|
|
By Editor - 'The Island'
Last Saturday we were treated to a hilarious outburst of intoxicated logic in the editorial of the once staid Daily News under the caption 'The Island's thick skin'. The cause for this inspired outburst was our editorial of January 7, titled 'Aloy in cuckooland' where we commented on a speech made by the Chairman of Lake House, Mr. Aloy Ratnayake on media freedom at a seminar held at the British Council. We contested many of the points made by Mr. Ratnayake on his speech and commented on his relative inexperience in the media but instead of having our arguments rebutted, we were treated to a 'kohede yanne, malle pol' logic and none of our arguments met. Instead 'character certificates' and 'certificates of merit' were issued to Mr. Ratnayake , some others, and even to himself by the Editor of the Daily News .In our comments we said that Mr. Ratnayake as a private citizen and a lawyer was entitled to his views but when he, with his brief foray into journalism Ð just one and a half years Ð decides to hector the media, particularly the press, he is rushing into an area where angels fear to tread. Apparently our reference to him as a provincial lawyer appears to have caused umbrage to his favourite scribe. The plain fact is that Mr. Ratnayake was unheard of in journalistic circles till his entry into Lake House and we said so. We do not see any objection to any lawyer being called a 'provincial lawyer'. There are many such distinguished lawyers in the provinces and in fact some provincial lawyers will object to them being described as City lawyers.
Apparently, 'Slaves singing praises of his masters' is not a phrase that the Daily News editor is familiar with. Having praised his master, he then awards to certificates of merit to two other lawyers Ð his old school chums Ð entirely unconnected with the issues we raised!
Mr. Ratnayake's relative inexperience in journalism has not been denied but instead we have been described as 'flailed failures'. Whatever it means, we do concede that we have had many failures in life but we had moments of success as well such as in being able to recommend the recruitment of a now prominent editor, senior to us in the profession, as a stringer to Lake House.
In The Island editorial, we said that there were two schools of journalism in Sri Lanka today: Watchdog journalism and lapdog journalism and added that Mr. Ratnayake belongs to the latter school, going by the report of speech. Instead of meeting the charge of 'lapdog journalism' of his institution the Daily News editor confuses or tries to obfuscate the issue with the recruitment of journalists on higher salary scales by the founder of The Island, Mr. Upali Wijewardene . Now this is being followed by Lake House. The editor, it is clear, can't distinguish between 'cheque book journalism 'and 'lapdog journalism'! Mr. Wijewardene's 'cheque book journalism' was amply justified in that he, by himself, fought the mighty Lake House state monopoly to establish and independent press at a time when the other two independent press groups were breathing their last. If not for Upali Newspapers, since its commencement in 1981, the SLFP would have had not had a newspaper even to report their meetings till 1994. Remember we were identified and vilified as 'SLFP papers' by Messrs. Premadasa et al. Remember we paid Rs. 2 million as defamation for merely reporting what SLFP leader Mrs. Bandaranaike said?Remeber we were foud guilty of a breach of parliamentary privilege for publishing an interview with Mrs Bandaranaike ? The present editor of the Daily News who was the UNPs chief propagandist, as editor of Lankapuwath at that time will not remember all that. He should ask the SLFP leader Mrs. Sirima Bandaranaike about the role of Upali newspapers.
The Daily News editor then rambles on incoherently on various issues such as Ishini Wickremasinghe, now the Golden Girl of the Peoples Alliance but who, not many moons ago, was charged by this very government under the Prevention of Terrorism Act for alleged misreportage in her father's TV company TNL. All we can say is that Ishini is still a charming girl, but in recent times fallen into bad company.
In reply to Mr. Ratnayake's comments that the private media dared on criticise the UNP leaders when they were in power, we pointed out to the scathing attacks launched on our founder, Mr. Upali Wijewardene by UNP leaders and after his death on other directors. We pointed out to how President Jayewardene threatened to freeze bank accounts of Upali newspapers when we dared oppose the Indo-Lanka Agreement. We said how journalists of The Island sent their families abroad when they were threatened by security forces and the JVP in those troubled times. We did not mention that posters came up overnight in Upali Group buildings saying 'Death to those who work' signed by the Military Commander of the JVP. But we worked. fearlessly and later found out that the posters were not by the JVP but by those from Mr. Premadasa's electorate in Colombo Central! That's how we dared the UNP Mr. Ratnayake.
