by a ‘Sinhalese jury’ of the suspects in the Kiliveddy incident where 23 Tamil civilians are said to have been killed.

The TNA demanded the full implementation of the Geneva Resolution. TNA issued the following statement,  All Sri Lanka’s obligations in terms of UN Human Rights Council Resolution 30/1 of 1st October 2015, co-sponsored by the Sri Lankan Government, must be fully implemented. These obligations must be fulfilled under strict conditions, under the monitoring of an office of the UN High Commissioner for Human rights, which must be established in Sri Lanka. The UN Human Rights Council must ensure that, in the event that the Sri Lankan Government fails to fulfill the abovementioned obligations by way of an appropriate mechanism, victims will receive the intended benefits of the fulfillment of such obligations, by way of international mechanisms.

The British government also wants Sri Lanka to fully implement the Resolution. Foreign & Commonwealth Office Minister, Mark Field who visited Colombo and Jaffna in October 2017, said “The UK is committed to the full implementation of Resolution 34/1 and will continue to support the government of Sri Lanka in its efforts to promote reconciliation and human rights”.  , he raised with Foreign Minister Marapana the importance of the Sri Lankan government implementing in full its commitments under UN Human Rights Council Resolution 34/1, which rolled over the commitments made under 30/1.Resolution

A two year postponement means that this matter will come up for discussion at the March 2019 Sessions of the UNHRC. However, 2019 will be election year for this government, warned Chandraprema. It is best that this UNHRC resolution 30/1 be taken off the radar altogether by 2019. If the government implements even a part of Resolution 30/1 which it so ill-advisedly co-sponsored, that will help the Opposition at the Presidential elections of 2019.

The 2015 Resolution   took place when Mangala Samaraweera was Minister of Foreign Affairs. Dr Mathias Keitel, from Germany, has an interesting piece in the Asian Tribune titled “Foreign Minister Samaraweera Must Go” with the comment “My recent visit to Sri Lanka, the country that I love most, fills me with dark foreboding as its vital interests are being systematically compromised by its buccaneering Foreign Minister.” He gives a detailed analysis of the Geneva resolution and points out the uniqueness (foolishness) of Sri Lanka to agree to co-sponsor the resolution against itself and comments: ‘The Foreign Minister has not learned the fundamental rule of being the chief representative of the country overseas. I.e. to represent the country’s best interests with fortitude, dignity and quiet pride.”

“It is also difficult not to draw the conclusion that the UNHRC resolution was not really an attempt to consolidate human rights and restore good governance but a thinly disguised Endeavour to destroy the iconic super hero status, especially of the victorious Sri Lankan soldier, and reduce it to the level of a common criminal. The Foreign Minister’s solicitous and breathless anxiety to comply with the demands of the West and the Tamil expatriate groups may well have contributed to realizing this goal. Dayan Jayatilleke observed that Foreign Minister Samaraweera poses an existential threat to the State’s sovereignty and security, and gravely jeopardizes political stability and governability.”

Minister Mangala Samaraweera had his own take on the matter. He said Sri Lanka has made considerable strides from soft authoritarianism towards consolidating rights based democracy with deeply entrenched institutions and values. The country will never be able to achieve the full socio economic development potential, if country fails to address grievances, that risk plunging our nation into conflict once again, he announced.

The set of actions that the Government has identified to deal with the past in a comprehensive manner, addressing the grievances of all victims, include truth seeking, justice reparation and measures for guaranteeing non recurrence, he continued. Traumatic memories do not simply vanish. We have learned through experience since independence that grievances that are left unaddressed can go on for generations, becoming entrenched and holding the risk of descending into cycles of violence, Samaraweera continued.

When serious allegations of human rights violation and war crimes are leveled at a country it is the duty of the government to prove such allegations wrong through a credible process of investigator and inquiry. Also to expose the perpetrators as well as those in the chain of command so that the good name of the country can be restored, said Samaraweera.

The 2015 resolution will help heal our wounds and genuinely unite the country. It will clear the good name of the members of the army and all those against whom there are unfair allegations. True war heroes like Sarath Fonseka have nothing to feat, only those who carried out criminal acts. And those who gave order to carry out heinous crimes. The video footage in Channel 4 documentary is not only authentic but was given to Channel 4 by member of the armed forces who were shocked at the some of the acts carried out due to orders from above., Samaraweera said.

We have prevented economic sanctions and the indignity of a foreign inquiry.  Many of the countries which had distanced themselves from Sri Lanka under the Rajapaksa government’s policy of self imposed isolation are all backing Sri Lanka, said Samaraweera.

In 2015, Sri Lanka ceased to be the pariah nation we were in the period immediately before that where we were fighting everyone and cornering ourselves. We took control of the accountability and reconciliation agenda, and we put the world as our witness. We regained our place as a responsible sovereign nation alongside the rest of the world, because we had regained our heart, and our identity as a compassionate, proud, diverse nation, full of hope and inspiration to march forward, holding our heads up high, to be the best that we could be, concluded Samaraweera..

APPENDIX 1

In 2015, the USA brought a Resolution  in the HRC, titled   Promoting reconciliation, accountability and human rights in Sri Lanka”. (UNHRC Resolution 30/1).This was a follow up  to its Resolutions of 2012, 2013 and 2014. Sri Lanka’s    puppet government  supported the Resolution.

.

Resolution 30/1  has been drafted craftily, to ease the fears of  other countries  who will otherwise object to a precedent that could endanger their own independence and sovereignty, said Tamara Kunanayagam. Therefore no member of the Human Rights Council  felt the need to  table a counter resolution to protect itself from becoming a victim of interventions of a similar nature at some future date.

The Resolution has been drafted jointly by  a tripartite group, consisting of   US, Government of Sri Lanka, and the Tamil National Alliance.  This was done secretly, and we only knew of it when the TNA announced the fact, said Shamindra Ferdinando. M.A. Sumanthiran told American ‘Congressional Caucus for Ethnic and Religious Freedom in Sri Lanka’, in Washington, that the government of Sri Lanka, the TNA and the US had been involved in the negotiations leading to the Resolution 

Sumanthiran named the Government of Sri Lanka, the US and the TNA as parties to the agreement. The declaration was made in the presence of Sri Lanka’s Ambassador in Washington, Prasad Kariyawasam, reported Shamindra. The resolution itself has been drafted by Jeffrey Feltman, UN under Secretary General for Political Affairs, in Washington. He is ‘an arch neo conservative, notorious for engineering regime change in countries of strategic interest to Washington, ‘said Tamara Kunanayagam.

Tamil intellectuals see much hope for their cause, in Human Rights”. Radhika Coomaraswamy had given a lecture at ICES where she spoken glowing terms of the western enlightenment which upheld reason, universal truth and universal rights applicable to all societies and cultures.   She expressed confidence in the international human rights regime. ( Island 8.12.13 p 5)

However, there is absolutely nothing in the Resolution  which deals with Human Rights per se .it is not a Human Rights  resolution at all. This Resolution is a political statement. Its preamble  welcomes  Sri Lanka ‘s ‘historic free and fair democratic elections in January and August 2015’,praises the 19th amendment and calls for a  political settlement based on the devolution of power. 

The Resolution  then goes on to incorporate the immediate concerns of the Tamil Separatist Movement ,  which are to erase the Eelam  defeat and get the Eelam movement back on track. Therefore  this Resolution is an Eelam Resolution as  well.[1] The Resolution is  silent as to the nature of the ‘conflict’. It supports the Eelam war indirectly, by saying that terrorism must be combated only  within the limits of the laws of war. It refers to the ‘victims’ of war, but says nothing about who waged the war .

Resolution  30/1 does not mention Eelam War IV by name. The Resolution consists of cryptic utterances which  make sense only to those  who are sympathetic towards Tamil Separatist Movement.  There are references to  “conflict- affected provinces of North and East’‘, “guarantee of non recurrence”, ” dealing with the past , as well as mention of LLRC and LTTE. In the case of Israel HRC is very specific. the resolutions against Israel speak of’ ‘occupied Palestine’, ‘occupied Syrian Golan’ and ‘incursions into Gaza.’ 

All  the matters raised in the Resolution are  matters which any sovereign state could carry out on its own, without any nudging by the HRC.  They were latched on to the HRC in the hope that UNHRC would give these matters greater legitimacy and also in the hope that it would silence the opposition, who,  they thought were in awe of the HRC.

The Resolution had an  unprecedented 23 introductory paragraphs that set the stage for 20 operational paragraphs, filling 5 pages observed Pathfinder Foundation. The Resolution is available online and  I list below some of  the  issues contained in the Resolution .The absurdity and also the gravity of the recommendations are immediately apparent. 

The clauses of Resolution 30/1 include the following:

• the proposal by the Government to establish  a  Commission  for  Truth,  Justice,  Reconciliation  and  non-recurrence,  an  Office  of Missing  persons  and  an  Office  for  Reparations    and to give each of these the freedom to obtain financial, material and technical assistance from international partners, including the Office of the High Commissioner

• to sign and ratify  the  International  Convention  for  the  Protection  of  All  Persons  from  Enforced Disappearance, to criminalize enforced disappearances and to begin to issue certificates of absence to the families of missing persons.

• to  review  the Public Security Ordinance Act and to review and repeal the Prevention of Terrorism Act, and   to   replace   it   with   anti-terrorism   legislation   in   accordance   with   contemporary international best practices

• accelerate the return of land to its rightful civilian owners,  [and assist in] the resumption of livelihoods and the restoration of normality to civilian life, [and also] ending  of  military  involvement  in  civilian activities,

• to fulfill its commitments on the devolution of political authority, which is integral to reconciliation and the full enjoyment of human rights by all members of its population

• introduce effective security sector  reforms

• [Remove from] the security forces, anyone  [charged with] Human Rights violations and violation of IHL. [This]  included  members  of  the  security  and intelligence units

• to  issue instructions  clearly  to  all  branches  of  the  security  forces  that  violations  of  international human  rights  law  and  international  humanitarian  law,  including  those  involving  torture, rape and sexual violence, will be investigated and that those responsible  will be punished.

• the  trial  and punishment  of  those    responsible  for  crimes [specially ] abuses of  human  rights  and  violations  of  international  humanitarian  law,  during  the period covered by the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission

• to establish a  judicial  mechanism to investigate   allegations   of   violations   and   abuses   of   human   rights   and   violations   of international humanitarian law, [which will include] foreign judges, defence lawyers and authorized prosecutors and investigators

• the Office of the High Commissioner to continue to assess progress on  the  implementation  of  its  recommendations  and  other  relevant  processes  related  to reconciliation, accountability and human rights, and to present an oral update to the Human Rights  Council  at  its  thirty-second  session,  and  a  comprehensive  report  followed  by discussion on the implementation of the present resolution at its thirty-fourth session

Appendix 2

In May 2014, presumably on leave prior to retiring from OHCHR, Navi Pillay appeared at    a US Tamil Sangam’s commemoration event to mark the LTTE’s war and those who were killed. She wore a saree that featured the colors in the LTTE flag. She began her address by announcing that she had brought greetings from the Durban (South African) Tamil Sangam, reported Sunday Times .

