மூடிய புத்தகமாக கூட்டமைப்பு, திறந்த புத்தகமாக த.ம.பேரவை

• இவர்கள் ஏன் தமிழ் மக்கள் குறித்து அச்சமடைய வேண்டும்.
• தமிழ் மக்கள் பேரவை தமிழ்த் தேசியக் கூட்டமைப்பை பிளவுபடுத்துவதற்காக் சிதைப்பதற்காக உருவாக்கப்பட்ட அமைப்பு என்று ஏன் கூக்குரலிட வேண்டும்.
• 2009இல் போர் முற்றுப் பெற்றபின் கடந்த 6 வருட கால தமிழர் அரசியலில் தமிழித் தேசியக் கூட்டமைப்பு சாதித்த சாதனை என்ன?
• எவ்வித தீர்வுப் பொதியும் இன்றி வெறும் கையுடன் முன்னாள் ஜனாதிபதி மகிந்த ராஜபக்ஷ அரசாங்கத்துடன் பேச்சுவார்த்தை நடத்தப் போய் மூக்குடைபட்ட கூட்டமைப்பினர் தான் மீண்டும் வெறும் கையுடன் நல்லாட்சிக்காரர்களிடம் இரகசிய பேச்சுவார்த்தையில் ஈடுபடுகின்றனர். 2016 இல் தீர்வு வரும் என்று தமிழ் மக்களை நம்புமாறும் கூறுகின்றனர்.
• அரசியல் தீர்வு விடயத்தில் கூட்டமைப்பின் நம்பிக்கைக்குரிய நல்லாட்சிக் காரர்கள் “கிராம ராஜ்யம்” நோக்கி நகர்கின்றனர்.
• கூட்டமைப்பினர் மௌனம் சாதிப்பது அவர்களின் இராஜதந்திர அரசியல் நகர்வின் அங்கமாக இருக்கலாம். ஆனால் கூட்டமைப்பினரின் தோல்வி கண்ட இராஜதந்திர நகர்வுகளில் தமிழ் மக்கள் எவ்வளவு காலத்திற்கு நம்பிக்கை வைத்து கண்மூடி மௌனிகளாக இருப்பது என்பதே கேள்வியாகும்.
• மூடிய புத்தகமாக கூட்டமைப்பு கொண்டு நடத்துகின்ற அரசியல் பயணத்தில் திறந்த புத்தகமாக தமிழ் மக்கள் பேரவை உதயமாகியுள்ளது.

 தமிழ் மக்கள் பேரவையின் உதயம் தமிழர் அரசியலில் குறிப்பாக தமிழரசுக் கட்சி அரசியலில் பெரிதும் பேசப்படும் பொருளாக மாறியுள்ளது. இவர்கள் ஏன் தமிழ் மக்கள் பேரவை குறித்து அச்சமடைய வேண்டும்.

தமிழ் மக்கள் பேரவை தமிழ்த் தேசியக் கூட்டமைப்பை பிளவுபடுத்துவதற்காக் சிதைப்பதற்காக உருவாக்கப்பட்ட அமைப்பு என்று ஏன் கூக்குரலிட வேண்டும்.
உண்மையிலேயே 2009இல் போர் முற்றுப் பெற்றபின் கடந்த 6 வருட கால தமிழர் அரசியலில் தமிழித் தேசிய கூட்டமைப்பு சாதித்த சாதனை என்ன?

உண்மையில் கூட்டமைப்பு சாதித்திருந்தால் இதுவரை மாற்றுக் கருத்துக்கள் மட்டுமே தமிழ் மக்கள் மத்தியில் உலவிய  நிலையில் அந்த மாற்றுக் கருத்துக்கள் தமிழ் மக்கள் பேரவை என்ற குழந்தையாகப் பிரசவித்திருக்காது.

தமிழ்த் தேசியக் கூட்டமைப்பு முன்னாள் ஜனாதிபதி மகிந்த ராஜபக்ஷ காலத்தில் 11 முறை இன விவகாரத் தீர்வு  குறித்து பேச்சுவார்த்தை நடத்தியது.
இந்த 11 சுற்றுப் பேச்சுவார்த்தையில் என்ன பேசப்பட்டது என்பது குறித்து அரசாங்கத் தரப்பும், கூட்டமைப்பும் வெளிப்படையான தன்மையுடன் பேச முன்வரவில்லை.