What does the Daily News editor say to all this? He recalls his role the as editor of Lankapuwath. The least said about it, the better.
The most significant point made by us was contesting the perception of the freedom of the media (particularly the press) as stated by Mr. Ratnayake. In his speech he lamented: 'The press got its freedom but sadly displayed no gratitude or even a sense of responsibility in its new found unbridled freedom after the PA came to power. The attitude of the PA government towards free media freedom especially that of president Chandrika Kumaratunga is seen in little acts of tolerance and magnanimity allowing malicious satires about her such as always breakdown on TNL which would never have been allowed either by Messrs. J. R. Jayewardene or Premadasa'.
We pointed out that the freedom of the media and the press was not the dowry of any one person where crumbs of freedom could be thrown to lapdogs waiting at the masters/ mistress table but an inherent fundamental right enshrined in the constitution. On that issue the Daily Noise (sic) maintains a deafening silence !
But there is constant repetition by state propagandists that we journalists should be 'grateful' towards President Kumaratunga who had 'restored the freedom of the media' in her 'magnanimity' etc. This is acknowledged supine, servile, obsequious, subservient, attitude is a disgrace to independent journalism. This is the attitude of adopted by sycophants and toadies and not of modern day independent journalists.
Quite in contrast to Mr. Ratnayake's contention that journalists should be 'grateful' to president Kumaratunga for her 'magnanimity', the Secretary General of the UN Mr. Kofi Annan , in his lecture on Global Media issues to the World Press Freedom Committee and the John's and James L Knight Foundation Committee recently said: 'Friends, freedom of speech is a right be to fought for and not a blessing to be wished for..... (The Island January 8 Page 6)
Our comments on Mr. Ratnayake's perception about press freedom were based on a news report published in the Daily News. Later, his speech was reported verbatim in the Sunday Observer where much more of his views on the press and the media were aired. Under the heading : 'Journalists should observe ethical norms ', Mr. Ratnayake reiterates a well known maxim stated in elementary books on constitutional law that there are limits to freedom of expression. He then went on to uphold the Code of Ethics for Journalists, the Press Council Law and the need to control media freedom through the Penal Code with criminal defamation and punishment
His narrow, suffocating attitude towards freedom of expression is in marked contrast to the liberal views of the freedom of the press as entertained by those like Kofi Annnan. In the same article referred to above he says: 'Now as the audience knows well, there are those who will question the value of freedom of speech in their societies, those who argue that it threatens stability and endangers progress, those who still consider freedom of speech as an imposition from abroad and not indigenous expression of every people's demand for freedom
'What has always struck me about this argument is that it is never made by people but by governments and I repeat by governments, never by the powerless but the powerful; never by the voiceless but by those whose voices can be heard. Let us put this argument once and for all to the only test that matters, the choice of the people to know more or less, to be heard or to be silent to stand up or kneel down.
Do we stand up or kneel down, Mr. Editor and Mr. Ratnayake?
Mr. Ratnayake in his passionate plea for restricting the freedom of the press, hails the infamous Press Council Law which if implemented will fully bind journalists hand and foot. He is all for the code of ethics framed under this law. He hails the archaic law of Criminal Defamation. Hewill sound authoritative about the law to those who want journalists gagged or partly gagged but he does not seem to have read the Peoples Alliance Manifesto about the pledges given on the media by President Kumaratunga.
We hope he reads this at least today in The Island. The PA manifesto on the Chapter on Media Policy states: 'The PA therefore attaches the greatest importance to strengthening the media and providing a framework within which the media can function independently and without inhibition. This entails significant changes with regard to structures on ownership, policy objectives, legislative instruments applicable, administrative policy in respect of such matters as facilities and the attitude of government issues which are indispensable for a sound media policy.