Navaneethan Pillai, the former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights said, This memorial event to commentate victims of the final war in Sri Lanka on May 18 in 2009, is a re-enforcement of our commitment to honour the almost 146,000 Tamils perished in the six decades of struggle for self-determination of Tamils in Sri Lanka and reverberations of collective action for justice.

. What I saw and heard of the suffering of Tamils in Sri Lanka is worse. The anguish of survivors was dramatic. I saw fresh shallow unmarked graves with limbs and clothing visible abandoned in the sand. That was the point where civilian Tamils who have been shot from air. I saw videos of piles of dead bodies, women naked in several areas. It is an enormous violation of the Tamil women. Tens of thousands were annihilated, not for no other reasons than being Tamil. Such killings constitute international outcry. Sadly, the Tamil minority continues to suffer discrimination.

Last year, the Government of Sri Lanka refused to play the national anthem in Tamil. In past, on Independence Day celebrations it was sung. Last year it was denied. This is one more act of denying the Tamils and their identity.

 This year, in March 2020 the United Nations High Commissioner expressed concern. Signs of reversal of past commitments made by Sri Lankan government towards setting up mechanisms for justice and accountability have emerged.” She noted the failure by the government to fully implement the UNHRC resolution. The perpetrators of the violations of human rights are not cunning.There has been no investigation or no credible judicial mechanisms. Instead government has taken steps against justice. In March, this year president pardoned and released from prison Army Sergeant Sunil Ratnayake who has been sentenced in 2015 for a murder he perpetrated in 2000 of eight civilians including a child. Conviction and sentence have been confirmed by the Supreme Court in Sri Lanka in May 2019.Releasing of a key perpetrator who is sentenced to imprisonment by the court is a wrong act and a huge insult to the Tamils. These acts undermine the progress that is made towards the ending impunity for serious crimes. This is why international community has to engage and be vigilant of justice and liberation of Tamils in Sri Lanka.” Other speakers delivered speeches in Tamil.

It is abundantly clear from Navaneethan Pillai’s remarks that she has played around with some factual matters giving her own twist. She began her address by announcing that she had brought greetings from the Durban (South African) Tamil Sangam. Take for example her lament that only a miniscule portion” of lands belonging to Tamils have been returned. Even the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) would not agree to that false claim. The fact is that 90 percent of the lands have been returned.

Her remarks that she had held a high-ranking international position as UN High Commissioner for Human Rights also raise profoundly serious questions. This is when she declares that 146,000 Tamils have been killed. Her claims that during a visit to Sri Lanka in 2013, that she saw limbs showing together with clothes from graves also raise damning questions on her credibility, both when she was at the UNHRC and now a champion of LTTE policies and propaganda.. (continued)

---

Dr Tilak S. Fernando

There is an intensive drive by the Government to vaccinate people, irrespective of the type of vaccines. The adverse after-effects following vaccination are increasingly becoming evident worldwide. There is established proof that by vaccination, besides other complications like allergy etc., the formation of unusual blood clots (thrombotic complications) is a deadly possibility as an after effect. ”Blood clots in circulation can be deadly as they may precipitate pulmonary embolism, strokes, and heart attacks and place the liver in danger’‘ says Dr Mass R. Usuf, (President of the National Association of Homoeopaths & Affiliates)!

Dr Lalith Mendis, former Lecturer in Charge of the  Dept. of Pharmacology, Faculty of Medicine, Kelaniya, refers to ‘people who have reacted to the vaccine with allergies – including anaphylaxis, thrombotic complications, myocarditis or neurological complications’.

  EudraVigilance,  The European Medicines Agency (EMA) provides guidance and support to medicine developers. This includes scientific and regulatory information on how to design and run clinical trials, compliance standards, and obligations and incentives for developers of specialised medicines. The European Union database of suspected drug reactions has reported over 21,000 deaths and over two million disabilities following Covid-19 injections.

 (https://mail.yahoo.com/d/folders/1/messages/42730).

Health Impact News – USA states: We have also documented several stories this year where nurses have died or been crippled from the COVID shots”. It also states: From age 12 to those in their 20s, formerly healthy young people are now dying and permanently crippled by the COVID shots.” (https://healthimpactnews.com/2021/critical-nursing-shortages-hit-hospitals-nationwide-as-nurses-quit-or-are-fired-over-covid-vaccine-mandates/) + (https://healthimpactnews.com/2021/. We-are-destroying-the-lives-of-our-young-with-experimental-covid-injections/)”.

According to the UK Government, following COVID-19 Injections, over one million disabilities and  1, 500 deaths have been recorded (https://healthimpactnews.com/2021/1135579-injuries-1559-dead-in-the-uk-following-covid-19-injections-according-to-uk-government/).

It appears that Sri Lanka does not have a facility to record deaths and disabilities that may be attributed to post-vaccination, and hundreds of such deaths and disabilities may be taken for granted as usual and as not related to vaccination!

It has been proved beyond doubt that the vaccine induces the formation of dangerous blood clots leading to thrombosis (clot formation). Most post-vaccination deaths or disabilities by thrombotic complications (as stated by Dr Lalith Mendis) by way of strokes, heart attacks, pulmonary embolism etc., may be ascribed to post-vaccination adverse reactions.

To negate life-threatening thrombotic complications and other ill effects of the vaccination, Dr Usuf says that every vaccinated person must resort to specific Homoeopathic drugs (Tuja 1M- 3 globules one dose only) that would stop clots, de-coagulate formed clots, help maintain apposite blood-viscosity and integrity of micro-capillary circulation. This would, to a great extent, prevent post-vaccination deaths and disability, said Dr Usuf.

Nevertheless, because of the vigorous campaign by the Government, in tandem with the rumour generated fear factor, it may be argued whether people are rushing to various vaccination centres              en masse to get the jab are unknowingly placing their lives at risk!

Those who argue against vaccination say vaccination cannot be made mandatory because it stifles the freedom of the people’s choice. The Covid-19 vaccine is only two years old, and no one can be definite about the short and long term adverse after-effects of the vaccine.

Usually, a vaccine is tested for a long time before being authorised for use on a mass scale. But due to the rapid worldwide spread of the pandemic, several pharma companies  have come up with numerous types of vaccines within a short time- – spoken in jest as the ‘vaccine mafia’!

Sergeant-at-Arms (Parliament) Narendra Fernando has said (Island electronic paper on 11 August 2021) : People could not be forced to receive vaccinations.” He also said perhaps about a dozen MPs out of 225 had not taken the vaccine. As vaccination was not mandatory, the MPs and the Parliament staff COULD decline the offer.”

.

As mentioned in my previous week’s article (‘Getting Vaccinated’), Dr Mass R. Usuf stated that a few homoeopathy drugs are highly effective against the Covid-19 virus. The writer is aware that Dr Usuf has cured dozens over dozens of Covid patients, even those in ICU’s in serious condition, primarily within 48 hours.

He boldly states that Homoeopathy can effectively combat any mutating Covid variant – unlike vaccines that may prove ineffective against virulent variants. He said that the Government Homoeopathic Hospital in Welisara and Homoeopathic dispensaries island-wide could be utilised as centres to cure those affected by Covid-19 – with mortality reduced to zero, and fast recovery, with no clogged hospitals and with no severe complications or disabilities.

Dr. Usuf suggests that the Ministry of Health vigorously promote Homeopathy and advise the populace to seek treatment from the Welisara Homoeopathic hospital or the Homoeopathic dispensaries island-wide. Such a promotion would provide confidence and much-needed relief to people who are confounded by this virus menace!

Dr. Usuf emphatically states that any patient afflicted with the virus can have a speedy recovery with no severe complications with the use of Homoeopathy within 48 hours. ‘Nobody needs to die’!  He further says that if Homoeopathy drugs are administered as soon as a patient manifests symptoms, it will stop the further progress of the disease. Obviously, with this type of relief, any patient and kith and kin would not panic and be left hopeless! As the day passes, one can see the remarkable transition from a sick, threatening state to a healthy one! 

The President of the Association of Medical Specialists (AMS), Dr Lakkumar Fernando, quoted in Red Bold Letters in the Ceylon Today Newspaper on 17 August 2021: “Although some progress has been made, vaccination drive cannot control the latest Covid-19 wave!”

His argument agrees with many other critics against vaccination as most people are reluctant to get vaccinated. They are fearful of short and long-term side effects. The growing belief among people is that vaccinated people are getting infected and are dying or being disabled by post-vaccination adverse reactions. This is in keeping with the assertion of Dr Lalith Mendis, where those vaccinated suffer from adverse reactions.

Reports coming out of Israel claim hospitals are being filled with vaccinated people, 95 per cent of whom are suffering severe illness being fully vaccinated. The news out of Israel coincides with similar statistics coming out of Sydney, Australia, where government health officials late last month announced nearly all new Covid hospitalisations involve vaccinated people.

 (https://healthimpactnews.com/2021/israel-australia-report-95-99-hospitalized-are-fully-vaccinated/)

One cannot help but wonder, under the circumstances, if it is desirable to get Covid 19 and get rapidly cured by Homoeopathy rather than have the vaccination and carry the risk of falling dangerously sick or worse – face death or disability!

There is an exciting clip on YouTube  (https://youtu.be/RBiv8q_PWDU) where a Senior Lecturer at the Open University, Nawala, Nugegoda  states that those who are reluctant to get vaccinated for Covid-19 have the freedom NOT to get vaccinated. He is for resorting to complementary medicine to combat the Covid pandemic! He quotes an example of a patient before a surgical operation in a hospital giving his/her consent to the hospital in written form as it is his/her fundamental right. He cites the Nuremberg Code, which states that: “The voluntary consent of the human subject is essential.”  The Nuremberg Code was introduced after the Second World War.

Did someone invent Covid-19? The answer lies in a detailed description by Nemsiri Jayatilleke – also on YouTube (https://youtu.be/RBiv8q_PWDU), which is worth watching.

The scientific advisory group of the UK Government states that it was “almost certain” that a SARS-Cov-2 variant will emerge that “leads to current vaccine failure“.   Meanwhile, the Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) say, ‘the Covid variants labelled Epsilon and Lambda have developed resistance to vaccines. These new vaccine-resistant variants may soon become dominant, and there is no way to manufacture vaccines as fast as the virus mutates. Furthermore, many poorer countries can’t afford them (https://hpathy.com/editorials/editorial-august-2021-dealing-with-vaccine-resistant-variants/).

Where would that leave Sri Lanka with its depleted foreign reserves and a mutating virus that defies vaccines? It is indeed very, very scary! Everyone thinks that if the country is to maintain its economy intact without a complete shutdown, and if sanity is prevails sans mass scale hysteria, the only alternative is to promote complementary therapeutic systems such as Homoeopathy and even Ayurveda – along with western emergency treatment only when necessary! 