தமிழ் மக்களுக்குப் பொறுப்புக் கூறும் தார்மீகக் கடமைப்பாட்டைக் கொண்டுள்ள கூட்டமைப்பு கூட 11 சுற்றுப் பேச்சுவார்த்தையில் என்ன நடந்தது?  தீர்வு தொடர்பாக கூட்டமைப்பு முன்வைத்த தீர்வுத்திட்டம் என்ன? அரசாங்கத்தரப்பு இன விவகாரத் தீர்வு குறித்து முன்மொழிந்த யோசனைகள் என்ன? என்பன போன்ற விடயங்களைத் தமிழ் மக்களின் முன்வைப்பதற்கு முன் வரவில்லை.

இறுதியாக கூட்டமைப்பு நடத்திய ஊடக மகாநாட்டில் பேச்சுவார்த்தை ஒரு அங்குலம் தானும் நகரவில்லை என்ற செய்தி தெரிவிக்கப்பட்டது. அப்படியானால் ஒரு அங்குலம் கூட நகராத நிலையில் இனவிவகாரத் தீர்வு குறித்து அரசாங்கத் தரப்புடன் 11 சுற்றுப் பேச்சுவார்த்தையில் என்னதான் பேசப்பட்டது என்பது குறித்து வினா எழுப்புவதற்கு தமிழ் மக்களுக்கு உரிமை இல்லையா?

தமது தலைவிதியையே தீர்மானிக்கும் ஒரு பேச்சுவார்த்தையில் என்ன நடந்தது என்பது குறித்து தெரியாமலே தமிழ் மக்கள் இரண்டாவது முறையும் கூட்டமைப்பினரை நாடாளுமன்றத்துக்குத் தெரிவு செய்து அனுப்பினர்.
இன்று மீண்டும் அரசாங்கத்துடன் பேச்சுவார்த்தை நடாத்துவதாகவும் 2016 இன விவகாரத் தீர்வில் ஒரு திருப்பு முனையாக அமையும் என்றும் கூட்டமைப்பினரில் குறிப்பாக, தமிழரசுக் கட்சி சார்ந்தோர் ஆரூடமாகத் தெரிவித்து வருகின்றனர்.

இன விவகாரத் தீர்வுக்கென கூட்டமைப்பு முன்வைக்கப் போகின்ற அல்லது தற்போதைய பேச்சுவார்த்தையில் அரச தரப்பிடம் முன்வைத்துள்ள தீர்வு யோசனைகள் என்ன என்பது குறித்து 2016ல் தீர்வு வரும் எனக் கூறும் சம்பந்தன் ஐயாவோ அல்லது கூட்டமைப்பு காரர்களோ வெளிப்படையாக பேச முன்வரவில்லை. மீண்டும் இன விவகாரத்துக்கான தீர்வினை மூடு மந்திரமாக வைத்துக் கொண்டு கூட்டமைப்பினர்  தமிழ் மக்களுக்குக் கண்ணாமூச்சி விளையாட்டுக் காட்டுகின்றனர்.

கூட்டமைப்பினர் முன்னாள் ஜனாதிபதி மகிந்த ராஜபக்ஷவின் அரசாங்கத்துடன் நடத்திய பேச்சுவார்த்தையின் பெறுபேறுகள் குறித்து இரு தரப்பினருமே மௌனம் காத்த போதும் பேச்சுவார்த்தையின் ஆரம்பத்தில் என்ன பேசப்பட்டது என்பது குறித்து ஊடகங்கள் அறிந்தே இருந்தன.

அதாவது பேச்சுவார்தையின் ஆரம்பத்திலேயே அரசாங்கத்தரப்பு அதிகாரப் பரவலாக்கம் குறித்து பேசுவதற்கு ஒன்றும் இல்லை. கிராம சபைக்கு அப்பால் அதிகாரப் பகிர்வு குறித்து சிந்திக்கும் நிலையில் அரச தரப்பு இல்லை என்ற ஏடு தொடக்கத்துடனேயே பேச்சுவார்த்தையை அரசாங்கத் தரப்பு ஆரம்பித்திருந்தது என்பது வெளிச்சத்துக்கு வந்தது.

பேச்சுவார்த்தையின் ஆரம்பமே கோணலான பின் கூட்டமைப்பினர் மஹிந்த அரசாங்கத் தரப்புடன் 11 சுற்றுப் பேச்சுவார்த்தைகளை நடாத்துவதற்கு என்ன இருந்தது, எதைப்பற்றியெல்லாம் கூட்டமைப்பினர் அரச தரப்பிடம் பேசினர் என்பது இன்றும் மர்மமாகவே உள்ளது.