Major constraints arising from the provisions in the constitution, Public security Ordinance, Press Council Law, official secrets Act and the Parliament Powers and Privileges acts will be removed by amendment to this legislation.
How does this square up with Mr. Ratnayake's praise of the Press Council Law and criminal defamation et al? The manifesto calls for removal of major constraints while Mr. Ratnayake waxes eloquent on the uses of these laws meant to stifle journalists!
And above all the manifesto states: Action will be taken to broadbase Lake House and the shares of Lake House will be traded in the stock market! Four years later Lake House is still under rigid control with Mr.Ratnayake the political nominee as Chairman who speaks about the freedom of the press! If promises were genuine neither Lake House as it is nor Mr. Ratnayake should be there!
Navy destroys 11 Sea Tiger craft, most powerful warship, kills Batticaloa area leader
Time to strengthen Navy fleetBy Our Defence Correspondent
Unnoticed by the rest of the country, the Sri Lanka Navy this week notched up one of the biggest victories at sea in a 3-part battle between Trincomalee and Mullaittivu.Incredibly, even the Defence Ministry still doesnât seem to have a clear idea of the successful fight, which raged on the nights of January 7, 8 and 11.
But it has now been clearly established that among the eleven Sea Tiger craft which were sunk or disabled, was a large boat carrying a twin-barreled 23 millimeter gun, a powerful weapon never before seen on a Tiger boat.
At least fifty-four Tiger cadres were killed in the fighting, and a huge number wounded, possibly over a hundred.
Among those confirmed dead is Lieutenant Colonel Keethan, the newly appointed Batticaloa area political wing leader. He is the highest ranking leader to be killed in many months. Lieutenant Colonel is the LTTEâs second highest rank.
The fighting which raged in the first part of the battle, on Jan. 8, was covered extensively by this column on Wednesday (Jan. 13 - ``A good start to the year, at sea)ââ Part of the second half, which raged on Jan. 11 and ended shortly before dawn on Jan. 12, was mentioned in the same column.
Briefly, an LTTE reconnaissance craft was destroyed by a navy fast attack craft off Mullaittivu on the morning of Jan. 8 (which we earlier mistakenly said was Jan.7).
The Tigers, having seen only the one navy craft, were encouraged by the apparent belief that there was only a weak navy presence in the area at the time, and that night sailed a convoy of 10 boats from the Salpe Aru area in the Trincomalee district, towards Mullaittivu.
A navy flotilla attacked the convoy, and with only slight damage to two Dvoras, disabled six of the convoyâs boats. What only the Tigers knew at the time was that the convoy was carrying about 250 new cadres, who had been freshly trained in the Thoppigala jungles in the east. They were obviously on their way to join in planned massive attacks on the army in the Wanni when the rains end later this month.
Intelligence has now confirmed that 22 of them were killed, and another 30 severely wounded by navy gunfire. Over a hundred more suffered lesser wounds. Only 60 are believed to have escaped unscathed. However, some of the boats managed to get back to the Salpe Aru area, with most of the dead and wounded. Among the survivors was Lt. Col. Keethan. Then, on the night of Jan. 11 (Monday), two boats, possibly two which survived >from the convoy, tried to get to Mullaittivu. Keethan was on board. One of the boats carried the big 23 mm gun.
But they were intercepted by alert navy fast attack craft off Kuchchaveli. One LTTE craft, hit repeatedly by gunfire, caught fire and blew up. The other fled back to the shore, but was so badly damaged that it sank about 200 meters from the beach.
At this time, four more Sea Tiger craft came out of the Mullaittivu area, heading towards the battle. The LTTE was obviously intent on saving their big warship, as well as Keethan and the supplies his boats had been carrying. But the navy was wide awake by now, and these four were intercepted long before they could get to Kuchchaveli. Two were sunk, and the other two escaped.
Intelligence reported that another 32 Tigers were killed that night. The navy suffered no casualties, or damage. The army quickly rushed troops to the Kuchchaveli beach, where they found the sunken boat.
As the troops neared the beach, they sighted two women Sea Tigers, but before they could close in, both swallowed cyanide vials and killed themselves.
The body of one more woman Sea Tiger was found in the boat.
