Art across the Palk Strait

March 26th, 2021

By Meera Srinivasan/The Hindu

Art across the Palk Strait

Colombo, March 25: Yazhpanam P.S. Balamurugan had to cancel nearly a dozen performances in India last year, after the pandemic made it impossible to travel from Jaffna, where he lives, in Sri Lanka’s Northern Province.

I participated in some online events, and in another instance recorded a performance here and shared it with organisers there, but there’s nothing like a live performance in front of an eager audience,” says the nagaswaram artiste, who has a steadily growing fan base in south India.

Those who heard him play Charukesi at a Chennai concert over two years ago have neither forgotten the rendition nor been able to appreciate other Charukesis since, without being reminded of his. The robust sound emanating from his wind instrument, sustained by long, full breaths, brimming with life and emotion, casts a spell on audiences.

For Sri Lankan artistes like him, performing in India defied the usual logistical complications of going abroad. The relatively friendly visa regime, innumerable flight options, and the short travel time — a Colombo-Chennai flight takes less than an hour, and a Jaffna-Chennai flight was introduced in 2019 — made travel fairly simple. I can’t wait to travel and perform there again once borders open up,” says Balamurugan.

Kandyan dance exponent and guru Upeka Chitrasena has performed across the world, but the audience in India, especially Chennai, is something else,” she says. Rows and rows of elderly people and children sit through performances, keeping taal and responding with spontaneous applause when they like something. It is rare to see that sort of engagement and passion.”

Chitrasena Dance Company

Collaboration with Nrityagram

The stronger magnet pulling her, however, is some 370 km away from Chennai. When she says she dearly misses India, she means she misses Nrityagram, the Odissi dance village near Bengaluru that has been second home for the renowned Sri Lankan artiste since 2003. This is the longest she has been away, given that she usually makes five or six trips a year. I stopped performing in 2011 and only teach now, so seeing dancers at Nrityagram learn and rehearse gives me the energy of my own performance days,” she says.

Artistes from the Colombo-based Chitrasena Dance Company, named after Upeka’s father, Sri Lanka’s pioneering Kandyan dance exponent, and the Nrityagram group have been collaborating for a decade now. Two productions, ‘Samhara’ (2012) and ‘Ahuti’ (2019), bring the two very different but delightfully complementary traditions, Kandyan and Odissi, in conversation. The pandemic meant that the two groups missed some joint performance tours last year, but they have stayed in touch all through. Their long professional and artistic collaboration has birthed precious friendships — like Chitrasena’s with Nrityagram’s artistic director and Odissi exponent Surupa Sen. Several trips across the Palk Strait from both sides, both planned and impromptu, have strengthened these ties.

It was 2019; artistes from the two dance schools were rehearsing for ‘Ahuti’ in Bengaluru. Surupa had casually mentioned to Chitrasena’s artistic director, Heshma Wignaraja, and principal dancer, Thaji Dias [both Chitrasena’s nieces], how lovely it would be to have Upeka Chitrasena for Guru Poornima the next day. I got a call on a Saturday evening from my nieces about this. And by 5 p.m. on Sunday, I was at Surupa’s doorstep, surprising her. I cannot forget her expression when she saw me there,” says Chitrasena, adding: So many memorable rehearsals, performances, conversations, and birthdays together — I miss all of those!” Her mother, the senior Kandyan dance exponent, choreographer and guru, Vajira Chitrasena, was chosen for the Padma Shri award in India last year, but the pandemic meant she could not travel to New Delhi to receive the honour.

Thivya Sujen

Colombo-based Bharatanatyam artiste and teacher Thivya Sujen has had different reasons to go Tamil Nadu every year. If she was not taking her Abhinayakshetra School of Dance’s productions there, she was visiting to work on the music score. It was our honour to collaborate with composers like Lalgudi G.J.R. Krishnan and Rajkumar Bharathi for our productions. I would spend about a fortnight there for the recordings,” she says.

Thivya also took her students who were preparing for their maiden stage performance to Chennai for the photoshoots and to get their costumes done. But what the dancer misses most is visiting her guru, C.V. Chandrasekhar, the veteran Bharatanatyam exponent. She had been especially looking forward to meeting him on his 85th birthday last May, but travel was shut down. She decided to mark the occasion in Sri Lanka by setting up the Global Association of Sri Lankan Bharatanatyam Artistes, a platform bringing together performers and teachers who were forced to leave the country during the anti-Tamil pogrom of 1983. She also organised online lectures with Indian artistes, such as Priyadarsini Govind, and began a virtual ‘Nattuvangam’ course, again periodically roping in Indian artistes. I believe the relationship between artistes of Sri Lanka and India must continue online until we can meet again in person,” she says.

Kambavarithy Jeyaraj

Literary meets

No one expected this sort of break,” says ‘Kambavarithy’ Ilankai Jeyaraj, a renowned Tamil scholar, who founded and helms the Kamban Kazhagam in Sri Lanka. Other than frequently travelling to India to participate in literary meets or to deliver lectures — sometimes even five times a month — Jeyaraj has been a prime force bringing senior Indian artistes and scholars to Sri Lanka every year. The Kamban Kazhagam’s ticket-free arts festivals, held in Colombo and Jaffna, are known for the huge crowds they draw. Their last festival was in early 2020, when playback singer S.P. Balasubrahmanyam was honoured.

We have invited Indian artistes since the mid-1990s, and over the years they have built a special bond with audiences here. They stay in our homes, eat with us, spend time with us… only such strong relationships built over time can brave an unprecedented situation like this pandemic,” says Jeyaraj.

Along with its branch in Australia, the Colombo Kamban Kazhagam held its literary meet online and has also begun sharing videos from its archives on its website. Meanwhile, Jeyaraj is remotely working with musician Bombay Jayashri, a regular and much-loved performer in Colombo and Jaffna, on an album of devotional verses.

Both artistes and audiences are yearning for interaction,” Jeyaraj says, hoping a physical festival might become possible this year.

The UNHRC resolution against SL applies to India more than to Sri Lanka with small context changes only.

March 26th, 2021

Dilrook Kannangara

This was why India abstained from voting. UNHRC will turn to India with the same set of demands very soon and India is keen to avoid an embarrassing situation by being party to it.

https://undocs.org/A/HRC/46/L.1/Rev.1

The paragraph about devolution of political authority must have sent a chill down India for sure. India revoked even limited devolution of political authority enjoyed by the people in Jammu and Kashmir. Now both states come under direct Indian central government rule. How can India preach devolution to Sri Lanka when India is reversing devolution against its own minorities!

India has not earned the Colombo Port Western Terminal in exchange for UNHRC support. It must be revoked.

The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), the attack dog of the UNHRC, has this to say about grave human rights violations in Jammu and Kashmir (in addition to the devolution matter).

https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/IN/KashmirUpdateReport_8July2019.pdf

Sounds familiar? Isn’t it a carbon copy of the OHCHR report on Sri Lanka? India has not implemented any of these since July 2019 and that is a good guide for Sri Lanka too.

Quoted from the report.

OHCHR recommends: To the Human Rights Council: Consider   the   findings   of   this   report, including   the   possible   establishment   of   a commission   of   inquiry   to   conduct   a   comprehensive   independent   international investigation into allegations of human rights violations in Kashmir.

To the authorities in India:

(a) Fully respect India’s international human rights law obligations in Indian-Administered Kashmir,

(b) Urgently repeal the Armed Forces (Jammu and Kashmir) Special Powers Act, 1990; and, in the meantime, immediately remove the requirement for prior central government permission to prosecute security forces personnel accused of human rights violations in civilian courts;

(c) Establish independent, impartial and credible investigations to probe all civilian killings which have occurred since July 2016, as well as obstruction of medical services during the 2016 unrest, arson attacks against schools and incidents of excessive use of force by security forces including serious injuries caused by the use of the pellet-firing shotguns;

(d) Investigate all deaths that have occurred in the context of security operations in Jammu and Kashmir following the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court of India;

(e) Investigate all cases of abuses committed by armed groups in Jammu and Kashmir, including the killings of minority Kashmiri Hindus since the late 1980s;

(f) Provide reparations and rehabilitation to all individuals injured and the family of those killed in the context of security operations;

(g) Investigate and prosecute all cases of sexual violence allegedly perpetrated by state and non-state actors, and provide reparations to victims;

(h) Bring into compliance with international human rights standards all Indian laws and standard operating procedures relating to the use of force by law enforcement and security entities, particularly the use of firearms: immediately order the end of the use of pellet-firing shotguns in Jammu and Kashmir for the purpose of crowd control;

(I) Amend the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 to ensure its compliance with international human rights law; 

(j) Release or, if appropriate, charge under applicable criminal offences all those held under administrative detention and ensure the full respect of standards of due process and fair trial guaranteed under International law;

(k) Treat any person below the age of 18 who is arrested in a manner consistent with the Convention on the Rights of the Child;

(l) Investigate all blanket bans or restrictions on access to the Internet and mobile telephone networks that were imposed in 2016, and ensure that such restrictions are not imposed in the future;

(m) End restrictions on the movement of journalists and arbitrary bans of the publication of newspapers in Jammu and Kashmir.

(n) Ensure independent, impartial and credible investigations into all unmarked graves in the state of Jammu and Kashmir as directed by the State Human Rights Commission; if necessary, seek assistance from the Government of India and /or the international community.  Expand the competence of the Jammu and Kashmir State Human Rights Commission to investigate all human rights violations and abuses in the state, including those allegedly committed by central security forces;

(o) Ensure people from Kashmir are not targeted or legally harassed in other parts of India on the basis of their actual or presumed identity;

(p) Ratify the International Convention for the Protection of all Persons from Enforced Disappearance, the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and its Optional Protocol,

(q) Introduce enabling domestic laws as recommended during India’s UPR in 2008, 2012 and 2017;

(r) In line with its standing invitation to the Special Procedures, accept the invitation requests of the almost 20 mandates that have made such requests; in particular, accept the request of the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances and facilitate its visit to India, including to Jammu and Kashmir; and

(s) Fully respect the right of self-determination of the people of Kashmir as protected under international law.

[Unquote]

Prerogatives following the Geneva Kangaroo Court decision

March 26th, 2021

MALINDA SENEVIRATN​E

Few countries can boast of anything close to the track record of Britain when it comes to gross human rights violations. Genocide and monumental plunder have marked the history of that country and indeed have been the main source of the wealth and sway its citizens and governments, respectively, have enjoyed over several centuries.

It is ironic then that this global bully (or rather the side-kick of the worst rogue state on earth, the USA) has led moves against Sri Lanka in Geneva. These moves can be traced back to the USA’s direct involvement (the involvement, following the ‘cesspool of bias’ descriptive of the UNHRC, has been largely behind-the-scenes stuff) in various vexatious allegations based not on evidence but hearsay. The evidence, as such there were, for example the missives of military attaches of the USA and UK in Colombo as well as the ICRC were disregarded and are still left out of the narrative.

Now, as it was then, it is about strategic interests. Then it was just the USA’s designs on the region. Now, in reduced circumstances it is the interests of the infamous ‘QUAD’ (USA, India, Japan and Australia) in counterpoint to the’Chinese Footprint Gonibilla.’ Ironically, the terrorist rump now masquerading as champions of human rights, i.e. the ex-LTTE groups who have rebranded themselves after the military defeat of the terrorists in 2009, are unhappy with the Resolution passed early this week. In that sense they find themselves in the same camp as the Sri Lankan government!  

However, the reasons for dismay are different. Sri Lanka believes it is vexatious persecution. The Government won’t say this, but it is really vexatious persecution by rogue states with sordid histories who turned the Human Rights Council into a kangaroo court.

The Tiger-rump is unhappy because the resolution hasn’t gone ga-ga with the now tired ‘Tamil genocide’ story but has instead been an exercise to further Quad objectives. The resolution is, admittedly, about the here and now. In other words it is about targeting the present government. If ‘war crimes’ was what it was all about then it is immaterial whether or not a US/UK friendly government is in power; it is a matter of principle, nothing else. However, the degree of vexation indicates clearly that things in Geneva are politically motivated.

The here and now. That’s an interesting factor. In the here and now the UK is almost at the tail end of a process to legislate the protection of service personnel in overseas operations. Not that they haven’t got away with all manner of crimes against humanity in the past of course. However, if tomorrow, the UK decides to invade Switzerland and some British soldier took Michelle Bachelet hostage, subjected her to torture (as advocated in interrogation manuals for British and US troops) and shot her thereafter, that country can resist censure at home by citing what is called the Protection from Vexatious Prosecution Bill. Vexation, after all, is a subjective term. As for censure in multilateral forums such as the Human Rights Council, it is about who calls the shots. There’s a cartel of rogue states who are ready to close ranks. They did so just the other day in what was essentially an Europe and North America combine against the rest of the world affair, buying off or silencing the objectors through bribe and threat just as was done in the infamous Green Rooms just prior to a vote being taken to bury the General Agreement on Trade and Tariff and to set up in its place the World Trade Organization.

What’s pertinent is that in the here and now, given the vexatious prosecution legislation, the Human Rights Council played dumb and dumber. It played blissfully ignorant or else knowingly pernicious. No one bothered to ask the British representatives if they’ve heard of the adage ‘charity begins at home.’ That’s international political economy, folks.

The further harassment of Sri Lanka that was legitimated is not about turning Sri Lanka into some kind of paradise when it comes to protecting human rights. It’s about arm-twisting the government into submitting to mechanisms that further Quad objectives or, failing which, wreck things to the point that destabilizes the country and as per top priority in the wish-list result in bringing in a pliant and indeed servile government.

The Human Rights Council has been hijacked by bullies. Sorry, the Human Rights Council was made by bullies, for bullies and with bullies. Bullies can keep changing goal posts until they can score.

All of this makes it all the more important for the government and the people of this country to get some basic things right. A government without the support of the people on Counts A, B and C, cannot defend the country and people on Count D. It goes without saying that a government that cares not about Count D will subject people to shameless servility. Of course they’ll call it some nice name. Like yahapalanaya. Or, as the Samagi Jana Balavegaya (which played dumb, dumber and dumbest when in power to allow the then government to compromised sovereignty via Resolution 30/1 in 2015) would put it ‘a balanced foreign policy.’ Such garbage is cheap.

We might end up there. This is why national security is inextricably linked to livelihood sustainability, protection of resources and an improved score on the Happiness Index.

The government has got the intelligence part of the equation right. The entire apparatus was almost dismantled by the previous government and to add insult to injury no stone was left unturned to demoralize the personnel in the intelligence services.

If anyone has any doubts about the success of this aspect of things, just consider the fact that countries like the UK, France, Germany and Italy are in lockdown right now, despite the bucks and vaccines. And the USA? A basket case if ever there was one, over and above the absolute misery that Washington inflicts on minorities in that racist and thieving trigger-happy nation.

Yes, they all voted against Sri Lanka, except the USA (the behind-the-scenes string-puller for European marionettes). How about Sri Lanka? The number of active Covid-19 cases have dropped from 10,000 to a little over 2,000. Things are getting back to normal. This would not have been possible if not for the tireless, 24/7 work ethic that marks the State Intelligence Service which readily accepted the burden of tracking and tracing, effectively complementing the excellent work of the health authorities in the state sector. STATE sector. Yes, that’s an emphasis that says something about private healthcare and privatization.  

And yet we have people like Nalin Bandara (MP-SJB) who will go out of the way to disparage the intelligence services. The likes of Bandara, knowingly or unknowingly play into the hands of anti-Sri Lankan (or, put another way, pro-Quad) forces for whom vexatious persecution is second nature. The relevant officers have taken Bandara to task, sending him letters of demand for damage caused. We won’t say anything more on the matter because it’s all about courts from now on. We don’t have to say anything more.

That kind of ‘security’ however is only one side of a many-sided story or rather a multi-faceted approach to national security. We need to, as mentioned above, ensure food security. We need the economy back on track. We need to set up and strengthen development banks and cooperative banks. We need models that are not crafted by people and nations interested only in furthering their interests and whose proposals, while hiding the fact, market servility as programs of prosperity. We need to take care of our resources. We need a new development model.

We cannot do any of this if we don’t have comprehensive knowledge of all things relevant to development, data most of all. If there are gaps they need to be filled. If reliability is an issue it has to be addressed. It can be done. It must be done.

Yes, managing foreign relations is important. It has to be framed by what can be done, what cannot be done, what should be done and what should not be done. The diplomats are well-equipped to do all this. They need to advise the politicians and more importantly politicians should be guided by the diplomats.

Citizens are not diplomats. Neither are political commentators. However, they all have the right to air their views. For example, on India. INDIA DID NOT STAND WITH SRI LANKA. India, in this crucial vote, by virtue of abstaining, was complicit. India did speak and the words were obnoxious. India harped about the 13th Amendment. The 13th Amendment was the issue of a marriage between Indian thuggery and Sri Lankan acquiescence, the former represented by Rajiv Gandhi and the latter by J R Jayewardene, one of the grandfathers of the SJB. India reneged on its part of the bargain but has the gumption to demand that Sri Lanka fulfill agreements made by a government in decline under duress!

India, geographically challenged, stood with the West, square in the middle of the Atlantic. Sri Lanka has nothing to gain by agreeing to terms of engagement slanted in India’s favor simply because the ‘friendship’ or ‘go-easy’ this might yield is in fact capitulation. It would compromise territorial integrity and sovereignty.

And in this context of India picking the West, it would not be imprudent for Sri Lanka to pick her West. The Western Container Terminal. A you keep yours, we keep ours kind of position.

As for the other Kangaroos, well they’ve all named themselves, haven’t they? Arms length, ladies and gentlemen, not closer! As for missives and statements and tweets, we don’t have to describe them each and every time, but here’s a word that would well inform policy maker and citizen: balderdash.

malindasenevi@gmail.com
[Malinda Seneviratne is the Director/CEO of the Hector Kobbekaduwa Agrarian Research and Training Institute. These are his personal views].

Wanted: An International Center on Vexatious Persecution

March 26th, 2021

Malinda Seneviratne

The vote on the resolution against Sri Lanka was adopted on Tuesdays at the 46th Session of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva. That slant was reflected in the vote as well. The resolution was passed 22-11 with 14 abstentions.

First let us examine the story told by the numbers. There were 40 co-sponsors, 12 of whom had voting rights. The vast majority of the co-sponsors were from Europe and North America. In essence, then, it was a WHITE Move (note: the history of white people when it comes to plunder, cultural erasure, genocide etc is known and it is NOT a thing of the past).
 The move was by rich, powerful and armed nations. It was a country-specific resolution. If it was a matter of principle that was being voted on, the result can be interpreted as a defeat for the architects. With all the bucks and guns at their disposal which can be and often are used as bait or threat, they ought to have secured near unanimous support. They did not. Here’s another number that’s gone under the radar: 42 of 46 nations in the Human Rights Council were plundered and victims of massive human rights violations by the 47th, the United Kingdom.

Now it can be argued that the majority (36) did not stand with Sri Lanka. The Samagi Jana Balavegaya (SJB) has put it down to a foreign policy failure by the current government: ‘The incumbent government has managed its foreign relations extremely irrationally. Instead of embarking on a careful and thoughtful process of diplomatically convincing the world that Sri Lanka is willing to take its human rights obligations seriously, it embarked on an obnoxious and intransigent campaign. The government lacks coherence, competence, and good faith in dealing with the international community.’

