‘More to go, but in right direction’:

Govt has concrete plans, clear commitment for reconciliation - Minister Samarasinghe

By Manjula FERNANDO

Minister of Plantation Industries and President’s Special Envoy on Human Rights Mahinda Samarasinghe, in an exclusive interview with the Sunday Observer before he led the Sri Lankan delegation to the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) Sessions in Geneva, said Sri Lanka has progressed far better than many other countries which were battered by prolonged, brutal terrorism and the international community should recognise this positive fact.

Speaking with the confidence of winning the support of the majority at the 47-member HRC, the Minister said, “If, after our submissions, they still feel a resolution is needed, then they are not interested in promotion and protection of Human Rights, but are trying to interfere with a sovereign country and playing out a different agenda. We will not fail to expose that.”

Excerpts of the interview:

Q: The Army Commander has appointed two Courts of Inquiry to look into the findings of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) in keeping with the LLRC recommendations. Will this be welcomed by the international community at the UN Human Rights Council sessions in Geneva?

A: It was done soon after the LLRC report was presented in Parliament. This Court of Inquiry commenced on January 2 although they announced it only last week. These Courts have already started acting on the LLRC recommendations.

Anyone looking at how we are dealing with accountability issues would only commend and appreciate this decision taken by the Army. If you look at the terms of reference of the inquiry, you will note that all references pertaining to the Army in the LLRC report are going to be looked into by these two legally constituted inquiry boards.

Once they conclude their investigations and if there is prima facie evidence that there has been wrongdoing, then the next step would be to appoint a tribunal under the Army Act. There is a Supreme Court decision now that the tribunal is also to be regarded as an established court of law under the Constitution. It will be equal to a high court.

Everything is being done according to the laws of this country and the Constitution. But I anticipate that those who are sceptical about the Army doing anything, especially some of the so-called champions of Human Rights, the INGOs in particular, will ask how we can have confidence in the Army looking in to its own actions.

But, if you look at how other countries in the West handled accountability issues, when there were charges against their military forces, they have also resorted to the same mechanism. If they were not criticised, why should the Sri Lanka Army be criticised?

We are interested in moving towards reconciliation more than anyone else. No one could be interested in moving towards comprehensive reconciliation than Sri Lanka because it is more relevant to us.

I am fully prepared to share detailed information about what the Army has done and what the Army hopes to do at the UNHRC. The Channel 4 incident is also listed as one of the items in the terms of reference that these two inquiry boards will be looking into. We have turned the searchlight inwards to inquire into the charges and accusations levelled against our Forces.

No one can point a finger at the LLRC Report and say that this is a whitewash. Some of our strongest critics, those who dismissed the LLRC as a whitewash - that it was something appointed by President Mahinda Rajapaksa to appease the international community - have admitted that it had some very good features. Also, these facts augur well for Sri Lanka’s case and we will be putting out this information in a very forceful manner.

This domestic process, which we have proved to be independent, should be given further time and space to do what is necessary to achieve comprehensive peace and reconciliation.

Govt action

Q: Are you satisfied that what the Government has done so far to advance reconciliation is adequate to convince the international community at the UNHRC sessions in Geneva?

A: Well, I think given the time that we have had since the end of terrorism up to now, and between the time the final LLRC report was released and now, we can justifiably say that we have travelled a long distance in that respect. We still have a long distance to travel, I am not saying that everything is perfect. We are travelling in a positive direction, we have travelled far and we have concrete plans and a very clear commitment to travel the full distance.

Thus, we must be given time and space to achieve further progress.

Q: What has been done about the allegations about failing to account for the population in the North?

A: That was one of the main charges, the inability to account for the population in the North.

We have already completed a census in the Northern Province. This was done by Tamil officers attached to the GAs and Divisional Secretaries’ offices and education officials working in the North. They went from house to house, speaking the language of the people there to obtain information. The last census done in the Northern Province was in 1981.

Anyone can compare the population of the North today with the population in 1981. We need more information to check how many people have gone abroad and those living in other parts of the country. That will be possible with the national census conducted this year. Then we will have a full picture.

No one can challenge these figures. This was conducted by the Department of Census and Statistics which is an institution of professionals. The Department has even gone to the extent of publishing this data in its website. We will share this information in Geneva.

This data will lay to rest speculation that 40,000 civilians were killed and that the Armed Forces were also responsible for large numbers of civilian deaths.

We went to that extent in moving towards reconciliation, because we understood, as the Government, that we have to make peace with our own people. And to do that, we needed to find out what happened to the people during the conflict years. This is the best way in showing accountability. This was a huge step, but we did not make it a propaganda exercise.

Census aspects

Q: Has it covered all aspects of the census? Have they been able to account for everyone, for instance, those who left the country before 2009?

A: It was the first step. We will have to start analysing the figures now. There will be another roadmap which will ensure the analysis of each and everyone of these figures. To do this we need the cooperation of some Western countries in particular, to know how many Sri Lankans have been allowed to stay in those countries. We have been asking various governments as to how many have sought asylum and how many have been given citizenship and the number of pending cases, the details of these people, but they are not willing to share that information.

If they want to know how many people are accounted for, they must also share that information with us, so that we can jointly ensure a comprehensive analysis of the figures that we have got.

India has shared those figures with us. We know the number of people living in India; how many are in camps and the numbers living with foster families. A lot of these people have come back to Sri Lanka. A few from Western countries have also done the same.

There is a significant Lankan population in the West. We want to know the figures because all such data can be used in the final analysis of the census.