The navy later recovered the remains of the boat, and certainly got a surprise at what they had destroyed. For starters, there was the big gun, which turned out to be twin-barreled, meaning it has twice the firepower. It is fortunate that the Tigers didnât manage to hit one of the navy boats, since even a single shot would have destroyed or severely damaged any navy warship.
Also on board were four General Purpose Machine Guns, which are commonly known as GPMGâs. These are the heaviest guns carried by regular soldiers or Tigers, and are only slightly smaller than the famed 'five-zeroâ machine guns. The fact that the convoy was carrying supplies for a massive land attack was proven beyond doubt by the presence of a huge number of 81 mm mortar shells on board. This is a land weapon, and is the main type of mortar used by both sides.
A large number of LTTE uniforms were also found, and interestingly, a brand new high frequency communications set. The boat itself was powered by four high performance outboard motors.
The convoy is also known to have carried a large amount of high tech equipment, such as a desktop computer, a photo scanner, and a photocopy machine. A large number of compact discs and audio cassettes were also on board. Some of the most chilling parts of the convoyâs cargo, were four thousand cases of penlight batteries, which were definitely intended for the horrible 'battasâ or Johnny mines, which have caused such problems for advancing troops, and has left thousands maimed for life.
The loss of Lt. Col. Keethan has stunned the LTTE, according to sources in the Wanni. Keethan was widely known as a young and dynamic leader, who had done a terrific job for the LTTE in the gory task of recruiting new cadres in the east, and in generally organizing administration in Tiger controlled areas there. He had only recently been chosen to head the Batticaloa area. Strangely, the government, pre-occupied with petty party politics and thuggery in the Wayamba, took little notice of the events off the east coast.
The Ministry of Defence put out one of its usual two paragraph communiquŽs, which was so boringly worded that most newspapers merely ran a small story buried on an inside page.
The communiquŽ made no mention of the big gun, or the death of Keethan. It merely noted that a few boats had been destroyed and a few cadres killed, but gave no other details.
It looks like, those officers who are supposed to be specialists in psychological warfare may need to have their own heads examined, since they are making so little mileage out of significant victories. They appear to believe that their main job is to cover up defeats.
It boggles the imagination, but 16 years after the war started, the government still doesnât an efficient propaganda machine. Its victories are swept under the carpet, just as the debacles are. The recovery of the 23 mm gun, while a notable victory for the navy, has now raised the fight at sea to a much more dangerous level. It is even larger than the main armament of the Dvoras, which have two 20 mm weapons. However, it is still smaller than the 37 mm guns on the larger navy gunboats.
This 23 mm gun is not one of the few which the Tigers captured from the navy in battles several years ago. All those guns were much smaller in caliber. It appears to have been manufactured in an east European country, which most probably means that the LTTE has managed to get at least one of its supply ships in without being caught, un-loaded it, and got away. Cer-tainly, this gun would have been part of a larger shipment.
This points to the urgent need to keep stre-ngthening the navy's fleet, as well as to purchase more reconnaissance planes for the air force, to pat-rol the coas-tal areas. The fact that the Tigers were in possession of so many batteries is worrisome. Ob-viously, these came from Colom-bo, or some other town. The Tigers are hardly likely to have sent them in by ship. This means that there are sti-ll many ways in banned items are smuggled across to the LTTE areas.
Tamil separatism and the 'Thimpu principles'
Part - I
(Continued from yesterday)By Kamalika Pieris
Despite this Hobsbaum is not taken in by the utterances of the Tamil separatist movement. Here is his assessment of the situation in Sri Lanka: (p 6) He quotes from an ITAK document,'The Tamil-speaking people in Ceylon constitute a nation distinct from that of the Singalese by every fundamental test of nationhood, firstly that of a separate historical past in the island at least as ancient and as glorious as that of the Singalese [sic], secondly by the fact of their being a linguistic entity entirely different from that of the Sinhalese, with an unsurpassed classical heritage and a modern development of language which makes Tamil fully adequate for all present-day needs and finally by reason of their territorial habitation of definite areas.'