Interesting, considering that Sri Lanka was forced to do a back-to-the-wall battle principally on account of the foreign policy of the yahapalana government, in which the SJB’s previous avatar, the United National Party, was the key player. What the SJB stalwarts supported between 2015 and 2019 was anything but rational. If there was care and thoughtfulness it was about how best to capitulate. A government can tell the truth and if it is not to the liking of its detractors, home and abroad, that exercise can be called ‘obnoxious’ and ‘intransigent.’

The SJB’s boys and girls played ‘good boy and good girl’ (meaning, ‘yes, we will submit to your version of our reality, good lords and ladies’). They weren’t called intransigent for obvious reasons. They toed the line. They were coherent in genuflection. They were competent slaves. They purchased happily the good-faith rhetoric of the bad-faith bosses.  One cannot expect anything from the SJB other than this kind of crude and obnoxious salivation. If they truly believe the UNHRC narrative then they should take issue with Sarath Fonseka, the Commander of the very Army that is accused of wrongdoing. The very same individual who received the vast majority of votes cast by the so-called victims, the Tamils in the North and East, in the 2010 Presidential Election.
It is part of a carefully designed, thoughtful vexatious persecution exercise with a clear end-point: a Sri Lanka that cheers and supports US-led strategic interests in the region. This is why the US Ambassador pleaded with the likes of the former Northern Province Chief Minister to go easy on the previous government (yes, ‘human rights’ is a political tool and that’s its principal function in Geneva, especially with respect to Sri Lanka).  

Let’s move to the implications. The US Government, which called the Council ‘A cesspool of bias’ not too long ago has immediately moved to capitalize on the resolution.  US State Department Principal Deputy Spokesperson Jalina Porter has said a mouthful: ‘The United States co-sponsored this resolution and together with the international community calls on Sri Lanka to safeguard the rights of ethnic and religious minorities, human rights defenders, and civil society actors, and to take credible and meaningful steps to address its past, promote reconciliation, and guarantee equal access to justice for all its people.’

This statement can be rubbished on account of absolute absence of morality, coming from a country with a long and sordid past and and equally horrible present with regard to safeguarding rights of ethnic and religious minorities, civil society acts and equal access to justice for all its people. She has said that the long-term security and prosperity of Sri Lanka depends on respecting human rights today and committing to peace and reconciliation for the future. Clearly, security and prosperity in the USA, by the same token, calls for utmost pessimism. Jalina Porter should know. She’s from Louisiana and she’s African American.

Porter has, not unexpectedly, saluted the resolution’s requirement for the OHCHR to ‘collect and preserve evidence for future accountability.’  This, after all, was a key element of the resolution.
Now, let’s backtrack a bit. The resolution was built on a long and vexatious process of mal-intent beginning with the Darusman Report. The principal sources quoted extensively in that report will not be released into the public domain until 2031. In other words it was essentially a trial in absentia or rather a trial in anonymity. Reliability cannot even be questioned until then! On the other hand, the Darusman Panel as well as all other groups which have since ‘reported’ to the Council have deliberately and vexatiously REFUSED to take into account the missives of the ICRC and the military attaches of the US and UK missions in Colombo.Rest assured, Sri Lanka’s version of matters will not be heard. So much for those who say ‘Sri Lanka did not do enough to convince the member states.’ Sri Lanka could get god him/herself (if such an entity exists as believed by and constitutionally affirmed by some of the nations that stood and continues to stand against Sri Lanka) to tell the truth, to no avail. 

There will be more to come, not that this resolution (non-binding though it is) has been passed. There will be oodles of bucks to collect, collate and creatively present all manner of lies. Individuals will be targeted by individual countries. Matters will be moved to the General Assembly. The circus will go on.

What can Sri Lanka do? Two things.
 First, the government has to realize one important truism: Only a government that has the full backing of the people can resist these kinds of vexatious prosecutions. Such backing can only be obtained if the government trusts the people, listens to the people and takes care of the people AND the land. In other words only a government that affirms in word and deed notions of sustainable livelihoods and the security of all the natural resources of the land can protect such a people and indeed itself.  

Second, the government should realize that one way of winning over other countries similarly persecuted or are potential victims of similarly pernicious moves is to take a strong and principled stand against vexatious persecution.  In other words is the cesspool of bias wants to compile lies, then Sri Lanka could compile all the truths that have not even been footnoted in Geneva, not just in relation to this country, but all the countries in the world. A vast repository can be developed. 

And therefore, a proposal to set up an International Center on Vexatious Prosecution headquartered in Sri Lanka, should be seriously considered.

malindasenevi@gmail.com.

THE GENERAL ELECTION OF 1956 Part 9B

March 26th, 2021

KAMALIKA PIERIS

It is a wonder that the 1956 government was able to achieve anything at all, considering the obstacles the MEP government had to face, said analysts. First, there were natural disasters.  An unprecedented drought  in 1956  and   unprecedented floods    in 1957.

Then there were two ethnic riots, the Gal Oya riots of June 1956, and two years later the 1958 riots, starting in May 24 1958. Emergency rule was declared from May, 1958 to March 1959.  There was Press censorship and all night curfew.

There has been government meddling in these riots. Merril Gunaratne reported that the IGP Osmund de Silva had stormed into a cabinet meeting after 1958 riots and   submitted his letter of resignation, accusing government MPs of having interfered with the lawful actions of the police during the riots.

The MEP   itself was very unstable. Bandaranaike had cobbled together all sorts of disparate groups into one coalition. MEP was not a political party it was a Peramuna, consisting of an assorted group of parties and persons,   explained Meegama. MEP did not last long as a political party. It started in 1956 and was dissolved in 1959.

Meegama observed that VLSSP was a party of socialists. Its two ministers, Philip and William Silva were both veterans of the international socialist movement. They looked at problems in a systematic and scientific manner. The SLFP on the other hand     was a home grown populist party, muddling through crises as they came.

The 1956 Cabinet was also an impossible mixture of opposites. Philip Gunawardene, William Silva, and TB Ilangaratne were socialists who wished to make radical changes.  They were opposed by W.Dahanayake, CP de Silva, and Stanley de Zoysa.  CP de Silva has worked closely with DS Senanayake on his Minneriya project and had been persuaded to join the SLFP by H Sri Nissanka. Stanley de Zoysa was a business man. Stanley de Zoysa sported a monocle and wore stylish English cut clothes.   

Bandaranaike was also in the peculiar position of finding himself opposed by both the Left (LSSP) and the Right (UNP) simultaneously. This is probably quite rare.   From the day the MEP government was formed, the right mobilized all its forces to topple the MEP government, observed Meegama. By 1958, Dudley and JR were regrouping the UNP to comeback into power.

LSSP was equally active. There was a spate of   strikes organized by the LSSP and CP in the port, postal and telecommunication services and in the tea estates. Labor unions controlled by LSSP and CP and estate unions controlled by CWC and DWC   participated. These unions were restive. They had not received what they had hoped for.

Within the MEP, also there was similar dissatisfaction. Changes were not taking place fast enough. There was rising heat against Bandaranaike at the annual SLFP convention held in Kurunegala in 1959.  The Maha Sangha was also getting restive and impatient. They were exasperated with Bandaranaike‘s inability to deliver.

The Eksath Bhikshu Peramuna had a meeting at Punchi Borella In 1959   , presided over by Bandaranaike. Ven. Talapavila Seelawansa, Baddegama Wimalawamsa, Mirisse Gunasiri and Mapitigama Buddharakkita were present on the stage.   

Talapavila Seelawansa made a powerful speech. Three years have gone by        only two more left. The   government has not honored a single one of its pledges.  Work in government office is done in English. We have got him down day to teach him how to do his job properly, not to chant pirit. This government the lacks the strength to implement its policies, said Talapavila Seelawansa.

SWRD got up, interrupted the speech and asked angrily, Did you call me here to scold me.   Seelawansa   stopped speaking and sat down. SWRD was persuaded to stay, reported Evans Cooray.  If he had not stopped the discussion, Bandaranaike would have had to listen to a barrage of criticism.

SWRD found it impossible to get anywhere, due to the political storms he encountered every week, observed Tarzie Vittachi.  Particularly in the third quarter of 1958 things began to become very difficult for Bandaranaike. There were frequent convulsions in the cabinet, said Bradman Weerakoon.

The right wing members of the MEP were strongly opposed to Philip Gunawardene’s socialist reforms. Bandaranaike tried to pacify them, by taking away some subjects from Philip but this was not enough. They wanted Philip out, and it appears that they wanted him out before Bandaranaike was assassinated. Philip may have replaced SWRD as Prime Minister.

Philip Gunawardene’s policies were unpopular with the mercantile sector as well. Sunday Times May 17 1959 said that mudalalies, shop owners and others in trade circles are rejoicing over the removal of Food Department from Philip. 

Matters came to a head over the Cooperative Development Bank Bill present by Philip Gunawardene to Cabinet in November 1958.This Bill would set up a fund to assist the hundreds of MPCS that Philip’s ministry had set up throughout the country. For the first time a Left party would have a rural base.  There was mounting opposition, but Philip would permit no compromise.

 On 6th May 1959 there was a revolt in the Cabinet. 10 ministers led by Stanley de Zoysa said they would not attend Cabinet meetings until Philip was dismissed.  The Cabinet meeting scheduled for May 13 1959 was cancelled. Stanley de Zoysa and Dahanayake were threatening to resign unless Philip left.

Philip Gunawardene and William Silva resigned on May 19.1959. When Philip resigned, all 12 members of the VLSSP  left. This included Hela Havula .  Seven members of the SLFP also left. That was the end of the MEP.

A cabinet of 16 ministers consisting of only SLFP MPs was sworn in on June 9 .The Government continued with a slender majority. It lacked the power to rule effectively as it lacked the votes. Government could barely hold its own in Parliament and depended on 5 nominated members.  The Right though victorious was disturbed, said Meegama.  Bandaranaike also had to be eliminated. Bandaranaike was assassinated in September 1959.

Evans Cooray observed that Bandaranaike had one foot among the masses and the other foot among the bourgeoisie. [He made the mistake of] attempting to pacify both extremes. He should have taken a position between these two extremes, said Evans.

SWRD was  a man besieged, standing all alone, fighting with his back to the wall, with whatever resources he had which were miniscule, compare to the massive  forces of the right, the left and the English speaking westernized elite range against him,  said HLD Mahindapala. (Continued)

NEWS‘UK suppressed wartime HC dispatches unfavorable to Western strategy at UNHRC’

March 26th, 2021

By Shamindra Ferdinando Courtesy The Island

… 20-year UN ban on examination of accusations travesty of justice: ex-CJ

Former Chief Justice Sarath Nanda Silva (1999-2009), on Thursday (18), alleged that the British government had suppressed diplomatic cables sent by its wartime Defence Attaché Lt. Colonel Anthony Gash from the British High Commission, Colombo, because they ran counter to the claims made by the western bloc as regards Sri Lanka at the Geneva-based United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC).

Appearing on ‘Get Real’ on Derana 24×7, anchored by Johnney Mahieash, the 41st CJ explained the British, in spite of being a member of the UNHRC in addition to spearheading the Core Group, had no option but to suppress credible information as part of the overall strategy to sustain the campaign against Sri Lanka.

The UNHRC consists of 47 countries divided into five zones with the UK categorised along with Austria, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands (Western Europe and other States). A vote on the Core Group’s resolution, backed by the US, is expected early next week at the end of the 46th session of the UNHRC on March 23. The session commenced on Feb 22.

Displaying a set of highly censored British diplomatic cables that dealt with the situation on the Vanni front in 2009 (January-May) made available by Lord Naseby, who obtained them following a protracted legal procedure, the former CJ expressed shock and dismay at the British choosing to suppress information provided by a person who enjoyed diplomatic status.

Silva said Lt. Colonel Gash had been stationed in Colombo during that period to provide information sought by the British pertaining to the conflict. Having perused the documents and examined the context in which they were written, the former CJ asserted that the Gash papers gave an accurate picture.

In an exclusive interview with The Island, in Sept 2019, Lord Naseby said that he struggled for nearly three years to secure the dispatches from the UK government after making the first formal request in Nov 2014.

Responding to another query posed by Mahieash, the former CJ questioned the rationale in the UK depriving a House of Lords member material relevant to an issue the UK government was deeply concerned about. The outspoken former CJ explained that for the British the dispatches from Colombo couldn’t have posed any security concerns though their disclosure was certainly detrimental to their Geneva agenda.

Referring to Gash dispatches again, former CJ Silva said that in spite of blackening sections of the reports from Colombo, the person assigned the task carelessly left some crucial words intact one could comprehend what had been censored.

Lord Naseby told The Island that he personally handed over sets of Gash reports to the then President Maithripala Sirisena’s administration as well as the Joint Opposition (now SLPP) in 2017. The Conservative Party politician regretted the disclosure of the vital material hadn’t been properly utilized by Sri Lanka. Lord Naseby revealed the existence of the Gash papers on Oct 12, 2017 in the House of Lords.

Comparing the LTTE with the Irish Republican Army, the former CJ pointed out the wartime British Defence Attaché’s comment on the LTTE employing foreign mercenaries to mount air attacks in Colombo and the Katunayake airbase, where Sri Lanka’s precious fighter squadrons were based at. The former CJ referred to specific reference to the LTTE targeting the Israeli supplied Kfir aircraft based at Katunayake at a crucial time of the war against the LTTE. Reference was also made to the LTTE having seven airstrips in the northern theatre of operations and its failure to use a fourth aircraft in its arsenal in the absence of a mercenary.

Sri Lanka brought the war to a successful conclusion in May 2009.

The former CJ said that another reason for the British to suppress Gash papers was that the British official officially assigned the task of keeping London informed of the developments here, presented a picture of the Sri Lankan military quite opposite to what they propagated. In the wake of Gash/Lord Naseby disclosure, the UN Panel of Experts (PoE) report based on unsubstantiated allegations was in tatters, the former CJ said.

The PoE issued its report on March 31, 2011.

The former CJ said that British diplomatic dispatches on the basis of UN reports explained how the LTTE deployed forcibly recruited ‘unwilling recruits’ in its desperate counter offensives as the fighting entered the final phase.

The former CJ stressed that the British should have disclosed all available information to ensure a free and fair inquiry. Sarath Nanda Silva was responding to the British declaration in February this year that they didn’t furnish Gash reports to the UNHRC nor did the Geneva body asked for them.

The former CJ alleged that the British were pursuing a politically motivated agenda. In the wake of his interview with Derana 24×7, The Island sought the former CJ’s opinion on measures that could be taken to ascertain the truth as regards the primary allegation namely the killing of 40,000 civilians (PoE, paragraph 137). The UK led Core Group which includes Germany and Canada could call for dispatches from Defence Advisors/Defence Attaches from other countries having diplomatic missions in Colombo. They could easily verify the Gash reports by comparing them with dispatches from other missions, the former CJ said, pointing out that the UN and ICRC, too, could furnish their reports.

The former CJ said that the British government actions had in fact embarrassed the ordinary people who believed in their supposed sense of justice and fair play.

The former CJ said that he was appalled by the PoE placed the number of dead at 40,000 in spite of UN report that dealt with the situation therein from August 2008 to May 13, 2009 having asserted only 7,721 perished on the Vanni front (both civilians and combatants/paragraph 134). He also pointed out the PoE declaration the unsubstantiated accusations that led to Geneva actions couldn’t be examined till 2031 (paragraph 23) revealed that due attention hadn’t been given to the high profile anti-Sri Lanka project. The PoE/UN prohibited the examination of accusations for a period of 20 years from 2011. Pointing out the discrepancy in varying figures quoted by interested parties, the former CJ said that wartime US Defence Advisor Lt. Col. Lawrence Smith’s revelation at the 2011 Colombo Defence Seminar could be utilized along with Gash reports to carefully re-examine the accusations.

The US official denied alleged war crimes, including battlefield executions, the former CJ said, pointing out that the US denial was made just a couple of months after the release of PoE report widely called the Darusman report. In fact, Geneva should have asked member states and other countries especially the US and India to provide their defence advisors’ dispatches to help its investigations. The Tamil Diaspora demanding justice never asked for those reports because all knew what would happen to politically motivated Geneva actions if the reports reached the public.

The former CJ also referred to a Wikileaks revelation that ICRC told the US in 2009 Sri Lanka military could have finished off the LTTE if the civilian factor was not taken into consideration. The bottom line is that the case against Sri Lanka had been exposed by the officials of the same countries, the former CJ said, urging the government to take a fresh look at all available information/evidence.

The former CJ told Derana 24/7 that cases shouldn’t be won by suppressing information/evidence. The former CJ further pointed out how a section of the media in early 2007 revealed the UN suppressing the LTTE detaining two UN Tamil employees for helping civilians to escape to the government controlled area. The UN acknowledged that New York was not briefed of the developments here, the former CJ said, urging those shedding crocodile tears to revisit Sri Lanka accountability issue.

Govt. tells parliament UNHRC resolution illegal

March 26th, 2021

By Saman Indrajith Courtesy The Island

The government yesterday told Parliament that the recently ratified UNHRC resolution against Sri Lanka was illegal.

Foreign Minister Dinesh Gunawardena said that the resolution was an attempt to interfere in Sri Lanka’s internal affairs. Sri Lanka considers the resolution unwarranted. This resolution against Sri Lanka is illegal.”

Minister Gunawardena said that Sri Lanka was a sovereign state and the government would protect the country’s sovereignty.

Gunawardena said that the new resolution had not been backed by a majority of the UNHRC members.

Minister Gunawardena tabled the resolution in Parliament along with details of the co-sponsors of the document.

However, the Minister said that Sri Lanka would continue to engage with the UN agencies.

The resolution co-sponsored by the former government had been a great betrayal, the Foreign Minister said, adding that the Government would address accountability issues in Sri Lanka through a domestic mechanism.

Given below is the full speech the Foreign Minister made in Parliament:

The United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva adopted by a vote, the draft Resolution titled Promoting reconciliation, accountability, and human rights in Sri Lanka” (A/HRC/46/L.1/Rev.1) tabled by a ‘Core Group’ of countries, on 23 March 2021 during its 46th Session. Out of the 47 Members of the Council, 22 countries voted in favour, 11 voted against and 14 abstained. It is implicit from the voting result that the majority of the Council did not support this Resolution.

At this meeting, Sri Lanka, as the country concerned, reiterated its position on this Resolution against the country, and the politically motivated process behind it, as has been briefed to the Human Rights Council before, including through my statement at the High-Level Segment of the 43rd Session, in February last year. Sri Lanka rejected this Resolution which had no consensus and requested the Members of the Human Rights Council to reject this Resolution by a vote.

I have provided a briefing on this matter to the Cabinet of Ministers itself.

Sri Lanka considers the draft resolution to be unwarranted, unjustified and in violation of the relevant Articles of the United Nations Charter, in particular Article 2(7) and relevant Sections of the United Nations Resolution 60/251 that provides for the mandate of the Human Rights Council. For the above reasons, this Resolution against Sri Lanka is illegal.