Any endeavours by the Government to force the vaccine on people can open the path leading to civil strife and litigation. It would, therefore, be prudent for the Government to focus on practical, complementary alternatives such as Homoeopathy (immensely capable of combating any variant successfully) and even Ayurveda to provide a rapid cure for those sick with Covid 19, thereby avoiding death and disability!

Dr. Usuf confidently says: ‘Homoeopathic remedies will work effectively regardless of the variant. No virus can ever become resistant to Homoeopathic remedies.’

The Covid pandemic threatens the world with more significant dangers to come, what with the unpredictable metamorphosis of the virus. The Government must carve out an approach free of politics, free of prejudice and dogma and with an open mind, to bring the situation under control.  It must resort to Homoeopathy with Ayurveda and western medicine visa vis emergencies.

Despite protective measures, thousands still mysteriously succumb to the virus. They suffer immensely with the fear of death looming over them…..and a proportion of them die! With Homoeopathy says Dr Usuf, ‘fear not, be not cowed down,..   suffer not, you need not die…..as the days pass by – you shall rise’!

Suppose if it is the Government’s genuine desire to protect its citizens, it must then gain the people’s trust by providing a practical way to provide protection and rapid cure with no dangerous side effects and complications and no threat to life. The solution is already here – Homeopathy!

tilakfernando@gmail.com

ආචාර්ය වරුණ චන්ද්‍රකීර්ති

අවවාදයට වඩා ආදර්ශය උතුම්” බව අප සැවොම පිළිගන්නා කරුණකි. මෙම ප්‍රවාදයෙන් යෝජිත ආර්ථික ක්‍රමය ක්‍රියාත්මක කිරීමට ද ඒ ඇසුරින් අපේක්‍ෂිත ප්‍රතිඵල ලබාගැනීමට ද ආදර්ශයේ පාඩම උපකාරි වනු නිසැක ය. පෙර ලිපියෙන් සාකච්ඡාවට ලක් කළ ගිනි පුපුරු න්‍යාය” සමඟ ද මෙම කාර්යය බැඳී පවතී.

යෝජිත ආර්ථික කටයුතු ක්‍රියාත්මක කිරීමට තෝරාගනු ලබන නිශ්චිත ගම්මානය (හෝ ගම්මාන කිහිපය) අනෙකුත් ගම්මානවල අයට අවශ්‍ය තථ්‍ය ආදර්ශ සපයනු ඇත්තේ ය. තෝරාගත් ගම්මාන සහ ඒවායෙහි ක්‍රියාත්මක කරනු ලබන ආර්ථික කටයුතු සැබෑ වශයෙන් පවතින නිශ්චිත ඒවා ය. එම කාර්යයන්ට සම්බන්ධ වූ නිශ්චිත පිරිස් සිටිති. එම පිරිස නිශ්චිතව ඔවුනගේ නම්වලින් හඳුනාගත හැකි ය. තමන් කළ කී දෑ, එම කටයුතුවල නිරතවීමේ දී ලද අත්දැකීම්, මුහුණ දුන් ගැටලු, තමන් විසින් කළ වැරැදි ආදි කරුණු විශාල ප්‍රමාණයක් ඔවුන් විසින් ප්‍රකාශ කරනු ඇත්තේ ය.

වියුක්ත න්‍යාය ඇසුරෙන් ලෝකය දෙස බැලීමේ විශේෂිත හැකියාවක් යුදෙව්වන් හට වෙයි. න්‍යායික කරුණු මත පදනම් වූ නූතන බටහිර දැනුම නිර්මාණයේ දී සහ එම දැනුමෙන් වැඩගැනීමේ දී ඔවුන් ඉදිරියෙන් ම සිටින්නේ එබැවිනි. එය ඔවුනට හිමි සංස්කෘතික මනසෙහි විශේෂත්වයකි. එනමුදු අප සිටින්නේ එයට හාත්පසින්ම වෙනස් තැනක ය.

අපගේ මනස සැකැසී ඇත්තේ සංයුක්ත වශයෙන් හඳුනාගත හැකි දෑ තේරුම්ගත හැකි ආකාරයකිනි. වියුක්ත කරුණු ග්‍රහණය කරගැනීමේ හැකියාවක් අප හට නොමැත. අප යමක් වටහාගනු ලබන්නේ ප්‍රත්‍යක්‍ෂයෙනි. භාග්‍යවතුන්වහන්සේ විසින් ජානුස්සෝණී බ්‍රාහ්මණයා හට චූළහත්ථිපදෝපම සූත්‍රය” දේශනාකිරීමෙන් පැහැදිළි කර වදාළේ අනුමාන, උපකල්පන ආදියට සීමා නොවී ප්‍රත්‍යක්‍ෂයෙන් ම ධර්මය දැකිය යුතු බව ය. අනුබුදු මිහිඳු හිමියන් මෙ රටට වැඩමකිරීමෙන් අනතුරුව මුලින් ම දේශනා කළ වදාළේ ද මෙම සූත්‍රය ය. එම ධර්මය අසා පෝෂණය වුණු සංස්කෘතියක හැදුණු වැඩුණු අපි ප්‍රත්‍යක්‍ෂයෙන් ම ලෝකය දැකීමේ මනසක් ඇති කරගෙන සිටිමු.

එහෙයින් මෙ රට මිනිසුන් හට මගපෙන්විය යුත්තේ සංයුක්ත වූ ආදර්ශවලිනි. මෙයින් කියැවෙනුයේ න්‍යාය අනවශ්‍ය බවක් නොවේ. යම් යම් න්‍යායික කරුණු වටහාගත හැකි අය ද අප අතර සිටිති. අප රටට අදාළ න්‍යාය ඇසුරෙන් ආදර්ශ බිහිකර බහුතරයට මගපෙන්වීම එවැන්නන්ගේ වගකීම වෙයි. ආදර්ශ බිහිවනු ඇත්තේ න්‍යාය ඇසුරෙන් ම නොවේ. යම් යම් අය විසින් තමන්ගේ ප්‍රත්‍යක්‍ෂ අත්දැකීම් ඇසුරින් ගොඩනැගූ ආදර්ශ ද පැවැතිය හැක්කේ ය. එම ආදර්ශ නිර්මාණයට මුල් වූ අත්දැකීම් සහ දැනුම හඳුනාගෙන ඒ ඇසුරින් න්‍යාය සම්පාදනය කිරීමේ වරදක් නැත. එනමුදු, එළැඹෙන මාර්ගය කුමක් වුව ද වැදගත් වනුයේ බහුතර ජනතාව සඳහා අවශ්‍ය ආදර්ශ ගොඩනැගීම ය.

ආදර්ශ බිහිකිරීම උදෙසා ගම්මානයක් තෝරාගත් පසු පළමුවෙන් ම ඒ තුළ සිටින නිශ්චිත හැකියා‍වන්ගෙන් පිරිපුන් පුද්ගලයන් (බිම් මට්ටමේ ගිනි පුපුරු) හඳුනාගනු ලැබිය යුත්තේ ය. අදාළ ආර්ථික කාර්යය ආරම්භ කර ඒවා ක්‍රියාත්මක කරන තෙක් ඔවුනගේ සැබෑ හැකියාවන් දැකගත නො හැකි ය. කෙසේ වුව ද, එවැනි හැකියාවන් නොමැති අය මේ සඳහා යෙදවීමෙන් අනවශ්‍ය ගැටලු ඉස්මතුවීමට විශාල ඉඩක් ඇතිවෙයි. එහෙයින් අදාළ ආර්ථික කටයුතු සඳහා පුද්ගලයන් හඳුනාගැනීම යම්කිසි ඉවක් සහ ප්‍රත්‍යක්‍ෂ කරුණු ඇසුරින් ඇති කරගත් අවබෝධයක් අනුව සිදුකළ යුත්තේ ය.

මූලික ආදර්ශ බිහිකරීම අසාර්ථක වුවහොත් එහි බලපෑමට මේ සඳහා මුල්වන අය ද ගොදුරුවෙයි. අසාර්ථකත්වය විසින් මෙහෙයුම් නායකත්වය ද අධෛර්යයට පත් කරනු ඇත්තේ ය. විශේෂ සහ නිශ්චිත අවධානයක් යොමු කර පළමු වටය සඳහා අවශ්‍ය පිරිස තෝරාගැනීමෙන් මෙම ගැටලුව ඇති නොවෙයි. තෝරාගත් ප්‍රදේශයේ (ගම්මානයේ) සැමට සම අවස්ථා ලබාදීම” වැනි මූලධර්ම අනුගමනය කිරීමෙන් මෙය සිදුකළ නො හැකි ය. එහෙයින්, මුලින් ම කළ යුත්තේ එවැනි ක්‍රම පසෙක ලා මෙහෙයවන්නන්ගේ පුද්ගලික අත්දැකීම් සහ නිරීක්‍ෂණ මත පදනම් වී හැකියාව ඇති පිරිස් හඳුනාගැනීම ය.

මෙවැනි තෝරාගැනීම් කරන විට එයට අදාළ විවිධ වූ සමාජයීය ගැටලු ඇතිවීම වැළැක්විය නො හැකි ය. තමන්ගේ පුද්ගලික සබඳතා අනුව මෙහෙයවන්නන් විසින් අදාළ තෝරාගැනීම් කළ බවට වන චෝදනාව ඒ අතර මුලින් ම වෙයි. කෙසේ වුව ද, එවැනි සමාජ ගැටලු ඇතිවීමට වන ඉඩකඩ මුළුමනින් ම අවුරා මෙවැනි කටයුතු ක්‍රියාත්මක කළ නො හැකි ය. මෙම කාර්යයේ පළමු අරමුණ වනුයේ අවශ්‍ය ආදර්ශ බිහිකිරීම විනා පවතින සහ ඇතිවන සෑම සමාජ ගැටලුවකට ම විසඳුම් සැපැයීම නොවේ. සමස්ත කාර්යය ඉදිරියට කරගෙන යෑම සඳහා අවශ්‍ය ජවය සැපයෙන්නේ පළමු වටයෙහි සාර්ථකත්වය විසිනි. බාහිර බාධාකිරීම් නොතකා මූලික අරමුණ වෙනුවෙන් කැපැ වී කටයුතු කිරීම සැබෑ සමාජ නායකයාගේ වගකීම වෙයි.

ආචාර්ය වරුණ චන්ද්‍රකීර්ති

Courtesy Outlook India

The three-match series was supposed to start in Hambantota on September 3 but commercial flights have been suspended in Kabul

The ODI series between Pakistan and Afghanistan has been moved to Pakistan from Sri Lanka due to logistical issues. (More Cricket News)

The three-match series was supposed to start in Hambantota on September 3 but commercial flights have been suspended in Kabul following Taliban’s takeover of Afghanistan.

ESPNcricinfo reported that it will remain a home series for Afghanistan.  