When I go abroad this time, we will share the information of the census and when I go back in June, I will be able to update them on the analysis we have carried out and again in September I can update them. This is a process and we have commenced that process and we should be commended for what we have done in such a short span.

Q: What are the countries with large populations of Sri Lankan immigrants?

A: The biggest population of Sri Lankans is in Canada, then in the US and in the EU including the UK. There are immigrants in Australia, legal as well as illegal. A week ago, another boatload of over 50 people were reported to have arrived in Christmas Island.

It is time that Western governments who ask us to account for our population, cooperated with us and shared this information so that we could do a proper analysis of the data. A large number of people over the years migrated to these countries.

Q: One of the allegations levelled against the LLRC was that the Commission did not account for the dead and injured during the final phase of the conflict. Has the Census covered this area as well?

A: Yes. If you look at the data of the number of deaths between January and May 2009, you have a total number and the categories - those who died as a result of old age and sicknesses, those who succumbed to natural disasters - there is accident, suicide and homicide, and there is the ‘other’ category.

If you dissect this ‘other’ category, it includes LTTE cadre, civilian deaths, deaths involving asylum seekers, civilians killed by the LTTE and internal migration. This is where we need to do a further analysis.

We know how many LTTE cadre were killed in 2009. The data was gathered under the following sources: recovered LTTE dead bodies and those which have been confirmed by name through technical sources (intercepted communication, from LTTE digital data and from the Voice of Tigers radio). I don’t want to reveal a lot at this point, but the information will be available to anyone who wants to clarify the figures at the HRC sessions.

The Census and Statistics data has already been released on its website and anyone can access this data now.

Roadmap

Q: There are allegations that the US envoys came here to get a clear understanding of what the Government is doing in the area of accountability ahead of the Geneva sessions.

Ms. Otero and Mr.Blake were disappointed that they did not receive a road-map outlining the future course of action. Is this true?

A: We will be making that known when we go to Geneva. When someone meets you for one hour, you don’t talk to them about a roadmap, this is something you need to discuss in detail. This is what we hope to do when we go to Geneva.

This is why we think that this talk about a resolution being supported may become premature in the light of the information that we will provide.

At that time, may be, they were not convinced that there was a roadmap and they said that they will ask for the implementation of the LLRC recommendations by supporting a resolution.

My job with the rest of the team will be to demonstrate that there is no necessity to have a resolution calling for the implementation of the recommendations because we have already started implementing it.

We do have a roadmap. It consists of several steps that we have taken, the two Courts of Inquiry, the census that we have completed in the Northern Province, various steps that the Attorney General’s Department has taken and the Human Rights Action Plan which is a time-bound plan. The LLRC recommendations synchronise with the National HR Action Plan. This is not all, we have done a lot during a span of two months since the tabling of the LLRC recommendations.

In such a context, having a resolution is redundant.

In October, when the Universal Periodic Review on Sri Lanka takes place in Geneva, we will have an interactive dialogue, within the ambit of the Council, as to how far we have travelled. I am sure even those who have been talking about a resolution would be convinced after we share this information with them, that we have indeed progressed far. If, after our submissions, they still feel a resolution is needed, then they are not interested in the promotion and protection of Human Rights, but are only trying to interfere with a sovereign country and playing out a different agenda. We will not fail to expose that.

Q: There have been various comments about India’s stance in relation to Sri Lanka’s affairs at the forthcoming UNHRC sessions - whether it would support us or not in the event of a negative resolution. Are you aware of their official stance?

A: There is no question about where India stands because we have been briefing India, regularly and comprehensively, at a very high level.

More than any other country, India knows how hard we are working towards comprehensive reconciliation.

India has also been interested in the political process. We have been briefing them on the steps that are being taken in that direction. If you look at its record at international fora, India has been a very strong supporter of giving time and space for a domestic process to travel its full distance, so this is actually a matter of principle.

Why should everything be international if a domestic process is independent enough to make strong recommendations and if the government is committed enough to take on board those recommendations, and in fact start implementing them? Then there is no need to substitute it with an international apparatus.

In this context, we have no doubt that India will support us - there is no question about where they stand on this issue.

Not on agenda

Q: Is Sri Lanka an ‘agenda item’ in the forthcoming UNHRC sessions?

A: No, Sri Lanka is not on the agenda. But, of course, under various agenda items, the situation in Sri Lanka would be referred to and in those instances we could exercise our right of reply if need be. And if anyone wants to proceed any further by way of bringing in a resolution, then they can do that also. But then, they must demonstrate that we have disregarded our responsibilities, which is a difficult thing to do.

Q: The vociferous LTTE fronts and sympathetic INGOs will whip up HR allegations to discredit Sri Lanka this time again. Are you anticipating anything challenging?

A: However much progress we make here, some parties will dismiss them, just like they dismissed the LLRC. Some of those INGOs totally rejected the LLRC and refused to come before the Commission to state on record their accusations.

We know that some of the funding for these organisations had been channelled from LTTE fronts. There was a case very recently. Such funds do not come without expectations of favours being returned. Those who take such money should be ashamed. They profess to be independent and impartial champions of Human Rights. When they take money from extremist groups, it is very clear where they stand.

However much we do here in terms of progress, they will disregard it and will stick to their subjective positions. But they will be exposed at some point. People have started to disregard their double standards.

Q: The Opposition Leader’s statement on the LLRC report speaks more of negative aspects and is accused of trying to appease foreign forces?

A: What he can’t understand is that finally, it is not the US or anyone else who is going to vote for the UNP, it is going to be the people of Sri Lanka. He has to realise that before trying to appease some foreign states.