The very first sentence of the Resolution states: Guided by the purpose and principles of the Charter of the United Nations…” Having said so, the Resolution goes on to violate Article 2 (7) of the Charter which states: Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state…”

This intervention denies a state the right enshrined in the Charter and other UN instruments in respect of the right of its People to choose its system of governance, developing the institutions to govern it, and developing arrangements to meet national challenges such as the COVID-19 pandemic in keeping with its civilizational values within provisions of the Constitution.

Acting beyond the Mandate granted to the UNHRC by UN Resolution 60/251 and recognize the importance of preserving evidence. Instead, to promote and protect Human Rights; to make recommendations relating to human rights violations; and be guided by universality, impartiality, objectivity and non-selectivity”.

To address accountability through a Domestic Mechanism and address violations of International Humanitarian Law, and derogated International Human Rights laws within the context of International Laws acceptable to the Community of Nations.

This Resolution against Sri Lanka is pushed forward at the behest of a few countries, representing one part of the world without the consent of Sri Lanka. It is therefore unhelpful and divisive. There is no moral right to interfere into affairs of a sovereign country in this manner.

No country has a greater interest in bringing about reconciliation among its peoples than Sri Lanka – a point that has repeatedly been emphasized during proceedings of the Human Rights Council.

The list of co-sponsors of the resolution amply demonstrates the divisive nature of such country-specific” initiatives and it is clear from the result of the vote that there is no consensus within the Council on this resolution.

The resolution adopted on 23rd of March is intrusive of the sovereignty of the people of Sri Lanka and the core values of the UN Charter. It will have an adverse effect on the ongoing efforts to maintain peace, reconciliation and economic development in the country. It will lead to polarization of Sri Lankan society, contrary to the insistence of its proponents that it will bring about reconciliation.

Sri Lanka categorically rejects the unprecedented proposal in this resolution to expand the role of the OHCHR. This sets a dangerous precedent and will have wide ranging implications for all countries. The Council cannot assume tasks not assigned to it by the UN General Assembly in resolution 60/251 or subsequent resolutions.

This Resolution is based on the rejected report by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights on Sri Lanka presented to the 46th Session of the HRC which violates the principles of sovereign equality of all states and non-interference in internal affairs. The Government of Sri Lanka has rejected this Report pointing out that, among other things, it is one-sided and exceeds the mandate of the UN Human Rights Council. It contains sweeping recommendations unsubstantiated and unwarranted comments of essentially political nature which no self-respecting sovereign country can accept. It has been compiled within months after the formation of a new Government in Sri Lanka, without any field visit, while the whole world was grappling with the ongoing global pandemic.

A well-orchestrated propaganda campaign was launched against Sri Lanka ahead of the 46th Session of the Human Rights Council. This campaign was carried out with extensive focus on Sri Lanka while reports pertaining to the situations in over 10 other countries were presented at the 46th Session of the HRC. The synchronized content of the propaganda against Sri Lanka and the exploitation of the OHCHR mechanisms in doing so, demonstrated a clear case of a pre-meditated endeavour.

I wish to recall that last year I have briefed this House of the reasons which led to the withdrawal from the co-sponsorship of the HRC Resolution 40/1 and its preceding Resolutions 34/1 and 30/1, which was announced at the 43rd Session of the Human Rights Council in February last year. It is unfortunate that the unconstitutional action of co-sponsorship of a resolution against Sri Lanka by the previous Government brought to a halt the comprehensive post-conflict development process which included a domestic reconciliatory process.

This new Resolution in an unwarranted manner seeks to interfere in all matters that are domestic affairs of a sovereign country. We questioned the members of the UN whether Sri Lanka represents a case warranting the immediate attention of the Human Rights Council. Sri Lanka has only defeated a secessionist terrorist campaign, and acted within its legal rights to defend its territorial integrity.

Sri Lanka regrets that this Resolution seeks to create a perception of discrimination and marginalization of its people which is far from the truth. Issues affecting the people of Sri Lanka are common to all people irrespective of their ethnicity or religion. The Government is determined to achieve its main targets to improve the lives of the poor despite these distractions.

No sovereign government is bound to work according to external prescriptions but be guided by the democratic aspirations of its own people. Sri Lanka has a well-established, time-honored legal system which is capable of ensuring dispensation of justice according to the constitution of Sri Lanka.

The government remains committed to protect those who have made immeasurable sacrifices to neutralize terrorism, protect the territorial integrity of the country and to regain for all people in Sri Lanka the most cherished of all rights, right to life.

It is regrettable that the proponents of the Resolution seek to create an ambiguous mechanism with funds of millions of USD at a time of severe financial constraints faced by the UN. We call upon the proponents of this Resolution to divest the money allocated for the implementation of this unprecedented proposal to improve the lives of the people affected by the conflict. This huge amount of funds is sufficient to build thousands of houses in the areas affected by the conflict, possibly to vaccinate the population of the entire Jaffna peninsula against the Covid19, or to provide to a whole Province, drinking water.

As I mentioned earlier, I made the position of the Government on this politically motivated process on the country clear, and undertook deliverable commitments in keeping with Sri Lanka’s domestic and international obligations, at the 43rd Session of the UN Human Rights Council. The Council has been well briefed on all measures taken and the progress made under challenging circumstances amidst a global pandemic within the relatively short period of time since then. We have provided detailed updates to the OHCHR in December 2020 as well as in January 2021 on the progress of implementation of commitments that Sri Lanka had undertaken such as continuity of the existing mechanisms, appointment of a special commission of inquiry headed by a Supreme court judge, achieving the SDGs, progress made in returning lands, demining and creating new avenues of livelihoods.

Reasons for this political campaign against Sri Lanka may vary from their domestic electoral compulsions to geopolitical interests. It is regrettable that countries with vested interests seek to achieve their political and strategic ambitions either through political destabilization or economic deprivation of the less influential countries of the global South, using the Human Rights Council as a tool.

We are aware that some of the countries which stood by Sri Lanka at this vote withstood immense pressure on them in doing so. We thank all countries who braved such adversity to reject the Resolution.

We are also mindful that some of Sri Lanka’s sincere friends were constrained to abstain. We thank them also for sharing with us their principled stands, and remaining neutral. In this context, Sri Lanka is of the view that this vote provided an opportunity for the member countries of the United Nations to re-assess whether the Human Rights Council is keeping with its guiding principles or not.

Despite the vote of this Resolution against Sri Lanka, Sri Lanka will pursue its domestic mechanisms aimed at bringing about reconciliation and a lasting peace. As briefed earlier Sri Lanka will continue to engage constructively with the UN and its agencies in the same spirit of cooperation that have stood for over six decades for the betterment of its people, including through the achievement of Sustainable Development Goals, in keeping with domestic priorities and policies as well as international obligations and undertakings.”

One more Covid-19 death reported in Sri Lanka

March 26th, 2021

Courtesy Adaderana

The Director General of Health Services confirms one more Covid-19 related death while this brings the death toll due to the virus pandemic in the country to 558.

The deceased is 70-year-old male from Mathugama who had been transferred from the Kalutara District General Hospital to the Homagama Base Hospital after testing positive for Covid-19.

He had passed away at that hospital on March 25 due to heart disease and Covid-19 pneumonia. 

Coronavirus: daily case count climbs to 260

March 26th, 2021

Courtesy Adaderana

The Epidemiology Unit of the Health Ministry says that another 94 persons have tested positive for COVID-19 increasing the total number of cases reported within the day to 260.

This brings the tally of coronavirus cases identified in the country to 91,561 thus far while total recoveries has reached 88,145.

Presently there are 2,859 patients who are being treated for Covid-19 at hospitals and treatment centers.

CID arrests two Madrasa teachers for giving weapons training to school children

March 26th, 2021

Courtesy Adaderana

The Criminal Investigations Department (CID) has arrested two Madrasa school teachers on charges of giving weapons training to school children in Puttalam.

The arrests were made following a directive from Attorney General Dappula De Livera, the AG’s coordinating officer said.

SLSI responds to allegations over unhealthy coconut oil

March 26th, 2021

Courtesy Adaderana

The Sri Lanka Standards Institution (SLSI) today rejected as totally fabricated and false” the allegations in the media and social media claiming that senior officials of the SLSI had authorized the sale of unhealthy coconut oil imported to the country by four importers. 

SLSI, being the standards body for quality to the nation, will not compromise the set standards for any commodity or material that will be detrimental to the lives and livelihoods of Sri Lankans, its Director General Dr. Siddhika Senaratne said. 

SLSI continuously conducts laboratory testing for Aflatoxin in coconut oil imported into the country by all importers to ascertain that it conforms to the set standard of 10micro grams/Kg.” 

The statement said that contrary to false social/media reports, 13 containers of Coconut oil have not been approved for sales to consumers by any authority, namely DG SL Customs, DG SLSI and Health Ministry (Food Control) unit. 

The Consumer Affairs Authority is also carrying out a stringent watch on these imports,” the DG said. 

The 4 said importers namely Ali Brothers Put Ltd, Sena Mills Refineries, Edirisinghe Edible Oils and Katana Refineries are long standing importers of Oil and their samples are under test for which results will be released within a few days.” 

Based on the test results, SLSI together with the Ministry of Health (Food Control Unit) will provide the necessary instructions to SL Customs for sale or re-export of the above imports.” 

Russia to resume commercial flights to Sri Lanka next month

March 26th, 2021

Courtesy Adaderana

Russia has decided to resume commercial flights to six countries including Sri Lanka from the 1st of April, the country’s emergency response centre said on Thursday (March 25).

Accordingly, commercial flights to Germany (Frankfurt-Moscow/St Petersburg-Frankfurt/ Moscow-Berlin), Venezuela (Moscow-Caracas), Syria (Moscow-Damascus), Tajikistan (Moscow-Dushanbe), Uzbekistan (Moscow-Tashkent) and Sri Lanka (Moscow-Colombo) will recommence from the aforementioned date.

Reportedly, regular international roundtrip flights between Moscow and Colombo are scheduled to operate once a week.

The Russian government reached the decision after a discussion on the epidemiological situation in individual countries and in agreement with Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin.

Russia suspended international flights in March last year following the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic but has since resumed a selected number of routes.

-with inputs from agencies 

The Report on Human Rights Violations in the United States in 2020

March 25th, 2021

By Xinhua

The State Council Information Office of the People’s Republic of China March 2021

Foreword
“I can’t breathe!” — George Floyd

“The scenes (the U.S. Capitol building violence) we have seen are the result of lies and more lies, of division and contempt for democracy, of hatred and rabble-rousing — even from the very highest levels.” — German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier

In 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic wreaked havoc around the world, posing a major threat to human security. The virus respects no borders, nor does the epidemic distinguish between races. To defeat the epidemic requires mutual help, solidarity and cooperation among all countries. However, the United States, which has always considered itself an exception and superior, saw its own epidemic situation go out of control, accompanied by political disorder, inter-ethnic conflicts, and social division. It further added to the human rights violations in the country, the so-called “city upon a hill” and “beacon of democracy.”

— The epidemic went out of control and turned into a human tragedy due to the government’s reckless response. By the end of February 2021, the United States, home to less than 5 percent of the world’s population, accounted for more than a quarter of the world’s confirmed COVID-19 cases and nearly one-fifth of the global deaths from the disease. More than 500,000 Americans lost their lives due to the virus.

— Disorder in American democratic institutions led to political chaos, further tearing the fabric of society apart. Money-tainted politics distorted and suppressed public opinion, turning elections into a “one-man show” of the wealthy class and people’s confidence in the American democratic system dropped to the lowest level in 20 years. Amid increasing political polarization, hate politics evolved into a national plague, and the Capitol was stormed in post-election riots.

— Ethnic minority groups suffered systematic racial discrimination and were in a difficult situation. People of color made up about one-third of all minors under the age of 18 in the United States but two-thirds of all of the country’s imprisoned minors. African Americans are three times as likely as whites to be infected with the coronavirus, twice as likely to die from COVID-19, and three times as likely to be killed by the police. One in four young Asian Americans has been the target of racial bullying.

— Gun trade and shooting incidents hit a record high, and people’s confidence in social order waned. Americans bought 23 million guns in 2020 against the background of an out-of-control epidemic, accompanied by racial justice protests and election-related conflicts, a surge of 64 percent compared with 2019. First-time gun buyers exceeded 8 million. More than 41,500 people were killed in shooting incidents across the United States in the year, an average of more than 110 a day, and there were 592 mass shootings nationwide, an average of more than 1.6 a day.

— George Floyd, an African American, died after being brutally kneeled on his neck by a white police officer, sparking a national outcry. Widespread protests for racial justice erupted in 50 states. The U.S. government suppressed demonstrators by force, and more than 10,000 people were arrested. A large number of journalists were attacked and arrested for no reason.

— The gap between the rich and the poor widened, with the people at the bottom of society living in misery. The epidemic led to mass unemployment. Tens of millions of people lost health insurance coverage. One in six Americans and one in four American children were at risk of hunger. Vulnerable groups became the biggest victims of the government’s reckless response to the epidemic.

The U.S. government, instead of introspecting on its own terrible human rights record, kept making irresponsible remarks on the human rights situation in other countries, exposing its double standards and hypocrisy on human rights. Standing at a new crossroads, mankind is faced with new, grave challenges. It is hoped that the U.S. side will show humility and compassion for the suffering of its own people, drop hypocrisy, bullying, “Big Stick” and double standards, and work with the international community to build a community with a shared future for humanity.

I. Incompetent Pandemic Containment Leads to Tragic Outcome

The United States claimed to be most abundant in medical resources and healthcare capacity, yet its response to the COVID-19 pandemic was chaotic, causing it to lead the world in the numbers of confirmed COVID-19 cases and related deaths. 

Incompetent pandemic response led to dire consequences. A tally by Johns Hopkins University showed that as of the end of February 2021, the United States has registered more than 28 million confirmed COVID-19 cases, with related deaths exceeding 500,000. With a population of less than 5 percent of the world’s total, the United States accounted for more than 25 percent of all the confirmed cases and nearly 20 percent of the deaths. On Dec. 20, 2020, CNN reported that the state of California alone had reported 1.845 million COVID-19 cases and 22,599 deaths, which translates to roughly 4,669 known cases and 57 deaths for every 100,000 residents. Even these numbers don’t give the whole picture of the state, because many cases, including mild or asymptomatic infections, had not been diagnosed. Had the American authorities taken science-based measures to contain the pandemic, this could have been avoided. But since they had not, the pandemic, as epidemiologist and former head of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) William Foege had put it, is “a slaughter” to the United States.

National leaders ignored warnings from experts and downplayed the seriousness of the pandemic. According to the timeline of COVID-19 pandemic in the United States released by media outlets including The New York Times and The Washington Post, the Trump administration had repeatedly ignored alarms regarding the risks of the pandemic. In early January 2020, a National Security Council office had already received intelligence reports predicting the spread of the virus to the United States. In a Jan. 29, 2020 memo, then White House trade adviser Peter Navarro projected that a coronavirus pandemic might lead to as many as half a million deaths and trillions of dollars in economic losses. A number of health officials, including then Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar, and medical experts also warned of the possibility of a pandemic in the United States. None of the aforementioned warnings brought the imminent pandemic to the Trump administration’s attention. Instead, the administration focused on controlling the message, and released misleading signals to the public by claiming “the risk of the virus to most Americans was very low,” suggesting that the coronavirus is no worse than the common flu, and stating the virus will “miraculously go away” when the weather gets warmer. Thus, the country lost crucial weeks for pandemic prevention and control. An article published on the website of The New York Times on April 13, 2020 commented that, then American leader’s “preference for following his gut rather than the data cost time, and perhaps lives.”

Government inaction led to uncontrolled pandemic spread. “There’s no need for that many to have died. We chose, as a country, to take our foot off the gas pedal. We chose to, and that’s the tragedy.” So commented David Hayes-Bautista, a professor of medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles, after the pandemic death toll hit 300,000 in the United States. Disease modelers with the Columbia University also estimated that, if the United States had begun locking down cities and limiting social contact on March 1, 2020, two weeks earlier than most people started staying home, about 83 percent of the nation’s pandemic-related deaths would have been avoided. An editorial from the website of medical journal The Lancet, published on May 17, 2020, commented that the U.S. government was obsessed with magic bullets — vaccines, new medicines, or a hope that the virus will simply disappear. At the same time, it noted that only a steadfast reliance on basic public health principles, like testing, tracing, and isolation, would see the emergency brought to an end. Even when the pandemic is spreading in a vast area in the United States, the administration was hasty to restart the economy due to political concerns. According to news website Vox on Aug. 11, 2020, in April and May last year, several states rushed to reopen and caused the virus to shift to the South, West and eventually the rest of the United States. In addition, despite that experts had recommended people wear masks in public, the then American leader and some state officials had been extremely reluctant to issue any decree to make wearing masks mandatory.

Chaotic pandemic control and prevention measures caused confusion among the public. An article published by CNN on May 9, 2020 called the U.S. response to the pandemic “consistently inconsistent,” and noted that there were no national guidelines and no organized efforts to reopen the country beyond what measures states had taken. The article also said that in terms of pandemic control and prevention, public health officials say one thing while governors say another and the national leader says something else entirely. In addition, after the experts called for federal leadership, the then American leader left it to cities and states to solve national problems with testing and hospital supplies by themselves. When the federal government released a phased plan for reopening, the leader called on states to reopen faster. After the CDC recommended that people wear masks in public, the leader refused to do so for months. Even more ridiculously, the leader at one point advocated injecting bleach as a treatment.

National leaders shirked their responsibility out of arrogance. Despite one ludicrous idea after another, the then American leader refused to admit any fault. Instead, the leader invented all sorts of excuses to gloss over his mistakes while shirking from responsibilities. For one, the then leader insisted that the U.S. leads the world in COVID-19 cases because it tested more than any other country in the world. When asked about testing problems and rising deaths, the leader claimed he “doesn’t take responsibility at all.” However, White House adviser and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases director Anthony Fauci admitted that the numbers didn’t lie and the United States had the worst coronavirus outbreak in the world.

Senior citizens fell victims to the government’s incompetent response to COVID-19. Senior citizens are a group more susceptible to the pandemic, yet they have been further marginalized in the U.S. pandemic prevention and control chaos, with their lives becoming valueless and their dignity trampled upon. On March 23 and April 20, 2020, Dan Patrick, the lieutenant governor of Texas, told Fox News that he would rather die than see public health measures damage the U.S. economy and there are more important things than living. Furthermore, an Aug. 18, 2020 report published on The San Diego Union-Tribune website found that residents in long-term care facilities account for less than 1 percent of the U.S. population but more than 40 percent of COVID-19 deaths. A May 9, 2020 article from The Washington Post website called the U.S. pandemic control efforts “state-sanctioned killing,” where “the old, factory workers, and black and Hispanic Americans” were deliberately sacrificed.