Also, a 10-day lockdown has been imposed in Sri Lanka due to rise in COVID-19 cases.

The venues for the series in Pakistan are yet to be announced.

 All format Pakistan players including skipper Babar Azam are expected to be rested for the series as part of their workload management ahead of T20 World Cup.

Courtesy Hiru News

The distribution of Ayurvedic medicines to COVID patients receiving home-based medical treatments began today (23) in several districts.

Meanwhile, Consultant Judicial Medical Officer ( Specialist in Forensic Medicine) Dr. Channa Perera stated that there is a possibility of using indigenous medicine to prevent complications caused by Covid infection.

He added that Western medicine alone could not prevent the complications of Covid infection.

He further stated that although there are treatments available in Western medicine for complications caused by the virus, it is important to think about the methods used in indigenous medicine to prevent complications.

Dr. Channa Perera also stated that more than 100 postmortem examinations have been carried out on Covid infected bodies in the country.

The post-mortem examination revealed that about 30% of the deaths were due to Covid pneumonia

Courtesy Adaderana

Courtesy Adaderana

The Department of Prisons has decided to launch an inquiry into the incident where a prison hospital doctor had allegedly been threatened by MP Rishad Bathiudeen, who is currently under remand custody.

The inquiry will be carried out under the supervision of an Assistant Superintendent of Prisons, the Prisons Media Spokesperson said.

A doctor at the Magazine Prison had lodged the complaint with the Colombo Crimes Division (CCD) accusing Bathiudeen of leveling threats against his life, which subsequently prompted investigations.

As per the complaint, MP Bathiudeen had obstructed the duties of the doctor while he was treating an inmate on the 15th of August. 

Reportedly, the doctor, who asked MP Bathiudeen to wait outside for his turn, has been told that his service is not required since the parliamentarian is capable of calling a doctor acquaintance. 

Then the former minister has allegedly threatened the doctor, saying that he can have him transferred while also threatening to end the doctor’s life. He had allegedly stated that he has parliamentary privileges and is treated well by both Government and the Opposition. 

The threat has also extended to the point that the lawmaker had purportedly asked the doctor to find a good place to hide.

Courtesy Adaderana

Former minister Rishad Bathiudeen has been named as the fifth suspect in the case pertaining to the death of a 16-year-old domestic worker at his residence. 

Meanwhile the four suspects including the MP’s wife who were arrested following investigations into the teenage girl’s death have been further remanded until September 06.

They were ordered to be re-remanded when the case was taken up before the Colombo Magistrate’ Court today (23).

On July 15, the 16-year-old girl, who was serving as domestic help at the Bathiudeen residence, succumbed to severe burn injuries while receiving treatment at the Colombo National Hospital. She had been under medical care for 12 days since her admission to the hospital on July 03.

Jude Kumar Ishalini, who was residing in the Dayagama area, had been 15 years of age when she was brought to the parliamentarian’s residence at Bauddhaloka Mawatha for domestic work last October.

The judicial medical officer who conducted the post-mortem on the girl’s death concluded that she had been sexually exploited.

Thereby, the former minister’s wife, father-in-law, and the middleman in question were taken into custody on July 23 based on the testimonies recorded from nearly 20 individuals, autopsy results, and the evidence gathered by the investigating officers which pointed to the fact that the deceased girl was subjected to abuse.

In addition, the 44-year-old brother-in-law of MP Bathiudeen was also taken into custody and produced before the Judicial Medical Officer for allegedly sexually abusing a young woman who worked as a domestic helper at the lawmaker’s official residence from 2015 to 2019.

Her remains were exhumed on July 30 for a second postmortem by a court-appointed specialist medical team.

Courtesy Adaderana

The Director-General of Health Services has confirmed another 194 coronavirus-related deaths for August 22, increasing the death toll in Sri Lanka due to the virus to 7,560.

According to the figures released by the Govt. Information Department, the deaths reported today include 91 males and 103 females.

None of the victims are below the age of 30 while another 49 are between the ages of 30 and 59.

The remaining 145 are aged 60 years and above. 

Courtesy Adaderana

The Epidemiology Unit of the Health Ministry reports that another 1,132 persons have tested positive for COVID-19 in Sri Lanka, moving the daily total of new cases to 4,355.

This brings the total number of confirmed cases of coronavirus reported in the country to 394,355.

As many as 344,381 recoveries and 7,560 deaths have been confirmed in Sri Lanka since the outbreak of the pandemic.

The Epidemiology Unit’s data showed that 42,608 active cases are currently under medical care.

Courtesy Adaderana

Sri Lanka has moved up to the 13th position in the rankings of the global COVID-19 fatalities that occur daily.

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in Sri Lanka on March 11, 2020, the highest daily count of new COVID-19 cases was recorded yesterday (August 22); that was with 4,304 new cases.

This was also the first time the number of COVID-19 infections reported within a day exceeded 4,000.

Meanwhile, the Director-General of Health Services confirmed yesterday that another 183 COVID-19 deaths had been reported on August 21. Sri Lanka today (August 23) confirmed 194 coronavirus deaths that were reported yesterday.

Accordingly, the ‘worldometer’ website reports that Sri Lanka has risen to the 13th position in the world in terms of daily COVID-19 deaths.

In the 12th position is the United States of America.

In the past 24 hours, only 198 coronavirus deaths have been reported in the United States, despite having a population of 3.3 billion.

This clearly indicates the severity of the pandemic situation in Sri Lanka, where there is only a population of 21.8 million.

Henry Lahore

The coalition is attempting to eliminate many race disparities

Concerning COVID-19
They should consider distributing bottles of Vitamin D to their churches.
The churches could hand out emergency packets of vitamin D
The Vitamin D would be taken at the first sign of COVID-19 symptoms.
This emergency Vitamin D appears to reduce the risk of serious COVID-19 by 3X
It may cost less than $50 of Vitamin D to save a life

Items in VitaminDWiki in both categories Virus and Dark Skin:

• US coalition of Black and Latino churches hope to reduce the 3X COVID-19 disparity – Aug 2021
• COVID-19 mortality for Blacks is 5X that for whites in 2 LA Hospitals – July 2021
• Low vitamin D associated with increased COVID-19 risk (in this case black women 1.7X) – July 2021
• COVID-19 was the third-leading cause of death in the US, especially in those with dark skins – April 1, 2021
• Prefer 40 – 60 ng of Vitamin D to minimize COVID-19 – March 17, 2021
• 26 health factors increase the risk of COVID-19 – all are associated with low vitamin D
• Those with recent cancer diagnosis had 7X increased risk of COVID-19 (more if A-A )- Dec 2020
• Healthcare workers at higher risk of COVID-19 if low vitamin D, especially if dark skin – Dec 2020
• Shift workers 2X more likely to get COVID-19 (low Vitamin D) – Dec 2020
• COVID-19 was killing dark-skinned doctors, then they got a Vitamin D recommendation
• COVID-19 antibodies 2.6 X more likely if had symptoms and low vitamin D (UK hospital staff)– Oct 5 2020
• Vitamin D could knock out COVID-19 in 3 months – Dr. Matthews interview Oct 2020
• Rate of COVID-19 test positive is 40 pcnt lower if high vitamin D (192,000 people) – Holick Sept 2020
• COVID-19 increased: 3.5 if Ultra-Orthodox, 2.6X if dark skin (52,000 Israelis) – Sept, 2020
• COVID-19 is harder for those with dark skins – perhaps due to low vitamin D – April 24, 2020
• COVID-19 more frequent and deadly for those with dark skins (high risk of low vitamin D)
• Indications of increase COVID-19 problems if dark skin in the UK- April 3 2020

Henry Lahore   founder of VitaminDWiki  phone: 360-301-9413

MD Pathik Hasan

Image source: Internet

The whole world saw the Rohingya refugee’s influx towards Bangladesh in 2017. The Rohingya people have been displaced from their homeland (Rakhine in Myanmar) by the Myanmar military Junta regime. Then, Rohingyas take shelter in Cox’s bazar area in Bangladesh. Bangladesh gives them shelter temporarily based on humanitarian ground. But this temporal assistance has brought disaster for Bangladesh.

As a consequence, Bangladesh faces a serious crisis and threat for this problem. Local unrest amongst people, huge economic burden, deforestation, illegal drug trades, human trafficking, prostitution in the region are increasing for this refugee crisis day by day. Some miscreants tried to take some advantages utilizing the problem as an opportunity. Deradicalization process by some extremist groups in the camps in Cox’s bazar, increasing of crime rate are some issues.

Cox’s bazar region is a hilly area. Landslide is a very common incident in Cox’s bazar. Rohingya’s faced serious threat from this landslide, flood etc. For this reason, Bangladesh govt has taken a holistic approach to deal refugees. The government has taken a great initiative called ‘Ashrayan-3’ for temporary housing of one lakh Rohingya people. Under this project, government-built shelter houses in its Noakhali’s Bhasanchar. Ashrayan is a Bengali term. It means giving shelter to anyone. Bangladesh has already sheltered I million Rohingya refugees. The Bangladesh government has completed it very successfully. Millions of people may be affected by landslides and flood at any time where Rohingyas are in Cox’s Bazar. From a social, physical and infrastructural point of view, Bhasanchar is safer for Rohingyas than their own country. But it must be temporal. They have to be repatriated to their own land (Rakhine, Myanmar)

About 1 million Rohingya have been sheltered in the densely populated refugee camp in Cox’s Bazar for three years. The government has taken initiative to send about one lakh Rohingyas to Bhasanchar from there. In order to protect 40 sq km area from tides and tidal surges, 13 km long dams and infrastructure of 120 cluster villages suitable for one lakh Rohingyas have been constructed. The government has rescued more than 300 Rohingya from the sea and taken them to Bhasanchar in 2020.

Meanwhile the Rohingya delegation was taken to see the island for the purpose of relocating about one lakh Rohingyas to Bhasanchar. Returning from Bhasanchar, the Rohingya leaders of the delegation gave an idea about the Bhasanchar Asylum Project for the Rohingyas sheltering in the Cox’s Bazar camp.

The Rohingya delegation was impressed by the hospitality in Bhasanchar. The Rohingyas visiting Bhasanchar said that so far, they have seen that the Bangladesh government has not failed to do better for the Rohingyas.

With excellent planning, keeping all the great arrangements, with utmost care and hard work, Bhasanchar has been made by arranging almost all the facilities of modern life. After the ‘complete completion’, various media outlets have publicly suggested that Bhasanchar is a hundred times better than the way large numbers of Rohingyas live in the 34 makeshift camps in Ukhia and Kutupalong in Cox’s bazar. On November 16, 2021, a delegation of 32 officials from 22 NGOs visited Bhasanchar and described it as ‘very beautiful and livable’. Already 40 Rohingya leaders (majhis) have been brought back into government management to give other Rohingyas an idea about Bhasanchar. The electronic media is publishing one after another positive news about Bhasanchar and trying to give an idea about the overall situation of Bhasanchar and the various facilities.