The purpose of this passage is clear: it is to demand autonomy or independence for an area described as 'over one third of the island' of Sri Lanka, on grounds of Tamil nationalism. Nothing else about it is as it seems. It obscures the fact that the territorial habitation consists of two geographically separate areas inhabited by Tamil speakers of different origins (indigenous and recent Indian immigrant labour respectively); that the area of continuous Tamil settlement is also, in certain zones, inhabited by anything up to a third of Sinhalese and anything up to 41% of Tamil speakers who refused to consider themselves national Tamils and prefer identification as Muslims (the 'Moors'). In fact, even leaving aside the central region of immigrants, it is not at all clear that the territory of major continuous Tamil settlement, comprising as it does areas of solid Tamil settlement (from 71 to 95% - Batticaloa, Mullaitivu, Jaffna) and areas where self-identified Tamils form 20 or 33% (Amparai, Trincomalee) should be described, except in purely cartographic terms, as a single space. In fact, in the negotiations which led to the end of the Sri Lankan civil war in 1987, the decision to do so was a straightforward political concession to the demands of the Tamil nationalists. As we have already seen the 'linguistic entity' conceals the unquestionable fact that indigenous Tamils, immigrant Indians and Moors are - so far - a homogeneous population in no other than the philological sense, and, as we shall see, probably not even in this sense. As for the 'separate historical past', the phrase is almost certainly anachronistic, question-begging or so vague as to be meaningless. It may, of course, be objected that patently propagandist manifestos should not be scrutinized as though they were contributions to the social sciences, but the point is that almost any classification of some community as a 'nation' on the grounds of such purportedly objective criteria would be open to similar objections; unless the fact that it was a 'nation' could be established on other grounds. p-6-7
Part II
This brings us to the second of the Thimpu principles Ñ recognition of the existence of an identified homeland. This 'homeland' concept is taken from the European ethnic movements. 'Foxwatch' points out that the Tamils who lobbied Britain during the independence discussions in the 1940s said nothing about a Tamil homeland. If indeed there had been a natural homeland, it would have emerged during the Soulbury Commission investigations in 1944. The homeland argument was not made, simply because the 'homeland' argument had not yet come into existence. (Island. 4.10.98 p. 9) K. M. de Silva has conclusively demonstrated that the notion of a Tamil homeland is a myth, a deliberately concocted myth. Sri Lanka Taimls have no extensive territory over which they ruled. There are just three pockets of Tamils settlements, Jaffna, Batticaloa and Colombo, with about half of the Tamil population living scattered in the rest of the country. The Jaffna settlements only arose in the 13th century those of Batticaloa have been dated 16th to 18 century, while the Colombo settlements is in the 20th century. Further, the Thimpu principles do not specifically state where this identified homeland is. There have been continuous migrations of South Indians over the centuries. They came from present day Kerala, Tamilnadu and Andhra Pradesh, the three Indian states closest to Sri Lanka.They came as soldiers, traders, invaders, plunderers, and as peaceful immigrants. None of these categories, except the invaders, could lead to a 'homeland'. The rest necessitate integration and assimilation into the Sri Lankan community. Further, the Sri Lankan Tamils are just one of several minorities, together with the Burghers, Moors, Malays, 'Colombo Chetty', Barathas, Chinese. The third clause is about self-determination.
The term 'self determination' was popularised by Woodrow Wilson, President of the USA from 1913 Ñ 1921 and head of the League of Nations. The League of Nations was in existence from 1919 Ñ 1946 and was the basis for the later United Nations Organisation. The idea of 'self determination 'was first expounded in the League of Nations, and was taken up by the UN. It is included in the UN Declaration of Human Rights, which says that all peoples are entitled to self determination. Therefore the key question was who are the 'people'. The UN subsequently was obliged to provide a definition. It defined the 'people' entitled to 'self determination' were those living under colonial rule. People in sovereign states which were democratically ruled, where not entitled to further 'self determination'. This decision was taken in two General Assembly rulings. These are: 'UN General Assembly declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial countries and Peoples' (1960) and the UN General Assembly Declaration of Principles of International law concerning Friendly relations among States' (1970). These declarations affirmed the territorial unity of sovereign states. The 'self determination' principle should not be interpreted in such a manner as to dismember the territory or political unity of soveriegn states, which were conducting themselves in compliance with the principle of equal rights, and had a government which represented the whole people with no distinction as to race, creed or colour.