The poor faced greater threat of infection. Researchers found that the Gini Index, an economic barometer that ranks income inequality from 0 (total equality) to 1 (total inequality), was a strong predictor of COVID-19 deaths. New York State, which had one of the highest Gini Index numbers also had the highest number of fatalities in the nation by a margin. The Guardian website reported on March 21, 2020 that in the wake of the epidemic, it’s the wealthy and powerful first get coronavirus tests, while low-paid workers, most of whom have no paid sick leave and can’t do their work from home, put themselves at greater risk of contracting the virus in order to earn a living. Public health officials said, in Los Angeles County, residents of low-income communities are three times more likely to die of COVID-19 than those in wealthier neighborhoods, according to a report published on the Los Angeles Times website on May 8, 2020. A Gallup survey revealed that one in seven American adults said that if they or their family members developed symptoms related to COVID-19, they would probably give up medical treatment because they were worried that they could not afford the costs. The United Nations Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights, Philip Alston, also pointed out that the poor in the United States were being hit hardest by the COVID-19 pandemic. Low-income and poor people face far higher risks from the coronavirus due to chronic neglect and discrimination, and a muddled, corporate-driven federal response has failed them, he observed.

The handicapped and the homeless were in dire straits. A study released in November 2020 by the nonprofit FAIR Health found that people with intellectual and developmental disabilities are three times more likely to die of COVID-19, compared to the general population. The website of the Los Angeles Times reported on May 14, 2020 that with the coronavirus-induced shock to the economy crippling businesses of all sizes and leaving millions of Americans out of work, homelessness in the United States could grow as much as 45 percent in a year. Many of the homeless Americans are elderly or disabled people. Given their originally poor physical health and bad living and hygienic conditions, they are susceptible to the virus. During the pandemic, the homeless were evicted and pushed into makeshift shelters. The website of Reuters reported on April 23, 2020 that the crowded shelters across the United States made it impossible for the homeless who lived there to maintain social distance, which made it easier for the virus to spread. The New York Times website reported on April 13, 2020 that in the New York City, a crisis has taken hold in homeless shelters, as more than 17,000 men and women are sleeping in group or “congregate” shelters for single adults, with beds close enough for people sleeping in them to hold hands. The Boston Globe website reported on May 4, 2020 that, about one-third of the homeless people who were tested have tested positive for the novel coronavirus.

Outbreak in jails threatened lives of inmates. ABC News reported on Dec. 19, 2020 that at least 275,000 prisoners have been infected, of whom more than 1,700 have died, and nearly every prison system in the country has seen infection rates significantly higher than the communities around them. One of every five prisoners in facilities run by the federal Bureau of Prisons has had coronavirus, according to data collected by The Associated Press and The Marshall Project, a nonprofit news organization covering the criminal justice system. They also found that 24 state prison systems have had even higher infection rates. Half of the prisoners in Kansas have been infected with COVID-19 — eight times the rate of cases among the state’s overall population. In Arkansas, four of every seven have had the virus.

Out-of-control pandemic brought Americans psychological pressure. The Trump administration’s reaction to the COVID-19 pandemic has negatively affected Americans more than the virus itself, which has left people stressed and isolated. In a study published by the CDC on Aug. 14, 2020, due to stay-at-home orders, 40.9 percent of adults reported at least one adverse mental or behavioral health condition, 30.9 percent reported either anxiety or depression and those numbers are just the tip of the iceberg. The same CDC study showed that 13 percent of people surveyed by the CDC during the same time said that they started or increased their substance use and 11 percent seriously considered suicide. A separate study released in June 2020 showed calls to suicide hotlines went up 47 percent nationwide during the COVID-19 pandemic with some crisis lines experiencing a 300-percent increase.

II. American Democracy Disorder Triggers Political Chaos

Touting itself as the beacon of democracy, the United States has wantonly leveled criticism against and oppressed many other countries under the guise of upholding democracy, freedom and human rights. However, the U.S. society has been plagued by deep-rooted money politics, unchecked public opinion manipulation and rampant lies, and American democracy has further aggravated social division instead of bridging the increasingly polarized political differences. As a result, the American people enjoy their civil and political rights in name only.

Influence of money in electoral politics essentially makes it a money-led election. Money is the driving force of American politics. America’s money politics has distorted public opinion, turning elections into a “one-man show” for the rich. The amount spent on the 2020 U.S. presidential and congressional campaigns hit nearly 14 billion U.S. dollars, more than double what was spent in the 2016 election. The presidential campaign saw a record high of 6.6 billion U.S. dollars in total spending, while congressional races finished with over 7 billion U.S. dollars. According to a Nov. 1, 2020 report on the website of CNBC, the top 10 donors in the 2020 U.S. election cycle contributed over 640 million U.S. dollars. In addition to publicly registered election donations, a large amount of secret funds and dark money flooded the 2020 U.S. elections. According to an analysis by the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University, dark money groups poured more than 750 million U.S. dollars into 2020 elections through ad spending and record-breaking contributions to political committees such as super political action committees.

Public trust in U.S. elections was in crisis. According to Gallup’s figures released on Oct. 8, 2020, only 19 percent of Americans say they are “very confident” about the accuracy of the presidential election, the lowest Gallup has recorded in its trend dating back to 2004. According to a commentary carried by the Wall Street Journal on Nov. 9, 2020, the 2020 U.S. election can be seen as the culmination of a two-decade period of decline in faith in the basic building blocks of democracy. 

Political polarization grew. Disagreement between Democrats and Republicans has gradually changed from policy differences to identity battles with increasingly obvious political tribalism. The two parties have ended in deadlocks on many major public issues, thus leading to inefficient and incompetent state governance. Power plays between rival politicians in dogfights have become the hallmark of American politics, which saw a variety of shows featuring ugly attacks and vulgar smears. Voters supporting different parties are at loggerheads under the instigation of extreme politicians. Dominated by growing political fanaticism, the two camps are increasingly harder to talk to each other. Hate politics raged through the country and became the root cause of constant social unrest and division. According to a Nov. 13, 2020 report by Pew Research Center, America is exceptional in the nature of its political divide. There has been an increasingly stark disagreement between Democrats and Republicans on economy, racial justice, climate change, law enforcement, international engagement and a long list of other issues. The 2020 presidential election exacerbated these deep-seated divides. A month before the election, roughly 80 percent of the registered voters in both camps said their differences with the other side were about more than just politics and policies, but also about core American values, and about 90 percent in both camps worried that a victory by the other would lead to “lasting harm” to the United States.

Power checks and balances have mutated into veto politics. The bipartisan divides intensified the veto practices inherent in the American system. The separation, check and balance of power have turned into vetoing each other. The two parties engaged in ferocious battles, paralyzing the Congress and deadlocking the decision-making. While the outbreak of COVID-19 went out of control, the two parties not only brawled with each other on multiple issues, but also took the bill for the second round of COVID-19 relief measures as their campaigning tool for election. The two parties filibustered and stalled each other for votes, leaving millions of grassroots people in livelihood predicament. The veto politics has caused acute confrontations between the Congress and the administrative system, as well as between the federal and state authorities. During the COVID-19 pandemic, frequent contradictions have taken place between the Republican president and the Democrats-dominated House of Representatives, and between the federal government and Democratic “blue states.” The federal government competed with the states in the scramble for anti-virus supplies, and was often at odds with the “blue states” in epidemic response policies, thus causing people to be at a loss. Massachusetts once arranged to buy 3 million N95 masks for urgent needs, but federal authorities seized them at the Port of New York.

The post-election riots highlighted the American democracy crisis. The election did not resolve the political differences in the United States, but heated up social confrontation. A Nov. 4, 2020 report on the website of the Guardian noted that whoever won the 2020 election, America would remain a country bitterly divided and the politics of anger and hatred would be the legacy. Claiming that the election was tainted by fraud, the defeated Republican camp refused to accept the presidential election results and filed lawsuits in Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Georgia, calling for a recount of ballots to overturn the election by pressuring and intimidating local election officials. Donald Trump repeatedly insisted that he would never accept the election defeat, calling on his supporters to protest against the congressional certification of the election result in Washington, D.C. The election dispute eventually turned into riots. 

On Jan. 6, 2021, tens of thousands of protesters who refused to accept the election defeat staged a “Save America” rally in Washington, D.C. A large number of protesters breached security and stormed into the Capitol building, where they tussled with police officers. Members of the U.S. Congress were hurriedly evacuated wearing their gas masks, as the police fired tear gas and shot to disperse the protesters. Protesters acted recklessly after occupying the venue. The riots resulted in multiple injuries and an interruption of the congressional certification of the electoral victory. Washington, D.C. imposed curfew and entered a state of emergency. On Jan. 7, 2021, U.S. Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund said that thousands of individuals involved in violent riotous actions attacked officers with metal pipes, chemical irritants and other weapons, injuring more than 50 police officers. The police arrested more than 100 people in total. On Jan. 7, 2021, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet said in a statement that the attack on the U.S. Capitol demonstrated clearly the destructive impact of sustained, deliberate distortion of facts, and incitement to violence and hatred by political leaders.

The political chaos in Washington shocked the world. American media called it the first time in modern American history that the power transfer has turned into a real combat in the Washington corridor of power. They blamed that violence, chaos and vandalism had shaken the American democracy to the core, dealing a heavy blow to America’s image as a democratic beacon. The French daily Le Figaro commented that the violent incident stoked up the resentment and distrust among different camps in American society, plunging America into an unknown situation. The Foreign Policy said in a commentary that the United States has become what its leaders used to condemn: being unable to avoid violence and bloody destruction during transfer of power. Lebanese diplomat Mohamad Safa commented via social media, “If the United States saw what the United States is doing in the United States, the United States would invade the United States to liberate the United States from the tyranny of the United States.”

III. Ethnic minorities devastated by racial discrimination

In the United States, racism exists in a comprehensive, systematic and continuous manner. Former U.S. President Barack Obama said helplessly that “for millions of Americans, being treated differently on account of race is tragically, painfully, maddeningly ‘normal’.” In June 2020, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet made two consecutive media statements, emphasizing that the protests triggered by the death of George Floyd, an African American, highlighted not only the issue of police brutality against people of color, but also inequality and racial discrimination in health, education, and employment in the United States. The grievances need to be heard and addressed if the country is to move on from its tragic history of racism and violence. On June 17, 2020, the 43rd session of the UN Human Rights Council held an urgent debate on racism. This was the first time in the history of the Human Rights Council that an urgent meeting on the human rights issues of the United States was held. On Nov. 9, 2020, the United States was severely criticized by the international community for racial discrimination when it was in the third cycle of Universal Periodic Review by the United Nations Human Rights Council. The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination of the United Nations and other institutions pointed out that racism in the United States is horrific. The white nationalists, neo-Nazis, and the Ku Klux Klan overtly use racist slogans, chants and salutes to promote white supremacy and incite racial discrimination and hatred. Political figures increasingly use divisive language in attempts to marginalize racial, ethnic and religious minorities, which amounts to inciting and fueling violence, intolerance and bigotry. Tendayi Achiume, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, believes that for black people in the United States, the domestic legal system has utterly failed to acknowledge and confront the racial injustice and discrimination that are so deeply entrenched in law enforcement.

Rights of the American Indians were violated. The United States has carried out systematic ethnic cleansing and massacres of Indians in history, and committed countless crimes against humanity and genocides. American Indians still live a life like a second-class citizen and their rights have been trampled over. Many indigenous peoples, such as the American Indians, who live in low-income communities in the United States, suffer from higher rates of cancer and heart diseases from toxic radioactive environments. Many indigenous people live near hazardous waste disposal sites and have an abnormally high rate of birth defects. On Aug. 5, 2020, the report of the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the implications for human rights of the environmentally sound management and disposal of hazardous substances and wastes, submitted pursuant to Human Rights Council resolution 36/15, decried the situation of indigenous peoples in the United States. They are exposed to toxic pollutants, including nuclear waste, released or produced by extractive industries, agriculture and manufacturing. The soil and lead dust pollution from mining waste poses a more significant health threat for indigenous peoples in the United States than other groups. The report of the United Nations Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief in accordance with General Assembly resolution 74/145 found out that the United States had opened up the lands of indigenous communities, including the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, to investment without the communities’ consent or in contravention of their customary and collective land ownership. The report of the United Nations Special Rapporteur on adequate housing as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living, released in accordance with Human Rights Council resolution 43/14, said that some of the most devastating effects of COVID-19 had been felt by racial and ethnic minorities and indigenous peoples. The hospitalization rate of Native Americans was five times that of non-Hispanic white Americans. The death rate of Native Americans also far exceeded that of white Americans.

Bullying against Asian Americans escalated. Since the pandemic began, the incidents of Asian Americans being humiliated and even assaulted in public have been found everywhere, and some American politicians have misled the public on purpose. “It’s very lonely to be Asians in the United States during the raging pandemic,” said a report published on the website of the New York Times on April 16, 2020. A survey of young Asian Americans showed that in the past year, a quarter of young Asian Americans became targets of racial bullying; fueled by the racist remarks of the then American leader, nearly half of the respondents expressed pessimism about their situation, and a quarter of the respondents expressed fear about the situation of themselves and their families, according to a report published on the website of the National Broadcasting Corporation on Sept. 17, 2020. Tendayi Achiume, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, said on March 23 and April 21, 2020, that politicians of relevant countries took the initiative to make open or suggestive xenophobic remarks, adopting alternative names with ulterior motives for the novel coronavirus. Their remarks that associated a specific disease with a specific country or ethnicity were irresponsible and disturbing, according to the Special Rapporteur. U.S. government officials openly incited, induced, and condoned racial discrimination, which was tantamount to humiliating modern human rights concepts.

The high level of hate crimes highlighted the deterioration of race relations. An FBI report released in 2020 showed that 57.6 percent of the 8,302 single-bias hate crime offenses reported by law enforcement agencies in 2019 were motivated by race/ethnicity/ancestry. Of these offenses, 48.4 percent were motivated by anti-black or African American bias; 15.8 percent stemmed from anti-white bias; 14.1 percent were classified as anti-Hispanic or Latino bias; 4.3 percent resulted from anti-Asian bias. Among the 4,930 victims of racial hate crimes, as many as 2,391 were of African descent. Some Americans blamed the outbreak of the pandemic on Asian Americans, and there had been an increase in the number of hate crimes and incidents of harassment and discrimination against Asian Americans, according to a report published on the website of USA Today on May 20. Statistics from the civil rights organization Stop AAPI Hate showed there were over 2,300 anti-Asian hate crimes in the U.S. during the first seven months of 2020.

Unchecked police violence led to frequent deaths of African Americans. On March 13, 2020, Breonna Taylor, a 26-year-old African-American woman, was shot eight times and killed by police in her own home. On May 25, 2020, George Floyd, a 46-year-old African American was killed after a white policeman kneeled on his neck in the street. On Aug. 23, 2020, Jacob Blake, a 29-year-old African American, was severely injured after police officers shot him seven times in the back when Blake was getting into a car. At the time, Blake’s three kids were in the car, witnessing the horrible act. American police shot and killed a total of 1,127 people in 2020, with no killing reported in just 18 days, according to Mapping Police Violence. African Americans made up 13 percent of the U.S. population, but accounted for 28 percent of the people killed by the police. African Americans were approximately three times more likely than white people to be killed by police. From 2013 to 2020, about 98 percent of the police involved in shooting cases were not charged with a crime, and the number of convicted was even smaller.

People of color were more harmed by the epidemic. The infection rate and death rate of COVID-19 in the United States showed significant racial differences, with the infection rate, hospitalization rate and death rate of African Americans being three times, five times and twice that of white people respectively, according to a report delivered by the Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent to the UN Human Rights Council on Aug. 21, 2020. “Nothing brings into sharper relief America’s color disparities than life and death in the Great Lockdown,” said a report published on the website of the Financial Times on May 15, 2020. Racial disparities in the epidemic extend to children, according to a report released by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Aug. 7, 2020. Latino and black children were hospitalized with COVID-19 at a rate nine times and six times that of white kids, respectively. Barbara Ferrer, director of public health for Los Angeles County, said the disproportionate impact of the coronavirus on black and Latino residents is rooted in the impact of racism and discrimination on the access to the resources and opportunities that are needed to good health, according to the website of the Los Angeles Times on July 10, 2020. COVID-19 kills far more people of color than white Americans, which could be attributed to America’s unequal education and economic systems that disproportionately leave people of color out of higher-wage jobs, discrimination in housing that corralled people of color into tightly packed neighborhoods, and environmental policies designed by white power brokers at the expense of the poor, an article by USA Today said. Of the 10 U.S. counties with the highest death rates from COVID-19, seven have populations where people of color make up the majority, according to data compiled by USA Today. Of the top 50 counties with the highest death rates, 31 are populated mostly by people of color.

People of color faced an even greater threat of unemployment. The Guardian commented in an article on April 28, 2020 that the “last hired, first fired” phenomenon was the most frustrating reality for African Americans. A report released by the U.S. Department of Labor on May 8, 2020 revealed the unemployment rate of African Americans and Latinos soared to 16.7 percent and 18.9 percent respectively in April, both the highest on record. The Washington Post reported on June 4, 2020 that after the Great Lockdown in spring, fewer than half of all black adults had a job. Figures released by the U.S. Department of Labor in September showed the jobless rate for the black people almost doubled that for the white. The Christian Science Monitor reported on July 20, 2020 that trade union leaders called for a national workers strike in more than two dozen U.S. cities to protest systemic racism and economic inequality that had only worsened during the novel coronavirus pandemic.

Systemic racial discrimination existed in law enforcement and justice. The Courier Journal reported on its website on Dec. 17, 2020 that although black people make up about 20 percent of Louisville’s driving-age population, they accounted for 57 percent of police searches, even though the police were far more likely to find contraband in searches of white people than black people. In the past three years, black people made up 43.5 percent of arrests by the Louisville Metro Police Department. African Americans made up around 13 percent of the U.S. population, but represented almost a third of the country’s prison population, which meant that there were more than 1,000 African-American prisoners for every 100,000 African American population. People of color constitute approximately one-third of the U.S. population under 18, but two-thirds of incarcerated minors, according to a report by the National Conference of State Legislatures on July 15, 2020. Iowa Public Radio News reported on Dec. 18, 2020 that in Iowa’s prisons, black Iowans were imprisoned at a rate 11 times that of white Iowans. Black people were probably sentenced to a longer jail term for the same offense. The Los Angeles Times reported on Sept. 15, 2020 that black people have been over-represented on death rows across the United States and killers of black people are less likely to face the death penalty than people who kill white people. Davis Vanguard reported on Dec. 4, 2020 that people of color account for a disproportionate 43 percent of executions in the U.S. since 1976, and 55 percent of defendants currently awaiting execution are people of color. “We live in a country where our criminal justice system is defined by the size of your wallet and the color of your skin,” said an article published by the Miami Herald on Dec. 18, 2020.

Workplace racial discrimination was deeply rooted. According to a CBS News report on Oct. 7, 2020, over 20 current and former black agents interviewed all described some sort of racial discrimination while in the FBI. Of the top 10 leadership positions in the FBI, all are currently held by white men. Currently, only 4 percent of the 13,000 FBI agents around the world are black, and black women only account for 1 percent, a number that has stayed virtually the same for decades. There were long-standing problems at the FBI such as the disproportionate weeding out of black applicants during the training process. As head of the FBI’s Black Affairs Diversity Committee, Eric Jackson called it “institutionalized racism.” According to a report by the Los Angeles Times on July 2, 2020, Facebook Inc. was accused of systemic discrimination in hiring, compensation and promotion of black people. Facebook’s own figures showed just 1.5 percent of employees in technical roles in the U.S. were black in 2019, and 3.1 percent were black among senior leadership. Those percentages have barely budged even as the company’s employees grew by 400 percent over the past five years.