இன விவகாரத் தீர்வுக்கான பொதியினை முன்வைக்குமாறு தமிழ்ச் சமூகத்தின் பல்வேறு மட்டங்களில் இருந்தும் கோரிக்கை விடுத்த போதும் கூட்டமைப்பினர் இன்று வரை செவி சாய்ப்பவர்களாகத் தெரியவில்லை. எவ்வித தீர்வுப் பொதியும் இன்றி வெறும் கையுடன் முன்னாள் ஜனாதிபதி மகிந்த ராஜபக்ஷ அரசாங்கத்துடன் பேச்சுவார்த்தை நடத்தப் போய் மூக்குடைபட்ட கூட்டமைப்பினர் தான் மீண்டும் வெறும் கையுடன் நல்லாட்சிக்காரர்களிடம் இரகசிய பேச்சுவார்த்தையில் ஈடுபடுகின்றனர். 2016 இல் தீர்வு வரும் என்று தமிழ் மக்களை நம்புமாறும் கூறுகின்றனர்.

கூட்டமைப்பினர் நல்லாட்சிக்காரர்கள் மீது கொண்டுள்ள நம்பிக்கை, நல்லாட்சிக் காரர்கள் வழங்கிய வாக்குறுதிகள் அனைத்தும் தமிழ் அரசியல் கைதிகள் விவகாரத்தில் வெளிச்சமாகின. இதனை தமிழ் மக்கள் நன்கறிவர்.
தமிழ் அரசியல் கைதிகள் விடயத்தில் நடைபெற்ற கண்துடைப்புக்கள், வாக்குறுதி மீறல்கள் கண்முன் நிற்கின்றன. இவ்வேளையில் தான் அரசியல் தீர்வு விடயத்தில் கூட்டமைப்பின் நம்பிக்கைக்குரிய நல்லாட்சிக் காரர்கள் “கிராம ராஜ்யம்” நோக்கி நகர்கின்றனர்.

முன்னாள் ஜனாதிபதி பிரேமதாச காலத்தில் பேசப்பட்ட கிராமிய ராஜ்யம், சந்திரிக்கா அம்மையார் காலத்தில் இந்தியாவின் முன்னாள் அமைச்சரான மணிசங்க ஐயர் மூலம் முன் மொழியப்பட்ட கிரா ராஜ்யம் எனும் விடயத்தைத் தான் முன்னாள் ஜனாதிபதி மகிந்த ராஜபக்ஷ அரசாங்கமும் கூட்டமைப்பிற்கு முன்மொழிந்தது.

நல்லாட்சியில் அரசியலமைப்பு பேரவை உருவாக்கப்படப் போவதாகப் பேசப்படும் இவ்வேளையில் பிரதமர் ரணில் விக்கிரமசிங்க கிராம ராஜ்யம் குறித்த நடைமுறைச் செயற்பாட்டில் இறங்கியுள்ளார்.

சிங்களத் தலைமைகளுக்கு அதிகாரப் பரவலாக்கம் என்பது கிராம ராஜ்யம் என்பது தான் அர்த்தம். மாகாண சபைகளுக்கான நிதி அதிகாரங்களைப் பிடுங்கிய நல்லாட்சி அரசாங்கம் அதிகாரப் பகிர்வினை மாகாண சபையில் இருந்து கிராம ராஜ்யத்தினை நோக்கி இழுத்துச் செல்ல முற்படுகின்றது.

கூட்டமைப்பினர் இனவிவகாரத்துக்கான தீர்வு வரும் 2016ஆம் ஆண்டு தீர்க்கமானதான ஆண்டாக அமையும் என தமிழ் மக்களை நம்புமாறு கூற மறுபக்கம் கூட்டமைப்பின் நம்பிக்கைக்குப் பாத்திரமான நல்லாட்சிக்காரர்கள் சிங்களத்தலைமைகளின் நிகழ்ச்சி நிரலுக்கேற்ப காய்களை நகர்த்திக்கொண்டிருக்கின்றனர்.

இன்றைய இந்த நிலை குறித்து கூட்டமைப்பினர் மௌனம் சாதிப்பது அவர்களின் இராஜதந்திர அரசியல் நகர்வின் அங்கமாக இருக்கலாம். ஆனால் கூட்டமைப்பினரின் தோல்வி கண்ட இராஜதந்திர நகர்வுகளில் தமிழ் மக்கள் எவ்வளவு காலத்திற்கு நம்பிக்கை வைத்து கண்மூடி மௌனிகளாக இருப்பது என்பதே கேள்வியாகும்.