Patrick Thornberry, examining the position for the London based Minority Rights Group, concluded at 'self determination, is not a right of minorities'. Minorities could share in self determination only with the rest of the population. Thornberry next argues that the term 'peoples' as defined by the UN can therefore apply only to the majority within the state. 'There is little in this definition for minorities.' Thornberry's last observation could be contested. The collective excercise of 'self determination' of a whole population cannot be interpreted as the exclusive right of a 'majority'. The does not define 'majority'. He majority here would be a simple numerical majority of votes, which could be composed of the votes of all ethnic groups. (P Thornberry. 'Minorities and Human Rights Law' 1991. p 9-10)
The United Nations has examined the position as regard the 'self determination' of minorities recently. The Sub-Commission on Prevention, Discrimination, and Protection of Minorities, requested a special report on the matter by Asbjorn Eide. This report titled 'Protection of Minorities', dated 10.8.93. Documents No E/CN. 4/ Sub. 2/1993/34 Eide examines the position of minorities in soveriegn states, with democratically elected governments.
Eide begins by announcing that 'when a minority group lives compactly together in part of the territory of a soveriegn state, its representatives sometimes claim that the group constitutes a people, or nation and on that basis is entitled to self-determination.' Eide examines the relevant UN discussions, and conclude that the word 'people' as used in the UN declarations means the 'permanent, resident population of the territory, not the separate ethnic or religious groups, whether dominant or not in that territory' (p 17) Eide points out that over the years, interested parties gave exaggerated and misconceived interpretations to the right of self determination. He emphasises that this announcement of the right of self determination has led to acts of violence and aggression, based on vague and elusive interpretations of this right. Eide suggests that the statement issued last of all, by Vienna Declaration of 1993 could be considered conclusive.
Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, 1993, stated as follows in Section 1.2:
'In accordance with the 1970 Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation Among States in Accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, this shall not be construed as authorizing or encouraging any action which would dismember or impair, totally or in part, the territorial integrity or political unity of sovereign and independent States conducting themselves in compliance with the principal of equal rights and self-determination of peoples and thus possessed of a Government representing the whole people belonging to the territory without distinction of any kind.'
Eide points out that the Vienna Declaration confirms the UN position given in 1966 and 1970. The UN is firm on its stand that it will not advocate the dismemberment of sovereign states which are member states of the UN. Eide makes the following observation regards the Vienna Declaration. The sovereign state should possess a government which represents the people in the territory without distinction of any kind.
'If members of a group living either compectly together in an administrative unit of the State or dispersed within the territory of a sovereign State claim that the State is not possessed of a Government representing the whole people without distinction, this claim can be examined at the international level, either by the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) in connection with its examination of the State's report, since discrimination in political rights on ethnic grounds is covered by the Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, article 5, or by the Human Rights Committee. If the State is a member of the Council of Europe, it could also be addressed under article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights in conjunction with protocol 1. In such cases, the remedy will have to be that the discrimination is brought to an end and that the Government is made truly representative, by allowing for participation in the political process on a basis of equality of all members of the group.
'Only if the representatives of the group concerned can prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that there is no prospect within the foreseeable future that the Government will become representative of the whole people, can it be entitled to demand and to receive support for a quest for independence. If it can be shown that the majority is pursuing a policy of genocide against the group, this must be seen as very strong support for the claim of independence. The mere fact of there being ethnic violence between the majority and minority does not prove that there is an intent to destroy the group as such, in whole or in part. Even if there was, it would still have to be shown that the majority side was more responsible than the minority for the acts of violence taking place. Unfortunately, when violence has reached such levels, there is at present no machinery at the international level to which the aggrieved party can turn for an impartial finding.