The government has spent about 3,900 crore Bangladeshi Taka to implement Bhasanchar project by controlling all standards of UN refugee management. All this is the money of the people of this country. What is not in this Bhasanchar? It is built on an area of ​​40 square kilometers in an area of ​​about 13 thousand acres. 120 clusters, 1440 cluster sheds have been constructed in a very well-planned manner four feet high from the ground. Each shed has 12 houses. Each house has 16 rooms. Each room has two beds with two floors. A family of four members will get one room each. According to UN standards, each refugee must have at least 36 square feet of space in the format of the international refugee system. But there is more space for everyone than that. In addition to the dormitories, schools, mosques, hospitals, playgrounds, wide roads, light houses, solar systems, food storage warehouses, towers of three mobile phone operators, sewerage systems, super shops, saloons, day houses have been built for the Rohingyas to live a modern and better life. -Care center, hat-bazaar system, community center and a permanent police station for round-the-clock law enforcement for overall security. Jetties have been built to transport goods and people. Apart from government assistance, cattle and buffalo rearing, poultry farming, fish farming, pigeon rearing, fruit farming, dairy farming, handicrafts and sewing machines are also provided to support the livelihood and economic activities of one lakh Rohingyas. Various arrangements have been made. There are many facilities waiting in Bhasanchar for Rohingyas. Now it is high time to shift Rohingyas to Bhshan char from Cox’s bazar region temporarily for their better life. But ultimately, they have to repatriate to their motherland, Rakhine because they are the citizens of Myanmar.

Some media reports that Rohingyas don’t want to take shelter in Bhashanchar.  But that is not true. One reason for this is the ignorance about Bhasanchar and the lack of adequate information. According to the Office of the Commissioner for Refugee Relief and Repatriation in Bangladesh, 3,446 Rohingyas were relocated to Bhasanchar on December 4 and 29. Then on January 29, 1,006 people were taken to Bhasanchar in the first part of the third phase and on January 30, 1,463 people were taken to Bhasanchar in the second part and in the fourth phase, on February 15 and 16, 3,020 people reached there in two groups. On March 2 and 3, in the sixth phase, 13,623 Rohingyas, including 4,018, have started living in Bhasanchar. All of them were relocated voluntarily.

The UN delegation visited Noakhali Bhasanchar and expressed ‘satisfaction’ in March 18, 2021. The group’s representatives responded after inspecting the island’s char and its infrastructure for three days in a row, closely monitoring it, and talking to Rohingyas who have gone there.

The UN delegation inspected the infrastructure in Bhasanchar and talked to the Rohingya. The UN delegation repeatedly met with the Rohingyas in Bhasanchar and tried to find out whether they had been forcibly repatriated from the refugee camps in Cox’s Bazar. However, the Rohingyas assured them that they had come to Bhasanchar voluntarily and no one had forced them to do so. Asked why they came here, the Rohingyas said they wanted a better life from the crowded refugee camp in Cox’s Bazar, which they are currently enjoying in Bhasanchar.

Bhasanchar, a Rohingya sanctuary, has set an example for the world, said Vulcan Bazkir, president of the 75th General Assembly of the United Nations, visiting Dhaka. Such an initiative for refugees is commendable. Bangladesh has also set an example of how to deal with refugees.

It is true that Bangladesh is the example for the whole world in case of dealing with refugees properly. Where many states in the world have failed, Bangladesh has shown everyone how to deal with refugees properly based on UNO arrangements. Rohingyas, International organizations, international financial institutions, NGOs, INGOs, International community, world media should support and provide assistance for Bangladesh in this regard.

Writer: MD Pathik Hasan, Dhaka based NGO worker and Freelance writer.

රාජ්‍ය ආරක්ෂක ආපදා කළමනාකරණ සහ  ස්වදේශ කටයුතු රාජ්‍ය අමාත්‍යාංශය 

නිරෝධාන ඇඳිරි නීතිය පැනීම හේතුවෙන් ජීවනෝපාය අහිමි වූ පුද්ගලයින් සඳහා රජය ලබාදෙන රුපියල් 2000 දීමනාව ලබාදීමට අවශ්‍ය කටයුතු දිස්ත්‍රික් ලේකම් කාර්යාල හා ප්‍රාදේශි ලේකම් කාර්යාල සියල්ල සූදානම් කර ඇති බව වාරිමාර්ග අමාත්‍ය සහ රාජ්‍ය ආරක්ෂක , ආපදා කළමනාකරණ රාජ්‍ය අමාත්‍ය සහ ස්වදේශ කටයුතු රාජ්‍ය අමාත්‍ය චමල් රාජපක්ෂ මැතිතුමා පැවසීය.

රජය විසින් එම දීමනාව ලබා දීමට නිර්දේශ කර ඇති පුද්ගලයින්ගේ නාමලේඛනය කඩිනමින් සකස් කර ලෙස  දිස්ත්‍රික් ලේකම්වරුන්ට සහ ප්‍රාදේශීය ලේකම්වරුන්ට    පසුගියදා  අමාත්‍යවරයා උපදෙස් ලබා දෙන ලදී.

ඒ අනුව ප්‍රාදේශීය ලේකම්වරුන් විසින් ඊට අදාළ නාමලේඛනය මේ වන විට සකස් කර අවසන්.

නිරෝධාන ඇඳිරි නීතිය පැනවීම හේතුවෙන් ජීවනෝපාය අහිමි වූ පුද්ගලයන් සඳහා මුදල් අමාත්‍යාංශය ප්‍රාදේශීය ලේකම් කාර්යාල වෙත ඊට අදාළ මුදල්ය යොමු කිරීමෙන් පසු  කඩිනමින්  අදාල පුද්ගලයින්ට එම සහනය ලබාදීමට නියමිතයි.

සියලු ප්‍රාදේශි ලේකම් කාර්යාල වල ග්‍රාම නිලධාරීවරුන්, සමෘද්ධි සංවර්ධන නිලධාරීන්,  සහ සංවර්ධන නිලධාරීන්ගේ පූර්ණ කැපවීමෙන් මෙම දීමනාව ලබා දීමට අවශ්‍ය කටයුතු සකසා ඇත.

   ජීවනෝපාය අහිමි වූ සියලු  ජනතාවට රජය ලබාදෙන මෙම දීමනාව අක්‍රමිකතා වෙන් තොරව විධිමත් ක්‍රමවේදයක් යටතේ ලබාදීමට ප්‍රාදේශීය ලේකම්වරුන්ට අමාත්‍ය චමල් රාජපක්ෂ මහතා වැඩිදුරටත් උපදෙස් ලබා දෙන ලදී.

ඔබ මාධ්‍ය ආයතනය අප වෙත දක්වන සහය අගය කොට සලකමි.

කසුන් වීරතුංග

මාධ්‍ය ප්‍රධානී

රාජ්‍ය ආරක්ෂක ආපදා කළමනාකරණ සහ  ස්වදේශ කටයුතු රාජ්‍ය අමාත්‍යාංශය 

අග්‍රාමාත්‍ය මාධ්‍ය අංශය

සෑම පුන් පොහෝ දිනකම ගරු අග්‍රාමාත්‍ය මහින්ද රාජපක්ෂ මහතාගේ සංකල්පයකට අනුව පවත්වන අමාදම් සිසිලස” ධර්ම දේශනා මාලාවේ 213වැන්න නිකිණි  පුන් පොහොය යෙදෙන අද (22)  දින පෙරවරුවේ  අරලියගහ මන්දිරයේ දී පැවැත්විණි.

පළමුව අග්‍රාමාත්‍යතුමා මල් ,පහන්, සුවඳ දුම් පූජාකොට ධර්ම දේශනාව සඳහා වැඩම කළ ශ්‍රී ලංකා ශ්වේජින් නිකායේ නියෝජ්‍ය ලේඛකාධිකාරි පොකුණුවිට ශ්‍රී විනයාලංකාරාමවාසී, ආචාර්ය කුකුල්පනේ සුදස්සී  නාහිමියන්ට දැහැත් වට්ටියක් පූජා කරමින් ධර්ම දේශනාවට ආරාධනා කළේය.

ප්‍රඥාවන්ත දැහැමි ජන සමාජයක් උදෙසා බුදු දහමේ සිසිලස බෙදාදීමේ අරමුණ පෙරදැරිව සෑම පුන් පොහෝ දිනකම  අමාදම් සිසිලස” ධර්ම දේශනා මාලාව පැවැත්වේ.

අග්‍රාමාත්‍ය මහින්ද රාජපක්ෂ මහතාගේ සංල්පයෙන් ඇරඹි මෙම අමාදම් සිසිලස ධර්ම දේශනා මාලාව අඛණ්ඩව සෑම පොහෝ දිනකම පවත්වන්නට යෙදීමේ වැදගත්කම පෙන්වා දුන් ආචාර්ය  කුකුල්පනේ සුදස්සී නාහිමියෝ ධර්ම දේශනාව අතරවාරයේ දී මෙසේ ද පැවසූහ.

“ගරු අග්‍රාමාත්‍යතුමන් මේ රට වෙනුවෙන් සම්බුද්ධ ශාසනය වෙනුවෙන්  සිදුකරන ලද අපරිමිත  කාර්යභාරයන් අතර වසර 30කට අධික  කාලයක් සියලු රටවැසියන් බියෙන්, තැතිගැන්මෙන් පීඩාවට පත්කරමින් පැවැති යුද බිය දුරුකර, සෑම සියලු දෙනාටම සමගි සම්පන්නව සතුටින් සැහැල්ලුවෙන් ජීවත්වෙන්න අවකාශ සලසා දීම ගිහි පැවිදි කවුරුත් සියලු කල්හි සුවිශේෂීව අගය කරනවා.”

“රට වැසියන්ට බාහිරින් පැමිණෙන උවදුරු වළක්වලා සියලු දෙනාට සුවෙන් ජීවත්වන්නට අවකාශ සලසා දුන්නා සේම අපි කොයි කාටත් ඇතුළතින් පැමිණෙන කෙළෙස් සිතුවිලි දුරුකර ගන්නට තථාගත සද්ධර්මය සැමදෙනාටම අහන්නට සලස්වමින් ලංකාවේ පමණක් නොවෙයි විදේශ රටවල පවා ජීවත්වන බෞද්ධයින්ට  තම තමන්ගේ සිත්සතන් දහම් සිසිලසින් සුවපත්කර ගන්නට ආරම්භකරන ලද මේ ධර්මදේශනා මාලාවත් සුවිශේෂ සත්කාරයක් හැටියට අපි අගය කරනවා.”යැයි ආචාර්ය  කුකුල්පනේ සුදස්සී නාහිමියෝ සිහිපත් කළහ.