Social discrimination against ethnic minorities was widespread. A poll conducted by the Wall Street Journal and NBC News on July 9, 2020 found that 56 percent of the U.S. voters believe American society is racist and blacks and Hispanics are discriminated against. The Los Angeles Times reported on July 14, 2020 that after the death of George Floyd, more white Americans recognized the serious racial discrimination in the United States. A July 2020 survey showed that compared with February, white respondents are 18 percentage points more likely to believe black Americans are discriminated against frequently (from 22 percent to 40 percent), 10 percentage points more likely to believe Latinos are discriminated against frequently (from 22 percent to 32 percent), and 13 percentage points more likely to believe Asians are discriminated against frequently (from 7 percent to 20 percent).

Inequality between races worsened. According to researchers from the University of Chicago and University of Notre Dame, the U.S. poverty rate jumped by 2.4 percentage points from June to November 2020, while the poverty rate among black Americans went up by 3.1 percentage points. Statistics showed the median white household has 41 times more wealth (measured as the sum of assets held by a family minus total household debt) than the median black family and 22 times more than the median Latino family. Citing data released by the Federal Reserve, the Associated Press reported on Oct. 13, 2020 that only 33.5 percent of black households owned stocks in 2019, compared with 61 percent for white households. USA Today reported on Oct. 23, 2020 that in the first quarter of 2020, the national homeownership rate for white households was 73.7 percent, but only 44 percent of black households owned a home. The Washington Post reported on June 4, 2020 that more than one in five black families now report they often or sometimes do not have enough food — more than three times the rate for white families. ABC News reported on Oct. 11, 2020 that 15.7 percent of Latinos lived in poverty in 2019, a percentage more than double that of the white people.

IV. Continuous Social Unrest Threatens Public Safety

The government failed to maintain proper law and order, and shootings and violent crimes, which were already high in incidence, recorded new highs during the COVID-19 pandemic, causing panic among members of the public. The police’s unrestrained use of violence in law enforcement triggered waves of protests that swept across the country. The police had abused their force to suppress protesters, and attacked and arrested journalists on a large scale, further fueling public anger and continuous social unrest.

Crime rates were on the rise amid the pandemic. While outdoor activities were down drastically as a result of various epidemic response measures, the crime rates were up in large cities amid the pandemic. According to the FBI’s Preliminary Uniform Crime Report released in September 2020, in the first half of 2020, the number of murder and nonnegligent manslaughter offenses increased 14.8 percent year on year, with cities with populations of 250,000 to 500,000 reporting an increase of 26 percent. During the same period, the number of arson offenses increased 19 percent year on year, while such offenses rose 52 percent in cities with populations of 1 million and over. Murders in Chicago spiked by 37 percent, while arson in the city was up 52.9 percent. New York City recorded an increase of 23 percent in homicides, while Los Angeles saw murders rise by 14 percent.

The number of violent crimes remained high. According to FBI reports released in 2020, more than 1.2 million violent crimes occurred in the United States in 2019, including 16,425 murders, 139,815 rapes, 267,988 robberies, and 821,182 aggravated assaults, translating to five murders, over 40 rapes, 80 robberies and 250 aggravated assaults per 100,000 inhabitants.

Gun sales and shootings hit record high. A study from the University of California, Davis found a significant increase in firearm violence in the United States associated with the coronavirus-related surge in firearm purchasing. A new destabilizing sense as virus fears spread had been motivating even people who had considered themselves anti-gun to buy weapons for the first time. The Washington Post reported on its website on Jan. 19, 2021 that, COVID-19 lockdowns, anti-racism protests and election strife had led to record gun sales of about 23 million in 2020, a 64 percent increase over 2019 sales. The 2020 numbers include purchases by more than 8 million first-time buyers, according to the National Shooting Sports Foundation. USA Today reported on its website on Dec. 18, 2020 that, with regard to gun homicides, the United States has historically reported a rate about 25 times higher than other wealthy nations. According to data from Gun Violence Archive, more than 41,500 people died by gun violence in 2020 nationwide, an average of more than 110 a day, which is a record. There had been 592 mass shootings nationwide, an average of more than 1.6 a day. Shootings in Chatham County of North Carolina, Riverside County of California, and Morgan County of Alabama each claimed seven lives. A deadly weekend in Chicago came at the end of May, when 85 people were shot, 24 fatally. In the afternoon of Jan. 9, 2021, 32-year-old Jason Nightengale went on a random shooting rampage in Chicago, leaving three people killed and four others wounded.

George Floyd’s death from police brutality sparked unrest. On May 25, 2020, George Floyd, a 46-year-old African-American man from Minnesota, died after a white police officer kneeled on his neck for eight minutes during an arrest for forgery. Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey said what he saw was “wrong on every level,” noting, “Being black in America should not be a death sentence.” Civil rights attorney Ben Crump said in a statement, “This abusive, excessive and inhumane use of force cost the life of a man who was being detained by the police for questioning about a non-violent charge.” Kristen Clarke, president and executive director of the National Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, said, “The depths of despair are enormous right now for black people in this country. You pile on unchecked police violence and it makes for a perfect storm.” The police brutality sparked visceral outrage, leading to protests in support of Black Lives Matter throughout the United States, as well as in other countries. The unrest escalated across the nation, with protesters blocking the streets and building barricades to confront the police. A large number of police stations, public institutions and shopping malls were looted. The Guardian reported on its website on June 8, 2020 that, since George Floyd’s death at the hands of police, about 140 cities in all 50 states throughout the United States have seen protests and demonstrations in response to the killing.

The demonstrators were suppressed by force. In the face of visceral public grievances, the then U.S. administration leader added fuel to the fire by deploying a large number of National Guard soldiers across the country and calling for shooting. Targeted with flying rubber bullets and tear gas on site, the public were horrified and the society fell into chaos. U.S. federal agents had been grabbing protesters seemingly without cause. More than 10,000 individuals had been arrested, including many innocent people. The disclosure of the shooting death of Breonna Taylor, an African-American woman, during a police raid fueled a renewed wave of Black Lives Matter protests in 2020, with the city of Louisville alone reporting arrests of 435 individuals during the movement. The Guardian reported on its website on Oct. 29, 2020 that, at least 950 instances of police brutality against civilians and journalists during anti-racism protests had occurred since May 2020. The police had used rubber bullets, tear gas and “unlawful lethal force” against protesters.

Journalists had been subject to unparalleled attacks by law enforcement. There were at least 117 cases of journalists being arrested or detained while on the job covering anti-racism protests in the United States in 2020, a 1,200-percent increase from the figure in 2019. The Guardian reported on its website on June 5, 2020 that, reporters were beaten, pepper-sprayed and arrested by police in numbers never before documented in the United States. There were 148 arrests or attacks on journalists in the country within one week after the George Floyd incident, which was more than what was recorded during the previous three years combined. The Committee to Protect Journalists said in a statement on Dec. 14, 2020 that, U.S. journalists faced unprecedented attacks in 2020, the majority by law enforcement.

V. Growing Polarization Between Rich and Poor Aggravates Social Inequality

The COVID-19 epidemic plunged the United States into the worst economic downturn since World War II. A large number of businesses shut down, workers lost their jobs, the gap between rich and poor widened, and the lives of the people at the bottom of society were miserable.

The rich-poor divide further widened. The website of Bloomberg reported on Oct. 8, 2020 that the 50 richest Americans now hold almost as much wealth as the poorest 165 million people in the country. The richest 1 percent of Americans have a combined net worth that is 16.4 times that of the poorest 50 percent. The epidemic has aggravated wealth inequality. The website of Forbes reported on Dec. 11, 2020 that over the past months of the pandemic, the collective net worth of America’s 614 billionaires has increased by 931 billion U.S. dollars. America’s poverty rate jumped to 11.7 percent in November 2020, up from 9.3 percent in June, according to researchers from the University of Chicago and University of Notre Dame.

Out-of-control epidemic led to mass unemployment. The speed and magnitude of business closures and job losses defied comparison, according to a report on the website of The Washington Post on May 9, 2020. Some 20.5 million people abruptly lost their jobs, which was roughly double what the nation experienced during the entire financial crisis from 2007 to 2009. In April 2020, the unemployment rate soared to 21.2 percent for people with less than a high school degree, surpassing the previous all-time high set in the aftermath of the Great Recession. The website of USA Today reported on Aug. 8, 2020 that 33 U.S. metro areas had a jobless rate of over 15 percent in June 2020. About 11.5 million American women lost their jobs between February and May 2020.

Tens of millions of people were in food crisis in the epidemic. More than 50 million people — one in six Americans, including one in four children — could experience food insecurity in 2020, according to an analysis report updated in October 2020 by Feeding America. The website of the Guardian reported on Nov. 25, 2020 that nationwide, demand for food aid has plateaued at about 60 percent higher than pre-pandemic times. Millions of Americans must rely on charity to put Thanksgiving dinner on the table in 2020.

Health insurance coverage plummeted. America has no universal health insurance because of political polarization and the number of people enjoying health insurance has shrunk sharply due to the epidemic. From March to May 2020, an estimated 27 million Americans have lost health insurance coverage in the pandemic. In Texas alone, the number of uninsured jumped from about 4.3 million to nearly 4.9 million, which means that three out of every 10 Texans are uninsured.

The digital divide aggravated educational inequality. In 2018, nearly 17 million children lived in homes without internet connection, and more than 7 million did not have computers at home, according to a report that analyzed census data for that year. The website of Politico reported on Sept. 23, 2020 that one in three students in Baltimore city, which is only an hour’s drive from the U.S. Capitol, has no computers. One in three African American, Latino or American Indian families do not have home internet. Virtual learning became a mainstream education pattern during the epidemic. Compared with their wealthier peers, low-income and minority children are less likely to have appropriate technology and home environments for independent study because of their family backgrounds and therefore are at a disadvantage in e-learning, further aggravating the educational divide caused by poverty and racial inequality.

VI. Trampling on International Rules Results in Humanitarian Disasters

At a time when global unity is needed to fight the pandemic, the United States, however, persists in pursuing an agenda of “America first,” isolationism, and unilateralism, imposing sanctions wantonly, bullying and threatening international organizations, and treating asylum seekers cruelly, thus becoming the biggest troublemaker to global security and stability.

The United States withdrew from WHO. In order to shirk its responsibility for its disastrous anti-pandemic measures, the Trump administration tried every means to scapegoat the World Health Organization (WHO) by fabricating false charges against the organization. On April 14, 2020, the U.S. government announced its suspension of paying dues to the WHO, which was widely criticized by the international community. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres issued a statement on April 14, 2020, saying that when the world was fighting the COVID-19 pandemic, it was inappropriate to reduce the resources required by the WHO or any other humanitarian organization for operations. President of the American Medical Association, Patrice Harris, stated on April 15, 2020 that combating the pandemic required international cooperation and halting funding to the WHO at this critical moment was a dangerous step in the wrong direction. On April 15, 2020, an online article of the Guardian commented that when the world desperately needed to jointly overcome this threat that the world had never experienced before, the suspension of the WHO dues by the U.S. government was an act that lacked morality and disrupted the international order, and was a horrible betrayal to global solidarity. In July 2020, the U.S. government brazenly announced its withdrawal from the WHO despite the opposition of the international community.

The United States walked away from its commitments to and withdrew from the Paris Agreement. The United States, as the largest cumulative emitter of greenhouse gases in the world, should bear the greatest share of emission reduction based on the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities. However, the United States ran counter to the trend of the times and officially withdrew from the Paris Agreement on Nov. 4, 2020, becoming the only country among the nearly 200 contracting parties to quit the treaty. The international community generally believed that the U.S. move was politically short-sighted, unscientific, and morally irresponsible. “Having the U.S. pull out of Paris is likely to reduce efforts to mitigate, and therefore increase the number of people who are put into a life-or-death situation because of the impacts of climate change,” said Cornell University climate scientist Natalie Mahowald, a coauthor of UN science reports on global warming.

Bullying actions threatened international organizations. On June 11, 2020, the U.S. government authorized economic sanctions and travel restrictions against workers of the International Criminal Court (ICC) and their family members for investigating American troops and intelligence officials for possible war crimes in Afghanistan and elsewhere. The U.S. sanctions targeting ICC staff were “a direct attack on the institution’s judicial independence,” according to an article on the website of UN NEWS on June 25, 2020. On June 19, 2020, the United Nations Human Rights Council adopted a resolution strongly condemning police brutality that led to the death of African American George Floyd. Citing remarks from human rights groups, the AFP said that the final version of the resolution removed the call for further investigations and stripped away any mention of the racism and police brutality in the United States due to “hard lobbying.” By bullying other countries, the United States watered down the text of the resolution, escaped from international probes for another time, and ran counter to the African descent in the United States and victims of police violence, said the American Civil Liberties Union.

Unilateral sanctions aggravated humanitarian crisis. At a critical time when COVID-19 spread globally and endangered human life, health, and wellbeing, all countries should work together to respond to the pandemic and maintain global public health security. However, during this pandemic, the U.S. government still imposed unilateral sanctions on countries such as Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, and Syria, which made it difficult for the sanctioned countries to obtain needed anti-pandemic medical supplies in a timely manner. United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet said on March 24, 2020, that in the case of a global pandemic, sanctions would hinder medical work and increase risks for everyone. She argued that to maintain global public health security and protect the rights and lives of millions of people in sanctioned countries, sanctions should be relaxed or suspended in certain sectors. A group of 24 senior diplomats from various countries urged the U.S. government to ease medical and humanitarian sanctions on Iran, noting that such move “could potentially save the lives of hundreds of thousands of ordinary Iranians,” according to a report on the website of the Guardian on April 6, 2020. On April 30, 2020, UN human rights experts said that the U.S. embargo on Cuba and sanctions on other countries seriously undermined international cooperation to curb the pandemic and save lives. The experts called on the United States to implement UN resolutions, lift its economic and financial embargo on Cuba and withdraw measures that prevent Cuba from financing the purchase of medicine, medical equipment, food and other essential goods. The United Nations Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights, the Special Rapporteur on human rights for safe drinking water and sanitation, and the Special Rapporteur on the right to education issued a joint statement on May 6, 2020, saying that the U.S. sanctions on Venezuela were seriously harming the human rights of the people in the country. They urged the United States to immediately lift sanctions that exacerbated the suffering of the people when the pandemic raged in the country. On Dec. 29, 2020, Alena Douhan, United Nations Special Rapporteur on human rights, called on the United States to remove unilateral sanctions against Syria, noting that the sanctions would exacerbate the already dire humanitarian crisis in Syria and run roughshod over the Syrian people’s rights to live, health, and development.

Asylum seekers were treated cruelly. According to a report of CNN on Sept. 30, 2020, in the 2020 fiscal year, 21 people died in Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) custody, which was more than double the number of deaths in the fiscal year 2019 and marked the highest annual death toll since 2005. A report published on the website of the Los Angeles Times on Oct. 30, 2020 noted that a huge number of migrant children were stranded in custody for the long haul. Data showed that of the 266,000 migrant children held in government custody in recent years, over 25,000 had been detained for longer than 100 days, close to 1,000 migrant children had spent more than a year in refugee shelters, and some of them had spent more than five years in custody. As reported by multiple U.S. media outlets, dozens of women from Latin American and Caribbean states have filed a class action lawsuit in federal court in Georgia, claiming that they were subjected to unnecessary gynecological surgeries without their consent while in ICE custody, including uterus removal in some cases. They said these unwanted surgeries caused severe harm to their physical and mental health. The Guardian website reported on Oct. 22, 2020 that Cameroonian asylum seekers were threatened and forced to sign their own deportation orders. Those who refused to sign were choked, beaten, and pepper-sprayed, with some put in handcuffs to have their fingerprints forcibly taken in place of a signature on orders of removal, by which the asylum seekers waive their rights to further immigration hearings and accept deportation.

Forced deportation of immigrant children continued during the COVID-19 pandemic. According to data tallied by the ICE, as of Jan. 14, 2021, a total of 8,848 detainees had been confirmed as COVID-19 cases. According to a report on the website of the Los Angeles Times on Nov. 18, 2020, the U.S. government had expelled at least 8,800 unaccompanied immigrant children despite serious protection risks during the COVID-19 outbreak. According to UNICEF, migrant children who returned from the United States to Mexico and Central America were facing danger and discrimination.

The United States pardoned criminals slaughtering civilians in other countries. On Dec. 30, 2020, the Working Group on the use of mercenaries, a mechanism of the United Nations Human Rights Council, issued a statement, saying that the then U.S. President’s pardon of four Blackwater contractors convicted of war crimes in Iraq violated U.S. obligations under international law. The statement called on all states to the Geneva Conventions to condemn the U.S. action. The four Blackwater contractors were found to have committed a massacre at Nisour Square in Baghdad in 2007, which left 14 unarmed civilians dead and at least 17 people wounded, according to the statement. Pardoning the Blackwater contractors was an affront to justice and the victims of the Nisour Square massacre and their families, said the Chair of the Working Group. Pardoning them “contributes to impunity and has the effect of emboldening others to commit such crimes in the future,” said Marta Hurtado, a spokesperson with the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.

Why Sri Lanka Had No Bargaining Chips at the UNHRC and Tamils Had All Trump Cards?

March 25th, 2021

Dilrook Kannangara

Reconciliation and accountability. These are the two words the international community imposed on Sri Lanka since it defeated Tamil terrorists in 2009. However, it was a one-way street; or, two one-way streets. Only Sri Lanka had to do reconciliation while Tamils always torpedoed it. Only Sri Lanka was pushed for accountability while Tamils were off the hook. This was why Sri Lanka lost the UNHRC vote in 2021. Sri Lanka had no bargaining chips, let alone trump cards. Tamils on the other hand had all trump cards against Sri Lanka.

UN Thinks It Was a One-Sided War!

UN including its agencies consider what happened in Sri Lanka as a one-sided war. Sri Lanka was fighting a war against Sri Lankans! This absurd view is because Sri Lanka failed to present its case officially to the UN. Officially. To the UN and UN agencies. Making videos, documentaries, etc. for the consumption of the general public is different to presenting the UN with facts and figures of Tamil war crimes. It was not done.

Tamil war crimes are two-fold – LTTE war crimes and war crimes by Tamil civilians. Sri Lankan government mostly failed on highlighting LTTE war crimes and totally failed on war crimes by Tamil civilians.

How can one blame the UN for taking the side of Tamils when Sri Lanka failed to present its case against Tamil war crimes?

War Crimes by Tamil Civilians

Beating the dead LTTE is important but does not give Sri Lanka a bargaining position. As all UNHRC sessions proved, it is a matter of bargaining and negotiating based on bargaining power. Highlighting war crimes by Tamil civilians would have put Sri Lanka in a commanding position. Unfortunately, it was never done!

War crimes by Tamil civilians and India include (but not limited to),

1.       Tamil mono-ethnic political parties arousing anti-Sinhala and anti-Muslim racism since 1922. This has not ceased. In fact, hateful statements by Tamil politicians against Sinhalas have worsened since 2009. Tamil youth were driven to violence because of these hateful statements and slogans. Tamil politicians have also not given up on their demand to divide the island nation based on ethnic lines.