'Special problems arise when a part of the settled residents of the country having an ethnic linguistic or religious identity different from that of the majority is denied citizenship. This effectively blocks that group from participating in the political processes and could be a strong indicator that the Government is not representative of the whole people. In this situation also however, the primary effort should be to ensure that they obtain citizenship, rather than secession.
'New States can of course still emerge through the peaceful and consensual subdivision of existing sovereign States. Borders can also be changed by agreement between the parties, obtained without duress. There is, however, no unilateral right under international law for groups to obtain such subdivision or border changes except under the conditions mentioned above. Changes arising from peaceful negotiations, free of acts of aggression or external intervention, are obviously in conformity with international law.
'The United Nations has not closed its door. Yet if every ethnic, religious or linguistic group claimed statehood, there would be no limit to fragmentation, and peace, security and economic well-being for all would become ever more difficult to achieve...The sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence of States within the established international system, and the principle of self-determination for peoples, both of great value and importance, must not be permitted to work against each other in the period ahead. Respect for democratic principles at all levels of social existence is crucial: in communities, within States and within the community of States. Our constant duty should be to maintain the integrity of each while finding a balanced design for all.'
Eide also discusses the possibility of 'internal self determination'. It is possible that groups living within sovereign states do have a right self-determination short of secession. Eide argues that this is limited to the right to vote. Eide points out that there is no firm indication that groups have a right to local self government or autonomy within the state, on the basis of the right of self determination. He suggests that this may be possible in the case of groups with historical record of self rule, such as pre-existing autonomy within union republics of dissolved federal states. (p19).
(4. Citizenship rights of Tamils) The fourth principle in the Thimpu declaration contradicts the first three statements! If the Tamils are a separate nation, with a separate homeland, and are entitled to self-determination, then why ask to be treated also as citizens of the larger unit of Sri Lanka. In this last item we are told that the Tamil 'nation' also look upon the island as their country, but according to the homeland clause they don't. This is of course, the usual careless writing one associates with the Tamil separatist movement. What it means is that while some Tamils, have a homeland, others can however opt to be citizens of the larger unit of Sri Lanka. They probably mean the Estate Tamils.
It is now clear that the four principles of the Thimpu declaration can be easily dismissed. Therefore, in 1998, USA branch of the LTTE was considering a rewarded and modified 'Thimpu proposal' prepared in 1996 by Rohan Edirisinghe and Kumar Ponnambalam. This was also discussed at a seminar held in Colombo at the Centre for Policy Alternatives. Edirisinghe pointed out that while the UN was not agreeable to supporting secession, the concept of 'self-determination' had been expanded to include devolution, autonomy and minority rights. The modified Thimpu proposals are these:
'1. The Tamil community constitutes a people with a distinct language, culture, tradition and identity. The constitution should recognise the above in order to ensure that the Tamil people live with dignity and self-respect.
2. The Tamil people have for centuries lived in certain areas and constitute a majority population in these areas.
3. There must be substantial devolution of powers in these areas, which is constitutionally guaranteed and secured. The people must have the right to determine their own affairs.
4. There must be complete equality particularly in the areas of race, religion and language. (Sunday Times 18.1.98 P6.)
This 'revised Thimpu' is much weaker than the original Thimpu, and is more a plea than a demand.
(Concluded)
Enjoyment of Human Rights requires conducive environment
By Indrani Iriyagolle
The Preamble to the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights records that 'the ideal of free human beings enjoying civil and political rights, freedom from fear and want can only be achieved if conditions are created whereby everyone may enjoy his civil and political rights, as well as his economic, social and cultural rights.'The covenant sets up a Human Rights Committee to consider progress reports from states which have ratified the Covenant. The Committee may also hear complaints by such states about other states which have ratified the covenant but failed to uphold the obligations, under he Covenant. The sphere of civil and political rights have been further widened by two Optional protocol.
Under the first Optional Protocol individuals under certain circumstances may file complaints of human rights violations by ratifying states if all other remedies have failed. Under the Second Optional Protocol States must take all measures necessary to abolish the death penalty.