අනතුරුව නිකිණි පුර පසළොස්වක පොහොය දින ඇති වැදගත්කම පැහැදිලි කරමින් හා මෙවන් කාල වකවානුවක තමන් තමන්ව සුරක්ෂිත කරගන්නේ කෙසේද යන කාරණය බුදුරජාණන්වහන්සේ විසින්  කළ දේශනා ඇසුරින් පැහැදිලි කරමින් ආචාර්ය  කුකුල්පනේ සුදස්සී නාහිමියෝ ධර්මය දේශනා කළහ.      

සෞඛ්‍ය මාර්ගෝපදේශයන් අනුව පැවති අමාදම් සිසිලස” ධර්ම දේශනාව ශ්‍රවණය කිරීම සඳහා අග්‍රාමාත්‍ය ආර්යා ශිරන්ති රාජපක්ෂ මහත්මිය ඇතුළු සීමිත පිරිසක් එක් වූහ.

උපුටාගැණීම අද දෙරණ

සමගි ජන බලවේගයේ පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්ත්‍රී රිෂාඩ් බදියුදීන් මහතා විසින් මරණ තර්ජන කළ බව පවසමින් බන්ධනාගාර වෛද්‍යවරයෙක් බොරැල්ල පොලීසියට පැමිණිල්ලක් කර තිබේ.

පසුව ඒ පිළිබඳව වැඩිදුර විමර්ශන සඳහා පොලිස්පතිවරයා විසින්  කොළඹ අපරාධ කොට්ඨාසය වෙත යොමුකර ඇත.

මැගසින් බන්ධනාගාරයේ වෛද්‍යවරයෙකු විසින් ඊයේ (21) එම පැමිණිල්ල කර තිබේ.

එම පැමිණිල්ලේ දැක්වෙන්නේ, වැලිකඩ බන්ධනාගාරයේ බෙහෙත් ශාලාව තුළ පසුගිය 15වනදා අදාළ වෛද්‍යවරයා විසින් රෝගී රැඳවියෙකු පරීක්ෂා කරමින් සිටියදී රිෂාඩ් බදුර්දීන් මන්ත්‍රීවරයා බලහත්කාරයෙන් එම ස්ථානයට පැමිණ ඇති බවය.

එහිදී මන්ත්‍රීවරයාට පිටතින් සිටින ලෙසත් අවශ්‍ය තොරතුරු ලබාගත් පසුව ඔහුව ඇතුළට කැඳවන බවත් වෛද්‍යවරයා විසින් පවසා ඇති බව වාර්තා වේ.

එහිදී කුපිත වූ රිෂාඩ් බදියුදීන් මන්ත්‍රීවරයා, බැණවැදී ඇත්තේ, “උඹ මහ ලොකු දොස්තර කෙනෙක් ද, මගේ යාලු දොස්තර කෙනෙක් මේ දැන් කෝල් කරලා මට ගෙන්න ගන්න පුළුවන්,මගේ වැඩ කරගන්න තමුසේ ඕන නැහැ” යනුවෙන් බව අදාළ පැමිණිල්ලේ සඳහන් වෙයි.  

“තමුසේ දන්නැද්ද මම මොකක් කරලා ද ආවේ කියලා. ඒ වගේම තමුසෙව වෙන ලෝකෙකට අරින්නත් පුළුවන්. පැයක් ඇතුළත මාරු කරලා යවන්නත් පුළුවන්. තමුසේ වැඩිය දැඟලුවොත් පාරේ යනකොට තමුසෙයි තමුසෙගෙ කාර් එකයි අළු වෙලා තියෙයි. එතකොට තමුසෙගෙ ගෑණිට මිනිහත් ළමයින්ට තාත්තත් නැති වෙයි. තමුසේ දැනගන්නවා මම රිෂාඩ් බදියුදීන්.” යනුවෙන් මන්ත්‍රීවරයා මරණීය තර්ජන කළ බවද වෛද්‍යවරයාගේ පැමිණිල්ලේ දැක්වේ.

“මට පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්ත්‍රී වරප්‍රසාද තියෙනවා. ආණ්ඩු පක්ෂයත් විපක්ෂයත් දෙකම සලකනවා. උඹේ ආයු කාලය කෙටියි.” යනුවෙන් ද මන්ත්‍රීවරයා එහිදී පැවසූ බව වෛද්‍යවරයා පොලීසියට පවසා ඇත.

“දොස්තර.. පරිස්සම් වෙලා හිටපන්. ඉක්මනට මෙතනින් පලයන්. ගිහිල්ලා උඹට හැංගිලා ඉන්න තැනක් හොයා ගනින්.” යනුවෙන් තර්ජනාත්මකව හා අපහාසාත්මක බැණවදිමින් ආවේගශීලීව හැසිරුණු බව වෛද්‍යවරයා විසින් කරන ලද පැමිණිල්ලේ සඳහන්ය.

අදාළ වෛද්‍යවරයා විසින් මේ සම්බන්ධයෙන් බන්ධනාගාරයේ ප්‍රධාන වෛද්‍යතුමියට, බන්ධනාගාරයේ ඉහළ නිලධාරියෙකුට වාචිකව සහ ලිඛිතව පැමිණිලි කිරීමෙන් අනතුරුව බොරැල්ල පොලීසිය වෙත පැමිණිලි කර ඇත. 

අනතුරුව බන්ධනාගාර කොමසාරිස්වරයා විසින් පොලිස්පතිවරයාට කරන ලද ලිඛිත පැමිණිල්ලක් අනුව පොලිස්පතිවරයාගේ නියෝග මත කොළඹ අපරාධ කොට්ඨාසය ඒ සම්බන්ධයෙන් වැඩිදුර විමර්ශන සිදුකරනු ලබයි.

ඒ අනුව සිද්ධියට මුහුණ දුන් වෛද්‍යවරයාව අද (22) දහවල් කොළඹ අපරාධ කොට්ඨාසය වෙත කැඳවා වැඩිදුරටත් ප්‍රකාශ ලබාගගෙන තිබේ.

මේ අතර කොළඹ අපාරාධ කොට්ඨාසයේ විශේෂ පොලිස් කණ්ඩායමක් අද කොළඹ මැගසින් බන්ධනාගාරය වෙත ගොස් අදාළ සිදුවීම සිදුවූ ස්ථානය පරීක්ෂා කර ඇත.

– මෙම පුවත උපුටා ගත්තේ දේශය පුවත්පතිනි..-

ආණ්ඩුවේ කැබිනට් ඇමැතිවරුන් වූ වාසු, උදය හා විමල් පෙරදා පැය 5 ½ක් තරම් දිගට ගිය අමාත්‍ය මණ්ඩල රුස්වීමේදී රට වසා දැමීමේ යෝජනාවක් නොකර පසුදා සෙසු පක්ෂ ගණනාවක් සමඟ එක්වී රට වසන ලෙස ලිඛිතව දැන්වීම ගැන ජනාධිපතිවරයා සිටියේ තරහිනි.

ඒ සමඟ මේ අමාත්‍යවරුන් තිදෙනාටම වෙන වෙනම දුරකතනයෙන් ඇමතූ ජනාධිපතිවරයා ඔවුන් කර ඇත්තේ බරපතළ වරදක් බවත් අමාත්‍ය මණ්ඩල සාමූහික වගකීම උල්ලංඝනය කර ඇති බවත් කීය. එබැවින් තමන්ට ඔවුන් අමාත්‍ය මණ්ඩලයෙන් ඉවත් කළ හැකි බවත් එක් අමාත්‍යවරයකු අමතා සඳහන් කර ඇත.

එවිට අදාළ අමාත්‍යවරුන් සඳහන් කර ඇත්තේ තමන් වෙනත් පක්ෂ නියෝජනය කරන බැවින් ජනමතය අනුව මෙම ප්‍රකාශය කළ බවය. එහෙත් එක් අමාත්‍යවරයෙක් පමණක් තමන් එවූ ලිපියේ වරදක් ඇති බව පිළිගත්තේය. ඔහු තමන්ගේ ලිපිය මගින් වරදක් සිදුවූ නිසා එය නිවැරදි කරමින් අවශ්‍ය නම් පසුදා තමන්ට පමණක් ප්‍රකාශයක් කළ හැකි බව ජනාධිපතිවරයාට දැන්වීය.

ඒ අතර මේ ගැන දැඩි අසතුටින් සිටි ජනාධිපතිවරයා, අගමැති මහින්ද රාජපක්ෂ, බැසිල් රාජපක්ෂ මහත්වරුන් වෙතද මෙම කරුණ දැනුම් දී තමන්ට මෙම අමාත්‍යවරුන් කැබිනට්ටුවෙන් ඉවත් කළ හැකි යැයි කියා තිබිණි. එහෙත් අග්‍රාමාත්‍යවරයා ගෝඨාභය ජනාධිපතිවරයාට කීවේ තමන් අදාළ අමාත්‍යවරුන් සමඟ කතා කොට ප්‍රශ්නය විසඳා ගන්නා බැවින් කලබල නොවන ලෙසයි

ඒ අනුව ඔහු වාසු, විමල් හා උදය සමඟ දුරකතනයෙන් කතාකොට සුහද ලෙස කරුණු විමසීය. එදා රාත්‍රියේ අරලිය ගහ මැඳුරේ ඔවුන් වෙනුවෙන් රාත්‍රී භෝජන සංග්‍රහයක් තමන් සූදානම් කර ඇති නිසා ඊට සහභාගි වී කතාබස් කොට ප්‍රශ්න විසඳාගනිමු යැයි මහින්ද ඔවුන්ට කීය.

සිකුරාදා රාත්‍රි 7.30ට පමණ අදාළ අමාත්‍යවරු අරලියගහ මැඳුරට පැමිණ මහින්දගේ භෝජන සංග්‍රහයට එක්වූහ. ඊට එක්ව සිටියේ විමල්, උදය, වාසු සහ බන්දුල ගුණවර්ධන පමණි. පුරා පැය 4කට ආසන්න කාලයක් සුහද කතාබහ සමඟ රාත්‍රී භෝජනය ඇදී ගියේය. රාත්‍රී 11.30ට පමණ එය නිමාවූයේ සියලු තරහ මරහ අමතක කරමිනි.

– deshaya

උපුටා ගැන්ම දිවයින

* දේශපාලන පක්‍ෂ හා වෘත්තීය සමිති කිහිපයකට, ජනප‍්‍රිය හිමිනමකට සහ මාධ්‍ය කණ්ඩායමක් වෙත ගැසීම සඳහා රජය අපහසුතාවට පත් කිරීමට කටයුතු කිරීම සඳහා විදේශ සංවිධානයක් විසින් රුපියල් කෝටි 85ක පමණ මුදලක් රාජ්‍ය නොවන සංවිධාන හරහා මෙරටට ලබාදී ඇතැයි විශ්වාසදායක ආරංචි මාර්ගයකින් ‘දිවයින ඉරිදා සංග‍්‍රහයට’ වාර්තා වේ.එම ආරංචි මාර්ග සඳහන් කරන ආකාරයට මෙම මුදල් මෙරට දේශපාලන පක්‍ෂ සහ වෘත්තීය සමිති කිහිපයකට ද ප‍්‍රසිද්ධ හිමිනමකට හා මාධ්‍ය කණ්ඩායමකට ද ලැබී ඇත.