2.       Tamil civilians robbed the land belonged to Sinhalese in Jaffna District in 1977 when more than 20,000 Sinhalese lived in Jaffna District. Tamil civilians occupy these lands to this date! Tamil civilians robbed the land belonged to Muslims in Jaffna District in 1990 when a large population of Muslims lived in Jaffna District. Tamil civilians occupy these lands to this date! Displaced Muslims had to be resettled in the Wilpattu national forest reserve because Tamil civilians would not let them return to their original homes. As a result, the Jaffna District has suffered two events of ethnic cleansing.

3.       Tamil Diaspora in western nations remitted over $300 million a year to the LTTE, a proscribed terrorist organization in those countries. Financing a foreign terrorist organization is a crime.

4.       Indian troops in Sri Lanka killed, raped and abused locals, particularly Tamils from 1987 to 1990. Various pro-Indian military groups including the Tamil National Army were also involved in these. India financed and armed Tamil terrorist groups.

5.       Tamil civilians (and foreigners) facilitated the recruitment, training and passing out of Tamil terrorists including suicide bombers and child soldiers.

Where is accountability for these war crimes? The world must know the nature of the elements Sri Lanka dealt with and still dealing with.

Sri Lanka must submit official statements with facts and figures to UN bodies and other nations about Tamil civilians’ war crimes. That will force them to come to a compromise. Sadly, it was not done and as a result, they do not see the need for a compromise. Why should they!

Post-UNHRC Resolution Remedies

As a result of Sri Lankan government not highlighting Tamil war crimes, the UNHRC resolution is lopsided. It only blames Sri Lanka. It must be balanced with remedial action that must be taken by the Sri Lankan government.

These include implementation of the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution, introducing new laws to ban and punish hate speech, new laws to punish separatism and the LTTE ideology, removal of Thesawamali, Muslim and Kandyan laws, re-demarcation of district and provincial boundaries of Trincomalee and Ampara districts to better align with modern ground realities, ethnicity based proportionate university admission that is fair for all ethnic groups and overhauling the parliamentary election system to reflect equity in parliamentary representation nationally.

UN agencies and other nations must be presented facts about Tamil war crimes (LTTE and Tamil civilians’ war crimes). Let them be forewarned about the gory nature of Tamil Elam if it ever becomes a reality. Made them feel disgusted about continuing Tamil racism that will put them off from supporting Tamil separatism. A Tamil nation would be a living hell of Tamil war crimes, so it must not be supported.

Conclusion

Unless Sri Lanka regains powerful bargaining chips and preferably trump cards on the matter by calling out Tamil war crimes, UNHRC, etc. are going to push Sri Lanka around all the time.

Reconciliation must be a two-way street. It cannot be a tool to tie down Sri Lanka while the other party can continue with separatism and racism. Since the UNHRC has put accountability ahead of reconciliation, Sri Lanka must do the same. Sri Lanka must demand accountability and punishment for Tamil war crimes.

Can Sri Lanka rise above petty politics and do these? If not, war heroes whose action that already saved 47,400 lives since the war was won in 2009 at 3,950 lives saved annually for 12 years, will be punished for doing the right thing. And real war criminals will get away. It will also lead to dividing the island into multiple nations disproportionately benefitting aggressors at the expense of the silent majority. But most importantly, it will let down and undermine the true friends of Sri Lanka that stood by and trusted Sri Lanka at the UNHRC voting.

The world must hear Tamil war crimes, some of them continuing.

Core-Group supporters in UNHRC have a dismal Human Rights record

March 25th, 2021

By Sugeeswara Senadhira/Daily News

Colombo, March 25: Although the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) Resolution on Sri Lanka was adapted at the 46th Session with 22 members voting for it, 11 voting against and 14 abstaining. This means that the majority (25) were not for the resolution.

Foreign Minister Dinesh Gunawardena described the vote as the Global South coalescing against its Northern counterparts. The countries of the Global South – Asia, Latin America and Africa – refused to vote for the West-sponsored resolution against Sri Lanka. The most populous countries in the world, China and Russia voted against the Resolution and two others with massive populations – India and Indonesia – abstained. Latin America’s Bolivia, Cuba, and Venezuela, Africa’s Somalia and Eritrea and Asian friends Pakistan, Philippines, Bangladesh and Uzbekistan, in addition to China and Russia voted against the Resolution.

Let us examine the countries that supported the resolution apart from its Western sponsors. Those who succumbed to Western pressures and voted against Sri Lanka include Fiji, Marshall Islands, Cote D’Ivoire (Ivory Coast), Malawi, Uruguay and Brazil, countries with most an unsavory record of human rights violations and military coups.

The UNHRC was chaired by the Fijian Ambassador to the UN, Nazhat Shameem Khan dressed in a Sari displaying her Indo- Fijian origin (her father is a Pakistani and the mother is an Indo- Fijian). When Fiji was elected to the Council she promised to give … the South Pacific region a voice in the world’s main human rights body”. Those who knew the South Pacific well pointed out that Fiji should start by allowing its own citizens to speak out and express themselves at home, without fear of reprisals.” (https://devpolicy.org/fijis-review-at-the-human-rights-council-highlight…)

After all, anybody who had studied politics of that area knows the role of the military in Fiji. The leaders of the two major political parties are not only former military officials but are former coup leaders. The racially divided politics of Fiji are marked by divisions between native Fijians (54.3%) and Indo-Fijians (38.1%), descendants of Indian contract laborers brought to the islands by the British colonial powers in the 19th century.

Fundamental Rights

Prime Minister Rear Admiral Frank Bainimarama was the leader of the 2006 coup (he had also led the countercoup of 2000). He has held onto power, albeit through a few elections during some of which Fundamental Rights including freedom of speech, association, and assembly were not widespread”. His Fiji First Party managed to the get support of most of Indo-Fijians votes. The 2018 election was won by his Fiji First Party with just over 50% of the vote and 27 seats. The main opposition party, the Social Democratic Liberal Party (SODELPA) led by Colonel Sitiveni Rabuka, (sometimes referred to in the press as Colonel Steve Rambo.”). He is best known as the instigator of two military coups that shook Fiji in 1987. He won around 40 percent of the vote.

Though Rear Admiral Frank Bainimarama restored” democracy and held elections, he retains a number of decrees from pre-democracy days to retain power. These include the Media Decree, which curbs freedom of the press and encourages self-censorship (Bainimarama remains notoriously sensitive to criticism) and the Public Order Decree, which restricts the ability of groups to hold public meetings.

His 2013 Constitution also states It shall be the overall responsibility of the Republic of Fiji Military Forces to ensure at all times the security, defense, and well-being of Fiji and all Fijians” – fairly flexible wording that could be used to rationalize further military interference in the country’s political affairs. Rear Admiral Frank Bainimarama’s authoritarian instincts remain a concern to many Fijians who believe that the future of democracy” in Fiji is in danger.

Yet, all that was kosher for the West. The West backs the Fiji First Party.  His coups and decrees are democratic, according to the lopsided logic of the West.

Another country to accuse Sri Lanka of human rights violations was Marshall Islands, a country ceded to the US after the World War II. The US used it for nuclear testing. From 1946 to 1958, the United States detonated 67 atomic bombs on the islands—the equivalent of 1.6 Hiroshimas a day for 12 years. The effects are still felt today, and the Marshall Islands are one of the countries least visited by tourists.

This sprawling chain of volcanic islands and coral atolls in the central Pacific Ocean, has a population of 58,791 people. Bikini Atoll, where The US military conducted nuclear testing from 1946 through 1958, is one of the atolls in the chain.

Key issues

The Republic of the Marshall Islands, though claiming to be a sovereign State, has a Compact with the US which has agreed to pay at least US$ 57 million every year for its upkeep.  Under the Compact, the United States has full authority and responsibility for the security and defense of the Marshall Islands, and the Government of the Marshall Islands is obligated to refrain from taking actions that would be incompatible with these security and defense responsibilities.

In the United Nations, the Marshall Islands have always followed the United States and on all key issues match its vote with the United States 100%. For example, in December 2017, the Marshall Islands were one of just nine countries (including the United States and Israel) to vote against a motion adopted by the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) condemning the United States’ recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. Marshall Islands still recognizes Taiwan and maintains diplomatic relations with it. And of course they too have a great Human Rights record, including the right to sell their babies to the US.

Human trafficking

Other than the Bikini Atoll, the only media coverage these islands received was the more recent British media coverage about an astonishing and shameless human trafficking ring, operating for years across the Marshall Islands archipelago and the United States of America. The racket involved pregnant women from the Pacific being lured to the United States with offers of US$ 10,000 and the promise of a new life in America, to give up their babies. If they sell babies for US$ 10,000 what would be the price for a UNHRC vote, one may ask?

Malawi is another well-known human rights violator. One of the poorest countries, in Malawi, democracy is often manipulated by the military. Malawi’s sixth elections were conducted in May 2019. The Presidential Poll results were nullified in February 2020 by the Constitutional Court. Fresh Presidential Elections were held on June 23, 2020 in which Lazarus Chakwera of the Malawi Congress Party and Saulos Chilima of the UTM Party were elected as President and Vice President respectively after getting 58.6% of the votes. Peter Mutharika of the Democratic Progressive Party and United Democratic Front coalition, who received 39.4% of the votes, accused the military of election malpractices.

Cote d’Ivoire (Ivory Coast) was another country that supported the resolution. On many occasions the Côte d’Ivoire government was accused of impunity and political violence, notably by its army and politicized judiciary. Côte d’Ivoire held local elections in October, marked by violence leading to deaths. Although Ivorian judges continued to investigate the crimes of the 2010-11 post-election crisis, President Alassane Ouattara declared an Amnesty for crimes related to the 2010-11 crisis, which has raised concerns that victims will not get justice in Ivorian courts.

The ICC is currently prosecuting Laurent Gbagbo, the former President, and Charles Ble Goude, a former Youth Minister and leader of a pro-Gbagbo militia, for crimes against humanity allegedly committed during the 2010-11 post-election crisis. The ICC is also investigating crimes committed by pro-Ouattara forces.

Ironically, these countries with long records of human rights violations, were among the UNHRC members who supported the resolution against Sri Lanka clearly kotowing to their former colonial masters.

Through 7,000 solar power plant installations, national grid to get 700 MW within three years: Power Minister

March 25th, 2021

Courtesy The Daily Mirror

Under the programme titled  ‘power plant to the village’, the government has planned to complete installing 7,000 solar power plants within three years and contribute 700 MW to the national grid, Power Minister Dullas Alahapperuma said.

Addressing the media to announce the plans to launch the first phase of the 7,000 Solar Power Plant project to be constructed islandwide in association with 7,000 selected transformers.

Accordingly, 880 power plants will be constructed as the first phase of the project and calling for tenders had already commenced today, the Minister said.

He said under the first phase, these power plants will be added to the national grid within seven months.

“These 7,000 power plants will be set up under a 20-year agreement with the Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB) and that there would be no political impact on them. If anyone dreaming of a change in the government, we should wish him a good night’s sleep,” the Minister said. (Chaturanga Samarawickrama)

All Madrasas will not be banned: Sarath Weerasekara

March 25th, 2021

Ajith Siriwardana and Yohan Perera Courtesy The Daily Mirror

While claiming that all the Madrasas will not be banned, Public Security Minister Sarath Weerasekara today reiterated that Madrasas that taught only religion and Arabic for children between the ages of five and 16 should be banned as they were against the National Education Policy.

He told Parliament that the Muslim society and organisations had already granted their approval to ban the Madrasas.

Responding to a statement made by SJB MP- S.M. Marikkar, the Minister said Madrasas that taught children above 16 years will not be banned.

I have never mentioned that all the Madrasas should be banned. A child in our country between five years of age and 16 should study according to the National Education Policy of the country without any racial difference. If there are Madrasas that teach only religion and language to children between five and 16, they should be banned,” he said adding that Muslim society and organizations had approved it.

MP Marikkar said that Madrasas were just like Pirivenas, cannot be banned and added that they should be operated subject to the syllabus of the Education Ministry and should not allow those coming from abroad to teach in the Madrasas.

The Minister said if someone wanted to become a Moulavi, there were a number of Madrasas that taught those above 16 and said such Madrasas will not be banned. 

Coronavirus: 271 positive cases detected on Thursday

March 25th, 2021

Courtesy Adaderana

Sri Lanka on Thursday (March 25) confirmed another 108 fresh cases of the novel coronavirus in the country as total infections detected within the day reached 271.

This brought the total number of Covid-19 confirmed in the country thus far to 91,289.

Department of Government Information said 20 of the newly -identified cases are returnees from foreign countries.

According to the Epidemiology Unit, 2,851 patients infected with the virus are currently under medical care at designated hospitals and treatment centres while total recoveries have reached 87,881. 

The death toll due to the Covid-19 pandemic in the country stands at 557.

UNHRC resolution seeks to interfere in matters within domestic jurisdiction – Foreign Min.

March 25th, 2021

Courtesy Adaderana

Minister of Foreign Affairs Dinesh Gunawardena the new resolution against Sri Lanka, adopted by the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) seeks to interfere in all matters that are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of a country.

Sri Lanka considers the resolution to be unwarranted, unjustified and a violation of the relevant articles of the United Nations Charter, in particular, Article 2(7) and the relevant sections of the UN resolutions 60/251 that provides for the mandate of the HRC, the minister remarked, delivering a special statement during today’s parliamentary session earlier today (March 25).

For the above reasons the resolution against Sri Lanka is illegal, he added.

Although the resolution says it is guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, it has violated Article 2(7) of the Charter which states that nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state.

We are a sovereign state that had been cooperating with the United Nations. We will protect our sovereignty. We are a democracy. We are the oldest parliamentary democracy in Asia. We have enjoyed universal suffrage for 90 years and today we are told that elections are not being held. We have held all the elections that could be held when the Election Commission decides.”
 
Foreign Minister says this resolution against Sri Lanka was pushed forward at the behest of a few countries representing one part of the world without the consent of Sri Lanka. It is therefore unhelpful and divisive.”

He stressed that there is no moral right to interfere in the affairs of a sovereign country in this manner.

No country has a greater interest in bringing about reconciliation among its people than Sri Lanka – a point that has been repeatedly been emphasized during the proceedings of the Human Rights Council.”

Minister Gunawardena, in his statement, pointed out that the list of co-sponsors of the resolution has amply demonstrated the divisive manner of such a country-specific initiative. He said it is clear from the result of the vote that there is no consensus within the Council on this resolution.

The resolution adopted on Tuesday (March 23), is intrusive of the sovereignty of the people of Sri Lanka and core values of the UN Charter, the minister said stressing that it can have an adverse effect on the ongoing efforts to maintain peace, reconciliation and development in Sri Lanka. It will lead to polarization of our societies.”

Sri Lanka categorically rejects the proposal in this resolution to expand the role of the OHCHR, the Foreign Minister reiterated. This sets a dangerous precedence and will have wide-ranging implications for all other countries.”

He went on to say that the Council cannot assume tasks that are not assigned to it by UN General Assembly in Resolution 60/251 or subsequent resolutions. This resolution is based on the rejected report on Sri Lanka by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights presented at the 46th Session of the Human Rights Council which violates the principles of sovereignty and equality of all states and non-interference in internal affairs, he continued.

The report is one-sided and has exceeded the mandate of the Human Rights Council, Foreign Minister emphasized. He said the report contains unsubstantiated, unwarranted comments of essentially political nature, which no self-respecting sovereign nature can accept.

The minister pointed out that the report was compiled within months following the formation of the new government in Sri Lanka, without any field visits, while the whole world was grappling with the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

He said a well-orchestrated propaganda campaign was launched against Sri Lanka ahead of the 46th session of the Human Rights Council. This campaign was carried out with an extensive focus on Sri Lanka while reports pertaining to the situation in over 10 other countries were presented at relevant HRC session. The synchronized content of the propaganda against Sri Lanka and exploitation of the OHCHR mechanisms demonstrated a clear case of pre-mandated endeavour. 

The new resolution, in an unwarranted manner, seeks to interfere in all matters that are domestic affairs of a sovereign country, Minister Gunawardena said further. He questioned the UN members whether Sri Lanka represents a case warranting the immediate attention of Human Rights Council. Sri Lanka only defeated a terrorist campaign and acted within the legal rights to defend its territorial integrity, he elaborated.

The minister says the Sri Lankan government is determined to achieve its main targets to improve the lives of its people despite the distractions from international bodies. No sovereign government is bound to work according to the external prescriptions but be guided by the democratic aspirations of its people.”

The government remains committed to protecting those who have made immeasurable sacrifices to neutralize terrorism, to protect the territorial integrity of the country and to regain the right to life, he added.

It is regrettable that the proponents of the resolution seek to create ambiguous mechanisms with funds of millions of US dollars at a time of severe financial constraints faced by the UN.

Pointing out that the UNHRC is wasting money to engage in an unnecessary inquiry against Sri Lanka, the Foreign Minister called upon the proponents of the resolution to diversify the money allocated for the implementation of this proposal to improve the lives of people affected by the conflict. He urged them to direct the funds to a more positive cause.

Speaking on the vote on the UNHRC resolution, he highlighted the fact that some countries that voted in favour of Sri Lanka withstood immense pressure. He thanked the countries for braving such adversities to reject the resolution.

Despite the vote on the resolution against Sri Lanka, the island nation will pursue its domestic mechanisms as pledged before the UN agencies aimed at bringing about reconciliation and lasting peace, the minister stressed.

Sri Lanka will continue to engage constructively with the UN and its agencies in the same spirit of cooperation for the betterment of the people including through the achievement of sustainable development goals, in keeping with the domestic priorities and policies as well as international obligations and undertaking.”

adstudio.cloud


Sri Lanka can win the admiration of the world by resisting the UNHRC ‘ Inquisition’

March 24th, 2021

Senaka Weeraratna

Cuba is one of the most admired countries in the Global South. Cuba stood up for Sri Lanka at UNHRC, with a speech calling for defiance and resistance. These are the hallmark attributes of Cuba which have won global admiration. 

Likewise, China, Pakistan, Venezuela, Philippines, Bolivia and altogether eleven countries backed Sri Lanka resolutely. Our sincere gratitude is due to all of them. 

The speeches of the Delegates from Pakistan, Venezuela and the Philippines were masterly orations. It was a treat to listen to them. Great analysis and eloquence. 

The delegate from.Sri Lanka, Mr. C.A. Chandraprema, the veteran Columnist, read out a well prepared draft speech exposing the hypocrisy and the double standards of the proponents of the Resolution. The so called ‘ Core Group’ of nations. ‘Which country would be most concerned about the welfare of its own people than the country itself?’ he asked.

He echoed the defiance and never say die spirit of Sri Lanka. If we are to die then let us die fighting for the principles we believe in and not capitulate in abject surrender. We have done no wrong to any soul to feel any remorse or guilt, was Sri Lanka’s stance.

In hindsight, the wisdom of a Counter Resolution from Sri Lanka as suggested by International law specialist Mr. D. Laksiri Mendis, in a recent article published in a local newspaper, looms large. Sri Lanka’s version of the chronology of events set out in a recital of the draft Counter Resolution would have then entered the records of the UNHRC proceedings. It is an option worth considering in future sessions of the UNHRC.

These speeches deserve to be played back over and over again on local TV and Radio Channels. Law students, in particular students of International law must be exposed to the reasoning and exposition inherent in the brief speeches.