Several key questions arise in relation to the above measures. Do Human Rights instruments protect all individuals equally? The poor as well as the rich, women as well as men, disabled and the able bodied, those in political power and those out of power? In theory, yes but in practice no. Civil and Political Rights that have developed over centuries, especially in Britain, USA and France at great human cost was firstly to protect the upper and middle class men (not women).
The two underlying concepts in this process of evolution were the rule of law and provision for political participation in some form in the decisions of the government. A kind of 'restricted' Democracy. The rules were based on principles that secured life, liberty, person and property from arbitrary power and provided for rights of association, assembly and freedom of expression. Unfortunately these rules for a long time did not apply to women, nor to men and women equally even in the west. Women were chattels (personal proterty) with men having power to inflict physical punishment. Even today, domestic violence, arising from this old concept, is considered to be a private matter.
However, over the last half a century the Declaration has gained recognition as a universal gauge by which governments can measure their progress or shortfalls in the protection of rights. Amidst all weaknesses, in its practice the H. R. Instruments have been a source of inspiration for national and international efforts to promote and protect wherever possible, human rights and fundamental freedoms.
It provides a base to strengthen legally binding instruments to protect these rights and freedoms. Proclamations, declarations and conventions have not only increased but imbibed the spirit and concepts. The Proclamation of Teheran in 1968, adopted following upon this the Declaration on the Protection of women and children in Emergency and Armed conflict in 1974, Declaration on the Use of Scientific and Technological progress in the interests of Peace and for the benefit of mankind in 1975, Declaration on the Elimination of all forms of Intolerance and Discrimination based on Religion or Belief 1981, Convention Against Torture and other Cruel Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment 1984, Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women 1979, International Convention for the Protection of Human Rights of all Migrant Workers and their families, etc.
How conducive?
The concept of Human Rights has broadened so as to relate to the political and development process. These now include social and economic rights, cultural rights political rights, rights of solidarity, right to peace, free assembly and development.The last four are clearly of great importance to men and women, and all the aforementioned rights are of immense importance to women. In all societies and especially in developing countries women have a primary and personal responsibility for nurturing others now called 'person Ñ work.' Women nurture others, care for the sick and elderly, socialise the young, pass down traditions and culture, contribute to family income, give companionship to family. Half the nation are counted as shareholders and contributors to the Gross National Product. But do they enjoy conducive conditions to the enjoyment of rights?
Deprivation of conducive conditions for the enjoyment of rights has harmed women and not the men. Poverty primarily affects women and children, especially in the developing countries and in times of armed conflict. Women of the Free Trade Zone, Women Migrant workers and their families and those suffering economic deprivation do not have opportunities to control their own resources nor enjoy them. That the reality is so different reflects a major problem in rights. Often in developing countries political authority and economic assistance, by way of international aid or State assistance subvert the rights of the poor, the dependent and unemployed.
Women's role in political participation, especially in Sri Lanka and other Asian countries is scandalous. The Constitution of Sri Lanka 1978 places women in the category of children and disabled by Article 12 (4). An ineffective, non-positive clause states: 'Nothing in this Article shall prevent special provisions made, by law, subordinate legislation or executive action, for the advancement of women, children or disabled persons.'
The enjoyment of Political rights in Sri Lanka is broadly restricted to the use of the franchise. Even this is no longer guaranteed. Opportunities for wider representation and participation of the people, women and men, is often undermined by the operation of party machinery. Violence, encouraged by major parties is a positive obstruction to holding free and fair elections. Women are discouraged and 'barred' from political candidature and would probably be obstructed from casting their votes too. Without changes in the ideology about women and their capacities there would be difficulties in securing enforcement of the law and the rights for women. The concept of indirect discrimination; the equal rule with unequal effect, for both men and women to exercise political rights, a violence free environment must prevail. I this is primarily the responsibility of he State. The last 25 years has clearly shown an erosion of the rights of the average citizen and a gradual distancing from the democratic process. Educating the hoi polloi about human rights must be preceded by educating those who wield power and authority. The country belongs to all and rights are for all people and 'In the Republic of Sri Lanka sovereignty is in the People, and is inalienable. Sovereignty includes the powers of government, fundamental rights and the franchise.' Are the people sovereign?