අදාළ විදේශ සංවිධානයේ සිටින ඉහළම නිලධාරියකුගේ මැදිහත්වීමෙන් මෙම මුදල් ලබාදී තිබේ.මෙම මුදල් වලින් රුපියල් කෝටි 50ක් අදාළ මාධ්‍ය කණ්ඩායමටත් ප‍්‍රසිද්ධ හිමිනමට රුපියල් කෝටි 5ක් සහ වෘත්තීය සමිති හා දේශපාලන පක්‍ෂ සඳහා රුපියල් කෝටි 30ක් වශයෙනුත් බෙදා දී ඇත. DIVAINA

ලංකා ආරංචි

කිංබානට්තුමාව පත්තරේ එඩිටර් මහත්තයා කතා කළා.

” අර ප්‍රෙස් කොන්ෆරන්ස් එකට ගියාද…? “එඩිටර් ඇහුවා.

” ඔව්…”

” කෝ කතාව ලිව්වද…?”

එඩිටර් මහත්තයා ආපහු ඇහුවා.

කිංබානට්තුමා ලියපු නිවුස් එක එඩිටර් ගේ අතේ තිබ්බා.

එඩිටර් ඒක කියවන්න පටන් ගත්තා.

” වෘත්තිය සමිති ව්‍යාපාරයේ බලපෑම හමුවේ ආණ්ඩුව විසින් දේශපාලන ලොක්ඩවුන් එකක් ක්‍රියාත්මක කර ඇතැයි රජයේ හෙද නිලධාරීන්ගේ සංගමයේ සභාපති හිටපු පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්ත්‍රී සමන් රත්නප්‍රිය මහතා සඳහන් කරයි.

නමුත් රට වසා දැමීමේ ප්‍රතිඵල ලබාගැනීමේ සැලසුමක ආණ්ඩුව නැති බවත් ඔහු කියා සිටියේය.

කොළඹ පැවැති මාධ්‍ය හමුවකදී ඔහු මේ බව පැවසීය.

එම මාධ්‍ය හමුවට එක්වෙමින් සෞඛ්‍ය වෘත්තිකයන්ගේ සංගමයේ කැඳවුම්කරු රවි කුමුදේශ් මහතා කියා සිටියේ රට වසා ඇති කාලය තුළ මෙරට කොරෝනා පාලනය කිරීම සඳහාම විද්‍යාත්මක ප්‍රවේශයක ආණ්ඩුව නැති බවයි.

එම මාධ්‍ය අඹ එක්වෙමින් ජනතා විමුක්ති පෙරමුණේ හිටපු පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්ත්‍රී වසන්ත සමරසිංහ මහතා කියා සිටියේ මෙය රට වැසීමක් ලෙස නම් කළද සේවක සේවිකාවන් විශාල ප්‍රමාණයක් අත්‍යවශ්‍ය සේවා සඳහා යයි කියමින් කැඳවමින් ඇති බවයි.

එනිසා මෙම වසා දැමීම ඔලමොට්ටල ලොක්ඩවුන් එකක් යයිද ඔහු පැවසීය.”

” ෂහ්… හොඳට ලියලා තියෙනවානේ… මේකට හෙඩිමක් දැම්මෙ නැද්ද …? “

එඩිටර් ඒක කියවලා ඉවරවෙලා ඇහුවා.

” දැම්මා…”

” මොකක්ද දාපු හෙඩිම …? “

එඩිටර් එහෙම ඇහුවම කිංබානට්තුමා හෙඩිම කිව්වා.

” බූරුවෝ තුන් දෙනෙකුට පිස්සු …! “

by Rohan Abeygunawardena

The World Cup semi-finals between England and South Africa in 1992 became a talking point of the cricket world due to an ‘unfair’ rain related rule that cost South Africa a spot in the finals of the World Cup.

South Africa’s task of gathering 22 runs from 13 balls was reduced after a brief spell of rain to 21 runs required off a single delivery in this World Cup semi-final game. The game became a farce and the subject of ridicule and parody.

ICC then requested two British mathematicians Frank Duckworth and Tony Lewis to design a reliable model to be used in rain affected one day cricket matches. Their proposal was accepted and though later somewhat modified by Steve Stern it is now used as the ‘Duckworth-Lewis’ method.

Senaka Weeraratna, a Sri Lankan lawyer, conceived an unique concept called ‘player referral’ as far back as 1997 to minimise on-field umpire errors. His letter to the editor entitled ‘Third umpire should perform the role of an appeal judge’ was first published in the ‘Australian’ (Australia’s national newspaper) on March 25, 1997, and thereafter in several newspapers and journals all over the cricket world.

Until he drew public attention to the benefit of such a player referral system, there was no such system or mechanism in any other sport (Wikipedia.) His concept is undoubtedly revolutionary in its breadth and scope because it challenges the validity of a fundamental rule since the inception of cricket – the decision of the umpire is final.

Basically, the Decision Review System (DRS) is a technology-based process for assisting the match officials with their decision-making. On-field umpires may consult with the third umpire (an Umpire Review) and players may request that the third umpire consider a decision of the on-field umpires (a Player Review).

Under the DRS a player of either side is empowered to appeal directly to the third umpire against the decision of an on-field umpire. It removes the finality of a decision made by an on-field umpire in upholding or dismissing an appeal. This is a revolutionary change. It goes against a cardinal tenet of cricket tradition namely that the umpire’s word is final. Nevertheless, it has brought integrity and justice to the game in place of an over exaggerated, flawed and abused method of adjudication.

In 2006, the International Cricket Committee of the ICC formally adopted the concept of Player Referral conceived by Senaka Weeraratna, and later introduced it to the cricket world as the Umpire Decision Review System (UDRS also called DRS).

The DRS is now used in all formats of the game (Test, ODI and T20) whereas the Duckworth-Lewis method is purely confined to rain affected one day internationals (ODI) and T20 cricket matches. With the improvement in technology the accuracy of DRS is expected to increase further and many a team and players will benefit.

A case in point is the just concluded India vs Sri Lanka T20 series. A Sri Lankan batsman was adjudged caught-behind while attempting to nudge at a delivery coming on his leg side. But when the batsman appealed to the third umpire, the ground umpire’s decision was reversed as ‘Ultra Edge’ clearly showed that there was no bat involved. Sri Lanka had to take only one run to win. The umpire then signalled a wide and Sri Lanka won the match. In the absence of DRS and if it was the last bowl of the game, Sri Lanka would have lost the chance of winning the match.

DRS – great boon to cricket

The DRS has been a great boon to the world of cricket ever since its official introduction to Tests by the ICC in October, 2009. Many a batsman’s innings and sometimes even a cricket career has been salvaged by bringing into play of the DRS, which prevents patently wrong umpire decisions to stand.

It has helped umpires to be more at ease; enabled them to be more confident, contributed towards making the playing environment better. Today the players behave more responsibly and regular on-field outbursts have been greatly reduced. Most importantly it has led to a 7% increase in the accuracy of umpire decision making i.e., from 91% to 98% according to ICC sources. It has served the best interests of cricket given the plaudits coming from all sectors for the DRS.

Shashi Tharoor

Shashi Tharoor, the Indian politician, recently expressed his views on the impact that the Decision Review System (DRS) has had on the modern game, and he stated unequivocally that it has been one of cricket’s best innovations. Tharoor further said that international cricket should never be without DRS in the future, given how many errors the technology prevents.

DRS is such a major innovation. I never want to see international cricket without DRS ever again. It is so indispensable and eliminates so many bad decisions, and it creates an additional form of excitement for the viewer. It adds an extra element of tension to the plot and it is a very welcome addition as far as I’m concerned,” Shashi Tharoor said.

The world is yet to give full credit to Senaka Weeraratna for this major innovation that has turned the game of cricket on its head. The more important question is whose brainchild i.e., that of Duckworth-Lewis or that of Senaka Weeraratna has served the best interest of the game of cricket.

Though both the Duckworth-Lewis method and the Senaka Weeraratna Rule are clearly meant to enhance accurate decision making it is indisputable that integrity of the game and Justice has been best served by DRS.

Varsha Thakur, the Indian journalist calls Senaka Weeraratna, the ‘Dharmaraja’ of cricket and the father of DRS.

මාධ්‍ය අංශය, වෛද්‍ය තිලක පද්මා සුබසිංහ අනුස්මරණ නීති අධ්‍යයන වැඩසටහන

ගෝඨාභය රාජපක්ෂ ජනාධිපතිතුමනි…,
යුක්තිය, සමානත්මතාවය සහ සාධාරණය  සහිත රටක් ගොඩ නගමු…විචාරශීලී ජනතාවට අත දෙමු…කොරෝනා පරදවමු…!

පාලකයන් සිදුකරන දූෂණය, නාස්තිය සහ බලය අවභාවිතය එළිදරව්වීම සහ එයට එරෙහිව ක්‍රියා කරන පිරිස බිහිවීම වැළැක්වීමට විචාරශීලී ජනතාවක් බිහිවීම ශ්‍රී ලංකාවේ නීතියෙන්, අධ්‍යාපනයෙන් සහ පාලනයෙන් වළක්වනු ලබුවත් එයම කොරෝනා ව්‍යසනයේදී පාලකයන්ට පාරාවලල්ලක් වී ඇත.

විචාරශීලී බහුතර ජනතාවක් ඇති රටවල කොරෝනා ව්‍යසනය සහ ඒ ආශ්‍රිතව පැනනගින ගැටලු පාලනය කර ගැනීම පහසු වුවත් ලංකාව වැනි විචාරශීලීත්වය අවම මට්ටමක ජනතාවක් සිටින රටවල එයට ඇත්තේ අඩු අවස්ථාවකි.

විචාරශීලීත්වයෙන් යුත් ජනතාව දුෂ්කර කාලයේදී පාලකයන්ට සහාය දක්වන නමුත්  යුක්තිය, සමානත්මතාවය සහ සාධාරණය නොමැති සමාජයක විචාරශීලී ජනතාවක් බිහිනොවන අතර තමන් ගැන සහ තමන්ගේ කණ්ඩාමේ වාසිය ගැන පමණක් සිතන ජනතාවක් බිහි වෙයි.

දැන්වත් යුක්තිය, සමානත්මතාවය සහ සාධාරණය ඇති කරන සමාජයක් ගොඩ නගමු…!

විචාරශීලී ජනතාවට රටේ තැනක් ඇති බව සහතික කරමු….!

කොරෝනා පරදවමු…!