Sri Lanka is on the right side of history. With China as an ally and support of the rest of Asia ( bar one – South Korea) which did not vote in favour of the Resolution against Sri Lanka, the signs are clear of the Global Split. Between the rapacious Colonial countries of the Global North and ex – colonies of the Global South. 

Sri Lanka must be congratulated for requesting a Vote. We showed that we are not prepared to bow our heads down to Western Imperialism deceitfully masquerading as paragons of Human Rights. 

In Nuremberg and Tokyo Trials what prevailed was Victor’s Justice. For the first time in history the only country which defeated brutal terrorism ( LTTE – that is responsible for killing thousands of innocent Tamils, and the Prime Minister of India, Rajiv Gandhi) is being subject to the Justice of the Defeated. 

This is a retrogression or must be treated as an Aberration.

It is like hauling the Allied Commanders and political leaders of USA, Soviet Union, Great Britain, France before an International War Crimes Tribunal for Crimes against 

Humanity, Genocide and Mass Murder of civilians after the end of the second world war. Using the evidence of bombing of Dresden, Tokyo, Atomic bombs over Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And the Rape of countless  German women by Russian, American and British troops of the Allies, as the basis of the criminal charges.

How would the world respond to such a drama? 

Double standards of the UNHRC

This is exactly what confronts Sri Lanka. The Punishment for defeating the evil of terrorism.

In the Report of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights there is hardly any mention of the serial killing and mass murder of innocent civilians committed by the LTTE. No condemnation. A document that is more appropriate to the proceedings of a ‘ Kangaroo Court’ than the hallowed precincts of a UN related international institution. 

UNHRC is now engaged in a shameless and morally indefensible exercise of white washing the LTTE and giving the status of Martyrdom to Prabhakar an. How would India respond if the UN system  recognized Godse, who killed Mahatma Gandhi, as a Martyr? The LTTE is no different. Its hands are stained with the blood of Rajiv Gandhi and over 1500 lives of IPKF soldiers. Yet the Foreign Minister of India, Jayshankar ( a Tamil from Tamilnadu) is totally indifferent to the sentiments of millions of Indians who have not forgotten the crimes of the LTTE perpetrated against Indians both on the soil of India as well as Sri Lanka.

Jayshankar wants India’s foreign policy to be forged by looking at Sri Lanka through the lens of Tamilnadu. This is suicidal for India. Tamilnadu is no longer an  exclusive Hindu state. Like the LTTE it pushes the Agenda of the Global Church. 

India will rue the day if a Dravidastan is formed. It will lead to the break up of India. By supporting Tamil aspirations for a Tamil Eelam, India is committing hara kiri. 

India no longer can claim leadership of South Asia. It failed to give support to a fellow South Asian country i.e. Sri Lanka, when three others namely Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Maldives ( all three Muslim countries)  showed South Asian solidarity and voted against the Resolution.

India is pushing all it’s regional neighbours to the warm embrace of China. 

Asia needs countries that  have a spine to lead this huge continent and stand up against the colonial West. The Historical  Adversary.

The East is East and the West is West. India is geographically in the East. Why did it not give voice to the concerns of Sri Lanka and join China, Pakistan, Philippines, Venezuela, Russia, Cuba, Bolivia?

Why did India join UK and USA and forget the history of humiliation and plunder under the British occupation ? The natural allies of India lie in Asia and not in the West. How can India forget this reality? 

We must take refuge in a value system that are non – negotiable. The grundnorm of our civilization and our links to each other. 

Unlike in a western country where almost every thing is for sale and values have significance only when they generate profit. It is not so in the East.

The image of India as a lackey of the West is causing enormous harm to India both within and outside India. Thanks to Jayshankar’s tribal driven agenda of foreign policy making for India. 

Posterity will never be kind to Indian Prime Minister Mody for having allowed a Tamilian (Jayshankar) to destroy India’ s millennial old links with Sri Lanka through a flawed foreign policy.

Singapore’s Foreign Affairs Minister is always an Indian or a Malay. Never a Chinese. Likewise a Tamilian Foreign Affairs Minister for India will not win the trust and confidence of Sri Lanka in respect to the latter’s existential problems. 

Tomorrow belongs to China, not India.

Pakistan, Bangladesh, Maldives and the rest of South Asia know that. The pattern of voting at UNHRC showed that clearly. 

Defiance should be the hall mark of Sri Lanka’s response to bullying tactics by Western colonial countries, both now and in the future. UN is a tool of Western Colonialism.

Sri Lanka can win the admiration of the entire world and put the current leadership of India to shame for showing spine when needed. Asia’s destiny is not subservience to the West. 

There was no greater embodiment of spine and moral courage than the great Netaji Subash Chandra Bose. Why is India failing him now? 

Sri Lanka can become the Cuba of Asia to the accompaniment of unceasing applause of Asia’s teeming millions yearning for moral leadership with backbone.

Senaka Weeraratna

THE GENERAL ELECTION OF 1956 Part 9A

March 24th, 2021

KAMALIKA PIERIS

The general election of 1956 introduced to its joyful and triumphant public something they never ever expected, political assassination.  SWRD Bandaranaike was assassinated in 1959. This was not the first assassination of a Head of state in South Asia. Liaquat Ali,  Prime Minister of Pakistan was assassinated in 1951. Bandaranaike was probably the second.

The first attempt at getting rid of Bandaranaike it appears was in August 1959.  CP de Silva had become severely ill at a cabinet meeting on 25 August 1959 after consuming a glass of milk and was flown to the UK for medical treatment. It was thought at the time, that the milk was intended for Bandaranaike.

KKS Perera said in Daily Mirror 7.4.2016 that CP’s own sister, the well-known Pediatrician, Dr. Ms. Stella de Silva, who was in USA, attending a seminar, rushed home on September 2nd, and on her initiation an eminent neurologist was summoned from UK. He accompanied CP to Hospital for Nervous Deceases in London on the 7th of September, where it was diagnosed as ‘acute nephritis’ or inflammation of kidneys due to either nephrotoxic effects of drugs and or toxins. The doctors were at a loss to describe exactly how such severe injury could happen so unexpectedly, but were convinced that it was caused from an ingestion of a toxic substance.” The fact that the poison could not be indentified easily in UK seems to show a foreign hand.

September 1959 was known to be a malefic period for Bandaranaike. Fortunately, SWRD was to address the UN General Assembly in first week of October and was to leave on September 28. This would help him escape the malefic period.

Bandaranaike‘s killers knew this. They first planned to kill Bandaranaike   at the opening of the new market in Kandy on the 23rd of September. The chosen assassin, the monk Somarama was to merge with the Asgiriya and Malwatte monks and vanish, after shooting Bandaranaike. But Somarama had panicked and the assassination did not take place.

SWRD was assassinated on Sept 26th. 1959   He was shot dead by, Talduwe Somarama a Buddhist monk at Bandaranaike’s residence in Rosmead Place, Colombo. Somarama however,   was only the tool. The brains behind the assassination was Mapitigama Buddharakkita, Viharadhipati of Kelaniya Rajamaha Vihara. Also founder and secretary of the Eksath Bhikkhu Peramuna of the MEP. 

Arrests were made and a Supreme Court trial before Justice TS Fernando started in February 1961. Somarama was defended by Lucian G.Weeramantry who appeared free of charge.  The Jury found the first accused Buddharakkita, second accused HP Jayewardena and fourth accused Somarama guilty by a unanimous verdict. All three faced death by hanging.

They appealed against their death sentence to the Court of Criminal Appeal. The Court of Criminal appeal dismissed all three appeals but amended the sentences imposed on Buddharakkita and Jayewardena from death to rigorous life imprisonment. Then the three convicted persons tried to get their verdicts reversed by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in the UK. Applications for special leave to appeal to Privy Council was refused by Privy Council in May 1962.

There was deep anger among the westernized elite regarding the convictions.   In Kandy, where I grew up, several elite persons    told my mother, angrily, that they would get the judgments squashed   by Privy Council in London.  My mother conveyed this to Justice TS Fernando, who was a close friend of my parents. Justice Fernando   replied, with contempt,    Wait and see. They will not   be given LEAVE to appeal.” He was correct.

Somarama was hanged in Welikada in July 1962. The life imprisonment sentences of the 1st and 2nd accused were commuted to 20 years by the UNP government of 1965. Mapitigama Buddharakkita died in 1967 of a heart ailment after serving time at Welikada prison. HP Jayawardena was released on August 4, 1977.

The Christian church got two converts after the Bandaranaike assassination. During the trial Somarama had stopped wearing the yellow robes when appearing in Courts.  Weeks before his execution Somarama was converted to Christianity and was baptized in his cell by an Anglican priest, said DBS Jeyaraj. Wimala Wijewardana whose name had been linked with Buddharakkita converted to the Catholic faith and left her property including Adisham, to the Church.

Those who planned the assassination would have considered it a great achievement to have got it done through the Sangha. They would have hoped that this would demoralize the Maha Sangha and make them run away from politics. That did not happen. The Maha Sangha were not shaken. But the public was, temporarily.

When Somarama assassinated SWRD, the public turned against the monks, said Ellawala Medhananda. They would put parcels of dirt into the begging bowl and would ask ‘pistole thiyanawada.  Monks did not venture out.

On the other hand, when Ellawala and other monks went to view SWRD’s lying in state, no one looked at them angrily or said anything.  Nobody said anything offensive to him when two weeks later he went by bus from Borella to Napawala, either. But on the bus from Avissawella to Napawala, one person,   known to Ellawala, had asked ‘pistole thinyanavada’. He later died an alcoholic.

The reason given for Buddharakkita wanting to kill Bandaranaike was that he did not get a lucrative contract he had asked for.   Buddharakkita had set up a company, Colombo Shipping Lines, in the name of HP Jayawardena, to carry freight for Sri Lanka government, specially rice from Burma. Stanley de Zoysa, MEP’s Minister of Finance and his brother Sidney, who was DIG, Police were also investors in Colombo Shipping Line.

 In May 1958 Buddharakkita made a bid for a tender to bring 200,000 tons of rice from Burma and carry a similar quantity for further period of three years. This was a very lucrative contract and the company stood to make enormous profits.

SWRD appointed a committee consisting of Philip Gunawardene, RG Senanayake and H.E.Pieris, Deputy Secretary to the Treasury, to examine the offer. Pieris did not think the company had the financial standing to undertake such a big venture and did not recommend it.  SWRD acting on the advice of the committee refused to give the contract to the company, resulting in great financial loss and disappointment to Buddharakkita and Jayawardena.   We are expected to believe that Buddharakkita got Bandaranaike killed for this. Not even a child will believe this.

The Bandaranaike assassination was a political assassination. Philip Gunawardene was the first to anticipate this. He had seen plenty of political intrigue at first hand, when he was living in UK, USA, and he could recognize high level intrigue when he saw it in Ceylon.  Philip announced in Parliament, Powerful forces, foreign and internal, which do not wish to see this government continue, are at work.  He turned to Bandaranaike and said,” Sir, your life is in danger”.

The 1956 MEP swing was not to the liking of UK or USA, observed historian Nayani Melegoda. It was seen as a blow to western prestige in Asia. Further, it is a blow in a place where a blow had not been anticipated, the west said.

UK was ‘bewildered ‘at this anti British vote.Sri Lanka was a country which had benefited greatly from it western connections and which had hitherto appeared to be such a staunch member of the Commonwealth. US was alarmed. Ceylon seemed to be swinging sharply left, it said. US sent Asst Secretary of State William Rowntree to Ceylon in 1958 to check this out.

When   the west comes across regimes they do not like, in newly independent states, they try to get rid of the head of state. The assassination is done through local agents who are supported in all sorts of ways.

The Bandaranaike assassination team appears to have had such external support. Bandaranaike‘s killers were defended by highly placed lawyers. At the Supreme Court trial Buddharakkita and Jayawardene were defended by reputed British Queen’s Counsel, Phineas Quass. Sir Dingle Foot QC, appeared on an honorary basis for Ven. Somarama, in London.

 DBS Jeyaraj says Buddharakkita had large sums of money at his disposal.   He had dished out Rs 50,000 to 60,000 in the 1952 election  to support  Wimala Wijewardena. In 1956 he had spent around one lakh on the election.  These were  huge sums of money in the 1950s and  the Sangha would not   normally have access to such sums . Temples did not run to that sort of money.

Buddharakkita    engaged  in business activity  at a level  far removed from  any business that a  bhikkhu would attempt. His businesses were in highly specialized   sectors. Clearly Buddharakkita had  business advisers in addition to donors.

Buddharakkita had his Colombo Shipping Lines. Buddharakkita had also invested in Metals and General Imports Co. This company together with the Czech firm Techno-export tendered for constructing the factory buildings at Sugar Corporation, Kantale. He won the contract. But the company got into difficulties and lost the contract. The link with a forieng firm shows that Buddharakkita had foreign business contacts.  

Buddharakkita has visited London. Buddharakkita and his associates made several trips to London spending substantial funds to obtain financial backing for the Colombo Shipping Company, said Meegama.  Sachi Sri Kantha says he had also visited London for a medical checkup.

Buddharakkita lived well. He travelled by car. Buddharakkita was openly disparaging about MEP high command. Buddharakkita used disparaging epithets for prominent political figures of the day, said Sri Kantha. Buddharakkita referred to Bandaranaike as  Sevela (slimy) Banda. Buddharakkita said of Philip, ‘there is no benefit to those who put him into power and power must be wrested from his hands’. He also used the term nondiya (cripple) to refer to RG Senanayake,  MP for Kelaniya, where his temple was located.  

Sachi Sri Kantha questions whether any ‘foreign hand’ was involved  in the Bandaranaike assassination. Was Buddharakkita contacted by the CIA, interested in toppling a Left-leaning prime minister into the Indian Ocean? It is no secret that the CIA was  involved inassassinations and assassination attempts on political leaders who were pro-Left during the period 1959 to 1962. Bandaranaike’s politics and actions were definitely pro-Left,  at  time when America was interested in Asia.

It may be of interest to delve into  ‘confidential’ records  to see whether Mapitigama Buddharakkita  had any direct or indirect contacts with international gumshoes, said Sri Kantha. Buddharakkita  died in prison (at a relatively young age of 46), when the UNP ,a pro-West government was in power. Has anyone taken the trouble to look seriously into this assassination,  Sri Kantha asked. ( Continued)

The Burqa Ban is not a “Mere Proposal”

March 24th, 2021

By Shivanthi Ranasinghe

Last week, the Pakistan High Commissioner Major General (Retd.) Muhammad Saad Khattak, in an unprecedented and shocking move took to Twitter to make a comment on an internal matter of Sri Lanka. His Tweet appeared shortly after Public Security Minister Rear Admiral (Retd.) Sarath Weerasekera made the long pending announcement that he signed the cabinet papers to present in Parliament to ban the burqa. Mr Khattak claimed that such a move would injure” the feelings of Muslims in Sri Lanka and elsewhere. 

Pakistan, who had been our all weather loyal friend had always prided itself for not being India. While India for decades had played politics with Sri Lanka by passing itself as a voice for Sri Lankan Tamils (whilst largely ignoring the Indian origin Tamils), Pakistan had maintained a strong relationship with the Sri Lankan Government. As such, Pakistan had been a friend to the nation as a whole without promoting or demoting any community in the Island. Despite the disparity in economy, territory and military strength, Pakistan had always treated Sri Lanka as an equal and given space for us to deal with our internal concerns as we see fit. 

Since the conclusion of the war against terrorism waged by the LTTE, there had been a concentrated effort by known and unknown parties to create tension between the Sinhalese and the Muslims. The incidents at Aluthgama and Digana had been twisted as attacks on the Muslim community. The provocation that led to these incidents or the bravery of the ordinary Sinhalese as well as the Buddhist clergy to protect the Muslims from the mob during these riots are being deliberately suppressed. The calm that prevailed after the vandalism of Buddhist statues in Mawanalla and even after the dastardly Easter Sunday Attack is also discounted. 

The West, masters of divisive politics, had not lost an opportunity to exacerbate the situation and portray that the Muslims are being marginalized by the Sinhalese. It was the West that took cudgels against Sri Lanka for cremating all COVID-19 deaths. The Islamic countries, other than perhaps a private inquiry, kept out of the debate. Even though the matter has been resolved the West remains still concerned” that the burials of COVID-19 deaths are only allowed in the remote parts of the Island. 

The irony is that the concern comes from the very elements that had reduced most Arabic countries to rubble. The resulting displacement of persons has been the largest since WWII. Countries like Germany pat their own back for absorbing large numbers of these displaced persons, but have never addressed the cause for this displacement in the first place. At the very least, none of these countries nor world bodies like the UNHRC had taken any measures to restore the destruction caused by these military invasions to alleviate the people from the consequential suffering. A case of point is the silence over NATO’s actions in 2011 to debilitate Libya’s water supply by targeting critical State owned water installations, including the factory that manufactured pre-stressed concrete cylinder pipes for the Great Manmade River (GMR) project that supplied water to over 70 percent of the Libyan population. 

The Islamic countries have refused to get duped by the hypocrisy promoted by the West. Hence, despite the propaganda against Sri Lanka on alleged discrimination against Muslims, the Islamic world had continued to be supportive to Sri Lanka. The West, to quote the British parliamentarian Lord Tariq Ahmad, is working hard to build support for the new resolution on Sri Lanka” at the UNHRC to make us accountable for all violations and abuses committed in Sri Lanka.” However, he fears that it would be an unwinnable” resolution. This means that they have been unable to muster the support for it outside the Western Hemisphere. 

It is at such a moment that Pakistan High Commissioner Khattak commented on a proposed action by the Sri Lankan Government. The Foreign Ministry’s response is however of greater concern. 

The ban is certainly not against the Muslim community and should not be misinterpreted as a move to intimidate a smaller community. The face covering veil that shrouds the entire body and thus enforcing an anonymity on the person, making it difficult even to distinguish the gender is not a religious or a cultural attire. It is a political stance to create exclusivity from the rest of the nation. Concerns over this alien costume has been coming from within the Sri Lankan Muslim community itself. 

Until the Easter Attack in April 2019, Sri Lankans with a sense of unease watched Muslim women in growing numbers opting to cover themselves in a burqa and some even with a niqab. However, this was seen as a matter that the Muslim community needed to resolve. This perception changed immediately with the Easter Attack. Then only the severity of the situation was grasped as it became clear that this dress code is a strong indication of extremism that will not hesitate at terrorism. Hence, even before the then Yahapalana Government could react, it was the people who reacted against the burqa by not allowing anyone in it from entering public premises, including buses. With everyone following this precautionary measures, the Yahapalana Government had little choice but to impose a temporary ban on the burqa. In turn, it did not provoke a reaction from Pakistan or any of our traditional friends. 

Traditionally, Sri Lankan Muslim women, especially the young women, did not cover their heads. They mostly wore the shalwar with a shawl loosely wound around or hanging from the neck. The older women used to cover the heads very loosely with their sari fold. Today, this has changed almost completely and those who do not wear the burqa often sports a hijab, which still covers the head but with a colorful scarf and done so quite artfully. This does not cover the face and thus does not hide the wearers’ identity. The burqa ban does not include the hijab. 