මාධ්‍ය අංශය, වෛද්‍ය තිලක පද්මා සුබසිංහ අනුස්මරණ නීති අධ්‍යයන වැඩසටහන

 by Moiz Mustafa Courtesy NewsIn.Asia

Colombo, August 22 (newsin.asia) – The Island nation announced a lockdown which began on Friday night (20), bowing to pressure from medical experts as infections have overwhelmed the healthcare system. All essential services will function as normal. Read more

As the lockdown came into effect on Friday night, Colombo went silent. Busy stretches such as the Galle Road, Marine Drive and High-Level Road remained deserted, barring an occasional vehicle or two.

Highlights:

Courtesy NewsIn.Asia

Colombo, August 22 (newsin.asia) – Sri Lankan Authorities announced that 52 Vaccination Centers will be open on Sunday (22).

By Liu Zongyi Courtesy Global Times

India’s attempts to revive the Colombo Security Conclave have garnered media attention. On Tuesday, the South China Morning Post argued that the revival of a trilateral grouping between India, Sri Lanka and the Maldives, shows New Delhi’s wariness of Beijing’s growing influence in the Indian Ocean region.

The group, now known as the Colombo Security Conclave, was formed in 2011 under the name National Security Adviser Level Meeting on Trilateral Maritime Security Cooperation. It was revived and renamed Colombo Security Conclave in November 2020 after a gap of six years. Earlier this month, the first Deputy National Security Adviser meeting of the Colombo Security Conclave kicked off virtually.

The renaming of the grouping proves that the three countries are institutionalizing the group, a move that is especially beneficial to India because the country can include this mechanism in its Indian Ocean Region strategy to help maintain India’s leading role in the region.

The Colombo Security Conclave is an emphasis and complement to India’s Indo-Pacific strategy, in which New Delhi pays particular attention to the security in the Western Indian Ocean, a region that is not in Washington’s top priority in its Indo-Pacific strategy. That is why the Seychelles and Mauritius – both in the Western Indian Ocean – were invited to the meeting as observers.

The meeting indentified four pillars of cooperation under the CSC: marine safety and security, terrorism and radicalization, trafficking and organized crime and cybersecurity. In other words, the CSC offers non-traditional security cooperation for those smaller regional countries to “maximize their security in Indo-Pacific region without picking any sides,” as a scholar from Bangladesh argued.

While it is true that the CSC is currently focused on non-traditional security cooperation, it could be an indirect and cost-effective way for New Delhi to strengthen traditional security cooperation. Some specific missions in non-traditional security cooperation are very similar to those in traditional security cooperation, particularly the maritime one. Both types of cooperation, for example, involve activities with the navies and coast guards of neighboring countries. And such interactions have already directly or indirectly consolidated India’s traditional security interests in the region.

As a regional power, India can guarantee the interests and security of smaller countries around it in some ways. But by wooing these countries into certain mechanisms, India is also forcing them to take sides, something that many of these countries are trying to avoid.

To be more specific, Bangladesh, which currently holds observer status at the CSC, might be vigilant about the group becoming a geopolitical strategy to contain or counter China. Such concern is reasonable due to India’s hostility against China. India is already building military bases in the Seychelles. It wants to use these facilities as some of its future strongholds to contain China in the Indian Ocean. Moreover, many of the India-led mechanisms in the Indian Ocean region exclude China.

There is no problem for countries in the region to participate in normal regional cooperation mechanisms. However, if they get involved in India’s anti-China attempts, then these small countries may miss out on some development opportunities with China. China advocates true and open multilateralism within the UN framework, rather than pursuing political and military blocs in the name of multilateralism. Small countries in the Indian Ocean should keep a clear head and be alert to India’s ambitions. The CSC should not become a trap set for smaller regional countries by India to maintain its dominance in the Indian Ocean and realize its geopolitical ambitions.

As the three observer countries Bangladesh, Seychelles, and Mauritius have been invited to become full members at the next meeting, it is clear that the Conclave is expanding. If the mechanism gets bigger in the future, India may also want to include and engage with some of the countries outside the region and some Western countries that supposedly share India’s values, including Japan, South Korea, Europe and the US. In terms of agenda, the CSC is likely to shift to the economic field and then to traditional security.

In short, India will gradually make newer mechanisms such as the Colombo Security Conclave functionally close to some of the old ones, complementing and supporting the existing mechanisms such as the Quad and the Indian Ocean Naval Symposium.

The author is secretary-general of the Research Center for China-South Asia Cooperation at the Shanghai Institutes for International Studies, a visiting fellow of the Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies, Renmin University of China, and a distinguished fellow of the Chinese (Kunming) Academy of South Asian and Southeast Asian studies. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn

Courtesy Adaderana

The government has planned to commence the vaccination of people between the ages of 18 and 30 years in the second week of September.

Joining the media briefing today (August 22), Acting Chief of the Epidemiology Unit, Dr. Samitha Ginige said that 3.2 million people belong to that age group.

He said, Our population over the age of 30 years is 11.5 million. We need 23 million to give them both doses. At the present, we have received 19.5 million vaccines. The remaining doses can be obtained within the next two weeks. Our goal is to give both doses to everyone over the age of 30 by the first week of September. We are successfully reaching that goal.

Today, 99% of the population over 30 has completed the first dose. Further, 48% of the group over 30 have been given the second dose”

Courtesy Adaderana

MP Rishad Bathiudeen is once again under the spotlight after a doctor serving at the Magazine Prison, where the parliamentarian is remanded, accused him of levelling threats against his life.

The Colombo Crimes Division (CCD) launched investigations into the incident based on a complaint filed by the relevant doctor with the Borella Police.

The doctor had lodged the complaint after informing the chief medical officer and a senior officer at the prison both verbally and in writing.

According to the complaint, MP Bathiudeen had obstructed the duties of the doctor while he was treating an inmate on the 15th of August.

Reportedly, doctor, who asked MP Bathiudeen to wait outside for his turn, has been told that his service is not required since the parliamentarian is capable of calling a doctor acquaintance.

Then the former minister has allegedly threatened the doctor, saying that he can have him transferred while also threatening to end the doctor’s life.

He had alleged stated that he has parliamentary privileges and is treated well by both Government and the Opposition.

The threat has also extended to the point that the lawmaker had purportedly asked the doctor to find a good place to hide.

Reportedly, the investigating officers recorded statements from the relevant doctor, who was summoned to the CCD this evening.

In the meantime, a special police team of the CCD visited the Magazine Prison today for inspection.

Courtesy Adaderana

The total number people who fell victim to COVID-19 infection in Sri Lanka soared yet again as a record high of 183 new fatalities were confirmed by the Director-General of Health Services on Saturday (August 21).

The new development has pushed the official death toll from the virus outbreak in Sri Lanka to 7,366.

According to the data released by the Department of Government Information, the latest victims include 107 males and 76 females.

As many as 136 deaths were reported among the elderly people who are aged above 60 years.

In addition, 45 individuals aged between 30-59 years and two females below 30 years have also succumbed to the virus infection.

Courtesy Adaderana

Sri Lanka reported its highest count of daily COVID-19 cases today (August 22) as total infections confirmed within the day exceeded 4,000.

According to official data, 4,304 novel coronavirus infections were detected today. The Government Information Department stated that 4,282 of the latest cases were associated with the New Year Cluster and the remaining 22 have been identified as arrivals from foreign countries.

Earlier today, 3,110 positive cases were confirmed, followed by 1,194 more. The new development brought Sri Lanka’s confirmed COVID-19 cases tally to 390,000.

At present, 40,475 active cases are receiving medical care at hospitals, treatment centres and their respective homes.

Meanwhile, the number of total recoveries has reached 342,159 and the death toll now stands at 7,366.

Laksiri Warnakula 

The Island editorial on 17/08/21 titled ‘Puzzling reshuffle’ amused me no ends as I was going through it. I somehow managed to look at it from another perspective, even with the gloom that is brought on by a ‘Viral cloud’ hanging above us the governed, and perhaps not the governors to the same extent.   

A refreshing change at least for me, away from what you see, hear and read these days: wailing of the poor, many families suddenly finding themselves in the middle of never-before-experienced economic hardships, the mass gatherings to get the vaccine standing in packed queues stretching for how long (only god will know), at many a location, and the health professionals asking for island-wide lockdowns, increased testing and patient isolation, to mention a few, to avert a disaster, of such ferocity and intensity never before seen. However, can the governments’ shuffling strategy of several ministerial portfolios in the Cabinet be considered even a reasonable attempt to support the fight against the epidemic? And the editorial mentioned above raises a few points that are quite thought-provoking too in addition to being as puzzling as the ‘Puzzling reshuffle’, itself.  

Now, about the shuffle written by the editor: It brought to my mind some images of a kind: ‘square holes/round pegs and post-turtles/fences’ (As for the latter, two of my letters were published in the ‘Opinion column’ of the Island dated and titled, ‘The post turtle era’, 19/06/18 and ‘Post turtle revisited’ 22/04/21, respectively).  

The unfitting round pegs uncomfortably (?) sitting in those holes often come out with sheer balderdash and the half-sleepy post-turtles suddenly awakened by the deafening silence around them and not-to-be-outdone come out with their own versions of balderdash, all of them thinking that their proposals and suggestions are innovative and ground-breaking (literally) ideas. However, in the end, a vast majority of them turn out to be, but miserable failures, a fitting analogy to a blind fellow missing the target lock, stock and barrel (how much they get paid by the public for this drama and the trauma caused by them to the country?). 

Eventually, it will be back to square one, won’t it? New pegs and new turtles, going into the shuffle-cycle, and the and governments’ policy of picking, plucking and planting whomever it likes and wherever it likes them to be  preferring ‘yes men/women and not the no-nonsense and the competent personnel’ (6P’s of selection), resulting in massive losses in both money and material, more harm done than any good, their indiscipline, disgusting work ethics coupled with their attitudes (not giving a ‘tinkers cuss’), interfering with matters that are beyond their ministerial responsibilities and duties, and who also can say ‘yes’ to any bigwig that asks them to do something even when it sounds not right, are able to bend down from their waists and ever-ready to raise their hands giving approval, whenever they are asked to, their mission of nation-building thus becoming more of a slavish submission to higher authority and nothing else.   

And some highly capable and educated people with proven track records in their fields of expertise, who continue to keep their dignity, honesty and integrity intact may stand a good chance of getting told ‘take it or leave it’ and few go for the latter, with their heads holding high with pride.   

So many a government portfolio gets filled with such ‘professionals of such calibre’, and the rest, needless to say its family members, and then their family members, on and on.   

Lastly, the problem of ‘having to shuffle and reshuffle’ is one of their own making.  

If the government is genuinely concerned about the wellbeing of the country, its people and preserving its environment and natural resources, it should employ only the capable regardless of their political affiliation They must be made to understand in no uncertain terms that they have been picked up based on pure merit only and to leave their non-work-related loyalties at home. Unless the government (and even the future ones too) follows this recruitment strategy, these shuffles will continue to appear from time to time and they in the end will again achieve next to nothing. 

Laksiri Warnakula