The burqa/niqab are not the only adaptations by the Muslim community that make the other Sri Lankan communities uncomfortable. The Halal certification for food has become a hidden cost for even the non-Muslims. Sunanda Deshapriya saw the Vesak lanterns hung by soldiers near their camp in the North as a religious invasion. However, this added cost due to the Halal certification to non-Muslims is yet to draw a likewise comment from Deshapriya and his cahoots. Still, though not vociferously communicated, this is a situation that most Sir Lankans are unhappy. 

Special banking facilities for the Muslim community alone is another unfair practice of the Muslims. The Muslim entrepreneurs are privy to bank loans at almost zero interest rates, which makes it harder for the other business communities to compete fairly at the market. 

Muslims also enjoy polygamy, which is an offense if committed by another community. However, the concern in many of the social groups is more on the underaged brides than of polygamy. 

The sharia laws and quasi courts also is extremely upsetting the other Sri Lankan communities. Yet, the immediate recommendation is to ban the burqa along with the niqab. This recommendation was once again reiterated by the Presidential Commission Investigating on the Easter Attack. 

Instead of explaining the background and reasons for the stance on the burqa, the Foreign Ministry has tried to dilute Rear Admiral Weerasekera’s statement and his move to legalize the ban. In a statement released by Foreign Ministry the Foreign Secretary Admiral (Retd.) Jayanath Colombage has stated that the ban is merely a proposal”. 

However, it is not and should not be treated or dismissed as a mere proposal”. Since the Easter Attack the extremism represented by the burqa along with the exclusivism certain sections of the Muslim community is enveloping themselves is cause for apprehension. Even before the Easter Attack, Rear Admiral Weerasekera had been highlighting the unforgivable acts of these extremist elements that also includes the flattening of the ancient Buddhist temple in Digavapi. 

When he contested at the 2020 General Elections he pledged to address this growing extremism that is threatening the ways, monuments and Iives of the non-Muslims in this country. When he started his election campaign he did not have a base in Colombo. Yet, after canvassing for a very short period of few months he got the largest mandate from the district. 

For a man who had always spoken against terrorism and extremism to win with an overwhelmingly large mandate from a liberal minded, cosmopolitan vote base as Colombo signifies the strongly worded message people wanted from the new Administration. No one has the right to dismiss this message as a mere proposal”. 

When Admiral Colombage was appointed as the Foreign Secretary there was hope that he will be without the prejudices afflicting our Foreign Ministry. Despite the numerous missions we maintain throughout the world, we have consistently failed to properly articulate our position to the outside. Instead, we are always aiming to appease and wilt at even the slightest glare. In the face of this abysmal failure to project Sri Lanka positively, the very 

need for our missions has been questioned. 

This sorry state of affairs was expected to change with Admiral Colombage at the helm. However, instead of explaining the reasons for the ban, he had opted to dilute Rear Admiral Weerasekera’s move and thereby have created the space for protest. It is not clear whether the same stance is adapted by the Foreign Minister Dinesh Gunawardena. 

Had the Foreign Ministry explained the basis for this ban, Pakistan would have understood and continue to support us. They too are deeply affected by undisciplined ideologists who harbor extreme views. Protecting the porous borders along the Pakistan territory, especially along Afghanistan is a tough challenge for the country. These border regions, which are often rural and cut off from the mainstream have schools taught by uneducated teachers. Their take on the religion is warped and seeks to twist young minds to view the world violently. It is mostly their action that the Western media often highlight to paint the entire country as a bomb exploding terrorist terrain. 

The statements made by the former western governor Azath Salley would have certainly helped the Foreign Ministry to build its case. Certainly a country cannot allow elements that would not accept or respect the Constitution or the law of the land. At the same time, a community – majority or minority – of a country cannot be allowed exclusive privileges denied to other communities based. 

Instead of taking the easy route to be in other countries’ good books for short term gains, our Foreign Ministry must get its act together. Its duty is not to create dispute over statements made by our policy makers but to articulate our position to the world. Therefore, instead of shooshing the people or their political representatives it is hoped that Admiral Colombage, one time Commander of the Sri Lanka Navy, too would have the same spine and courage as Rear Admiral Weerasekera, who was also a high ranking officer of the same Navy, to stand by the country by fearlessly speaking out the truth. 

ranasingheshivanthi@gmail.com 

Sri Lanka slams Western powers for bullying: after resolution passed at UNHRC

March 24th, 2021

 by Jamila Husain Courtesy NewsIn.Asia

Colombo, March 24 (Daily Mirror) – Speaking to media soon after the resolution on Sri Lanka was passed at the UNHRC, Gunawardena said that the fact that only 22 countries had voted in favour of the Resolution while 11 voted against and 14 abstained, showed that several countries were against this unfair pressure brought upon by the European and Western powers.

He further said that any resolution sponsored at the UNHRC should have the consent of the concerned country and without their approval no resolutions could be implemented. He maintained firmly that the government would not give into the unfair pressure brought upon by this new Resolution and would continue to conduct a domestic probe on allegations of human rights violations and other complaints during the war period.

This Resolution on Sri Lanka was moved by Britain and supported by the western powers who want to dominate the global south. Our call as well as the call from several countries were that our concentration should be on COVID-19 first and as the world as a whole we should defeat the virus first. Even now vaccinations have to be provided to over 100 countries,” Mr. Gunawardena said.

President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, soon after his election promised the country to withdraw from the resolution which was co- sponsored by the previous government. Cosponsoring such a resolution was not possible.

Even my predecessor Thilak Marapana mentioned this internationally that Sri Lanka constitutionally could not go forward with that resolution. President Rajapaksa said a domestic mechanism would be implemented where a commission was appointed headed by a Supreme Court Judge to entertain any allegations by any Sri Lankan citizen during the time we were facing the brutal conflict against the LTTE which is a banned organization today in Europe, US, India and even in the UK.,” he said.

However these western countries still want this resolution initiated leading to more dangerous objectives,” the Minister said.

Minister Gunawardena further thanked countries who had voted against the Resolution and those who had abstained from voting stating the fact that powerful countries such as India and Japan had abstained, only showed that they too were against the resolution.

He further said that Sri Lanka had been able to garner support from Latin America, South America, Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia and other countries across three continents who had supported the voice against domination of what the Western Powers were seeking and Sri Lanka would continue its commitment to the UN and uphold its democratic rights. (Jamila Husain)

Factors behind India’s abstention on Lanka resolution at UNHRC

March 24th, 2021

By P.K.Balachandran Courtesy newsin.asia

Colombo, March 23: India on Tuesday abstained from voting on the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) resolution on Sri Lanka for a variety of reasons. The immediate reason perhaps lay in the April 6 elections to the Tamil Nadu State Assembly in which the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) is contesting 20 seats of the 234 seats in alliance with the ruling All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK).

The alleged human rights violations in Sri Lanka against the Tamil minority is a key electoral issue in Tamil Nadu, a fact which the BJP cannot ignore. And the subject matter of the UNHRC resolution is the alleged violation of the human rights of the Tamils of Sri Lanka.

If India had voted against the resolution moved by the West-led Core Group on Sri Lanka, the BJP and its ally, the AIADMK, would have had to pay a heavy electoral price.

However, New Delhi chose to be neutral rather than vote for or against the resolution. This was because it could not alienate Sri Lanka either. Sri Lanka has great geo-political importance for India in the context of China’s ever widening footprint in the island nation in the economic  sphere. Dominance in the economic sphere could easily acquire an additional political and geo-strategic content.      

The resolution on Sri Lanka was adopted at the UNHRC with 22 of the 47 members voting for the resolution, 11 voting against, and 14 abstaining. India, Japan, Indonesia, Libya, Bahrain, Cameroon and Nepal were among the countries that abstained. China, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Philippines, Russia, Somalia, Uzbekistan, and Venezuela were among the countries that voted against the resolution.

The Resolution

The resolution requested the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) to enhance its monitoring and reporting on the situation of human rights in Sri Lanka, including progress in reconciliation and accountability, and to present an oral update to the Human Rights Council at its forty-eighth session, as well as a written update at its forty-ninth session, and a comprehensive report that includes further options for advancing accountability, at its fifty-first session, both to be discussed in the context of an interactive dialogue.

The resolution also encourages the OHCHR and relevant special procedure mandate holders to provide, in consultation with and with the concurrence of the Government of Sri Lanka, advice and technical assistance on implementing the above-mentioned steps.

India’s View

The Indian representative said: India’s approach to the question of human rights in Sri Lanka is guided by two fundamental considerations. One is our support to the Tamils of Sri Lanka for equality, justice, dignity and peace. The other is in ensuring the unity, stability and territorial integrity of Sri Lanka. We have always believed that these two goals are mutually supportive and Sri Lanka’s progress is best assured by simultaneously addressing both objectives.”

India supports the call by the international community for the Government of Sri Lanka to fulfill its commitments on the devolution of political authority, including through the early holding of elections for Provincial Councils and to ensure that all Provincial Councils are able to operate effectively, in accordance with the 13th amendment to the Sri Lankan Constitution.”

At the same time, we believe that the work of OHCHR should be in conformity with the mandate given by the relevant resolutions of the UN General Assembly.”

We would urge that the Government of Sri Lanka carry forward the process of reconciliation, address the aspirations of the Tamil community and continue to engage constructively with the international community to ensure that the fundamental freedoms and human rights of all its citizens are fully protected.”

Voting in the UNHRC on the Sri Lanka resolution

Sri Lankan View

The Sri Lankan Representative C.A.Chandraprema said that the resolution was unwarranted, unjustified and in violation of the relevant articles of the UN Charter in particular article 2 sub section 07, and relevant sections of the United Nations General Assembly resolutions 60/251 that provides for the mandate of the Human Rights Council.”

He said all members of the council would agree that UNHRC cannot assume tasks not assigned to it by the UN General Assembly in resolution 60/251 or in subsequent resolutions.

The Sri Lankan envoy said the resolution violated the principles of sovereign equality of all states and non-interference in internal affairs. The resolution was presented without the consent of Sri Lanka as the country concerned and is therefore unhelpful and divisive.

No country has a greater interest in bringing about reconciliation among its peoples than the country concerned, a point that has repeatedly been emphasized during the proceedings of this council,”  Chandraprema said.

Notwithstanding the stated objectives of the proponents of the resolution, Sri Lanka is of the view that this resolution will polarize Sri Lankan society and adversely affect economic development, peace and harmony,” he added.

Fallout For Indo-Lankan Ties

Although Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi is believed to have explained India’s predicament to the Sri Lankan President Gotabaya Rajapakasa over phone and had assured him that India would do no harm to Sri Lanka, the majority community in Sri Lanka, the Sinhalese, would not take kindly to the Indian abstention.

India-Sri Lanka -Lankan relations, none too good at the moment, will be further strained, observers believe. Relations had touched a new low after Sri Lanka disregarded a 2019 agreement to give India the project to construct the East Container Terminal in Colombo port. Losing faith in Colombo’s word, the government of India did not take Sri Lanka’s alternative offer of the West Contain Terminal, leaving the matter to a  private Indian company, the Adanis, to negtiate.

India is also apprehensive about the fate of the 13th.Amendment (13A) of the Sri Lankan constitution which gives the provinces (particularly the Tamil-speaking Northern and Eastern provinces) a measure of autonomy. The 13A flowed from the India-Sri Lanka Accord of 1987 which was meant to solve the Tamil question in Sri Lanka through devolution of power to provinces.

For the past few months Sri Lankan ministers, including the former Provincial Councils minister Adm.Sarath Weerasekara had been talking of repealing the 13A on the grounds that the provincial councils were wasteful and divisive. Following India’s expression of concern, Lankan President Gotabaya Rajapaksa relieved Weerasekara of the portfolio and later announced that Provincial Councils elections will be held in June after clearing the legal hurdles. But India continues to be apprehensive and its representative at the UNHRC Indra Mani Pandey made the fate of the 13A the burden of his speech.

Importance of Sri Lanka    

However, even though New Delhi is miffed with Colombo on several grounds, it cannot but build good relations with it in view of China’s growing economic footprint in Sri Lanka, which could acquire a political and geopolitical dimension. Geo-economics is the basis of geopolitics in this age of globalization.

Citing a security threat, New Delhi successfully thwarted Colombo’s bid to give some power projects in the Northern Province to a Chinese company. India made Sri Lanka a part of its Indian Ocean Maritime Security architecture with the responsibility to coordinate the mechanism’s activities by establishing a Secretariat in Colombo. Recently, in a thinly veiled attempt to show its military potential, India participated in the 70th.Anniversary celebrations of the Sri Lankan Air Force by sending its Tejas fighter aircraft and aerobatic teams to give demonstrations.

India bent over backwards to be the first to supply COVID-19 vaccines with the External Affairs Minister Dr.S.Jaishankar himself flying to Colombo to make the offer to President Gotabaya Rajapaksa. Although the second consignment of the COVISHIELD vaccines will be delayed because of supply constraints, to date, India is the only vaccine supplier in Sri Lanka.    India is continuing its house building projects in Sri Lanka and has a US$ 15 million project to help Buddhist institutions.

However, it remains to be seen how India will reconcile its long term interest to maintain good relations with Sri Lanka with the short term and immediate interest in keeping the Tamils of Tamil Nadu happy in the un-up to the April 6 State Assembly elections. Observers see India’s neutrality in the UNHRC as a way out of the sticky situation.

Resolution on Lanka is a bid to undermine its development and stability, China says

March 24th, 2021

Courtesy NewsIn.Asia

Geneva, March 23 (newsin.asia): The Chinese Ambassador in the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) Chen Xu  speaking on the resolution against Sri Lanka commended Sri Lanka for its commitment to promoting and protecting human rights, advancing sustainable economic and social development, improving people’s living standards, safeguarding the rights of vulnerable groups, advancing national reconciliation and combating terrorism, and congratulates the government of Sri Lanka on its achievements in the above-mentioned areas.

Ambassador Chen said that according to UN General Assembly resolution 60/251, the work of the Human Rights Council should be guided by principles of, among other things, universality, impartiality, objectivity and non-selectivity. All parties should promote and protect human rights through genuine dialogue and cooperation, and refrain from double standards and politicization of human rights.

We maintain that all countries should abide by the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, respect the sovereignty and independence of other countries, and abandon the practice of interfering in other countries’ internal affairs, and undermining their sovereignty and international cooperation under the pretext of human rights,” he said.

The sponsors of draft resolution L.1/Rev.1, ignoring the efforts and achievements made by the government of Sri Lanka in promoting and protecting human rights as well as the will of the people of Sri Lanka, attempt to interfere in Sri Lanka’s internal affairs and undermine its development and stability under the pretext of human rights. It is by no means aimed at the promotion and protection of human rights, but a typical example of politicization of human rights. This dangerous trend should not be encouraged at the Human Rights Council.”

In order to uphold the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and the principles established in General Assembly resolution 60/251, the Chinese delegation calls for a vote on draft resolution L.1/Rev.1 and will vote against it. We call on all members of the Human Rights Council to oppose this draft resolution,” Chen said.

Artificial beach between Kalutara and Mount Lavinia is a success: Coast Conservation Dept.

March 24th, 2021

Chaturanga Samarawickrama Courtesy Adaderana

An artificial beach created along Kalutara’s Calido Beach, the Ratmalana-Angulana stretch and in Mount Lavinia, which raised strong protests from activists, has been successful, Coast Conservation and Coastal Resource Management Department Chief Engineer (Coastal Design & Research) Sujeewa Ranawaka said.

He told the Dailymirror that the project was implemented to build an artificial beach, stretching 2 km along Kalutara’s Calido Beach, 1 ½ km along the Ratmalana-Angulana stretch, and 500 m in Mount Lavinia.

He said the project aimed to create a 15m beach at Wellawatte through the sand engine method and 150,000 m3 of sand was placed on Mount Lavinia beach and is expected to be transported to Wellawatte.

“The pattern of sand accretion/deposition repeats at the canal outlets at Dehiwala and Wellawatte. The coastal structures had been built to prevent sand deposition at the outlet to keep it open,” he said. 

The coastline between Mount Lavinia and Wellawatte would remain relatively stable for many decades albeit with seasonal changes, Mr Ranawaka said.

“The sand deposited at Mount Lavinia had to pass three major natural and artificial structures. Many associations, organisations raised their opposition over the project claiming that the Government was attempting to destroy the natural habitat,” he said.

However, the current situation has changed and now we have a large beach area except the filled rock on coastal barriers.

From Mount Lavina to the Wellawatte area the beach had widened about 30 to 40 meters from the sea with natural protection to the coast.

With the effort of the Coast Conservation Department, the country has got a beautiful beach area which can help even to increase the tourism sector, Mr Ranawaka added.

Moreover, the Chief Chef of the Mount Lavinia Hotel Dr Pabilis Silva also claimed that the beach that created in front of the hotel is very precious for them. He claimed that he was also in the wrong manner overfilling the beach area with sand.

However, the artificial beach is a great success done by the Government, Dr. Pabilis Silva said. 

Murali rejects allegations by Fonseka

March 24th, 2021

Courtesy Adaderana

EC decides not to register political parties named after religions or ethnicities

March 24th, 2021

Courtesy Adaderana

The Election Commission has decided not to register political parties whose official names portray affiliations to religions or ethnicities.

The decision was taken at a meeting of the Elections Commission yesterday (March 23), Elections Commissioner-General Saman Sri Ratnayake said.

He stated that a political party is registered as a national party as per the existing law, therefore it was decided not to register parties named after religions or ethnicities.

During the meeting, it has also been decided to amend the official names of the recognized political parties which are currently registered with such religious or ethnic names.

Further, the relevant political parties will also be informed and given a reasonable time to amend any such clauses in the constitution of the party.

Two more COVID-19 deaths bring tally to 554

March 24th, 2021

Courtesy Adaderana

Sri Lanka has reported 02 more coronavirus-related deaths, the Director-General of Health Services confirmed today (March 24).

The new deaths bring the number of COVID-19 related deaths witnessed in Sri Lanka to 554 in total.

01. The deceased is a 65-year-old female resident from Colombo 15. She died on 21.03.2021at her residence and the cause of death is mentioned as  Covid-19 pneumonia and heart failure.

02. The deceased is a 76-year-old male resident from Kolonnawa. He was diagnosed as infected with the Covid-19 virus while undergoing treatments at a  private hospital and transferred to Kothalawala Defense University  Hospital where he died on 24.03.2021. The cause of death is mentioned as COVID-19 pneumonia with acute kidney injury, causing multiple organ failures.

COVID-19 238 new positive cases within the day-caseload in Sri Lanka climbs past 91,000

March 24th, 2021

Courtesy Adaderana

Sri Lanka has registered 106 more positive cases of Covid-19 today (March 24), the Ministry of Health confirmed.

Thereby, Sri Lanka has detected 238 new positive cases of COVID-19 within the day.

As per statistics, the total number of Covid-19 infections confirmed so far in the country now stands at 91,018.

Recoveries from the virus meanwhile climbed to 87,630 earlier today, as 324 more patients regained health.

However, 2,836 active cases are still under medical care at selected hospitals and treatment centers located across the island.

Total lives claimed by the pandemic outbreak sits at 552 at present.


Copyright © 2026 LankaWeb.com. All Rights Reserved. Powered by Wordpress