எனவே தான் மூடிய புத்தகமாக கூட்டமைப்பு கொண்டு நடத்துகின்ற அரசியல் பயணத்தில் திறந்த புத்தகமாக தமிழ் மக்கள் பேரவை உதயமாகியுள்ளது.

இன்றைய தமிழகத்தில் திராவிடக்கட்சிகளின் துரோகத்தனங்களாலும் காங்கிரஸ் கட்சியின் ஏமாற்றுத்தனங்களாலும் வெறுத்துப்போன தமிழ் மக்கள் வீதிக்கு வந்து சகாயத்தைக் கூப்பிடுகின்றார்கள் என்றால் இதன் அர்த்தம் என்ன? இன்றைய அரசியல் களத்தில் நிற்கும் அரசியல் வாதிகள் மீது மக்களுக்கு நம்பிக்கை இல்லை என்றுதான் அர்த்தம். அரசியலில் சூனியம் நிலை கொண்டுள்ளது என்பது தான் அர்த்தமாகும்.

சகாயத்தின் மீதான கவர்ச்சி அல்ல, ஒரு புதிய அரசியல் மாற்றத்திற்கான பசியே தமிழக மக்களை வாட்டி எடுக்கின்றது.  முடிந்தால் அந்த பசியை போக்க மக்களுக்கு ஏற்ற செயல் திட்டங்களுடன் நல்ல தலைமையோடும் மக்களைச் சந்தியுங்கள்; இல்லையேல் வாயை மூடிக்கொண்டிருங்கள்! என்று தமிழக “த இந்து” நாளிதழில் சமஸ் தமிழக அரசியல் வாதிகளை நோக்கி தமிழக மக்கள் சார்பில் சுட்டு விரலை நீட்டியுள்ளார்.

சமஸின் வார்த்தைகள் தமிழகத்திற்கு மாத்திரமல்ல இலங்கையில் உள்ள வடக்கு, கிழக்கு, மலையகம் என சகல தமிழ்த் தலைமைத்துவங்களுக்கும் பொருந்தும். கூட்டமைப்பும் இதற்கு விதிவிலக்கல்ல.

தமிழ் மக்கள் பேரவை குறித்த உங்களின் விமர்சனங்கள், கண்டனங்களைத் தூர தள்ளி வையுங்கள், குறிப்பாக தமிழ் மக்கள் பேரவையின் தலைவராகத் தெரிவு செய்யப்பட்டுள்ள வடமாகாண முதலமைச்சர் மீதான வசைபாடுதலையும் சேறுவாரி இறைப்பதனையும் தயவுசெய்து நிறுத்திவிடுங்கள். அதே வேளையில் வசைபாடுவதற்கும், சேறுவாரி இறைப்பதற்கும் நீங்கள் தகுதியானவர்களா என்று சற்று சிந்தியுங்கள்.

தமிழ் மக்கள் பேரவையில் இருப்போரில் அரசியலில் தோற்றுப் போன ஒருசிலர் பற்றியே உங்களது கண்களுக்குத் தெரியலாம். ஆனால் அந்த அமைப்பு கூட்டமைப்பின் அரசியலால் தோற்றுப் போன ஒரு மக்கள் கூட்டத்தின் பிரதிநிதியாக நிற்பதை நீங்கள்  காணத் தவறுகிறீர்கள்.

தமிழ்த் தேசியக் கூட்டமைப்பு நடாத்துகின்ற அரசியல் என்பது தமிழீழ விடுதலைப் புலிகள் போட்ட பிச்சை. விடுதலைப் புலிகளே கோடும் போட்டு உங்கள் அரசியல் பயணத்திற்க்கான பாதையையும் அமைத்துக் கொடுத்தனர். இன்றும் கூட்டமைப்பினர் அதனை நினைவு கூருகின்றனர். ஆனால் அந்த தியாகிகளின் இன்றைய நிலைமை எவ்வாறு இருக்கின்றது என்பது குறித்து கூட்டமைப்பினர் கரிசனை கொண்டனரா?

தமிழ்த் தேசியக் கூட்டமைப்பிடம்…

1. இனவிவகாரத்திற்கான தீர்வுப் பொதி உள்ளதா?
2. போரினால் குடும்பத்தவர்களை இழந்த தலைவர்களினதும் அவர்களது குடும்பத்தினரதும் வாழ்க்கையைக் கொண்டு நடத்த ஏதுவான திட்டங்கள் கூட்டமைப்பினரிடம் உள்ளதா?
3. பெற்றோரை இழந்த பிள்ளைகளின் எதிர்காலத்திட்டங்கள் ஏதும் உள்ளதா?
4. போரினால் அவயங்களை இழந்த சிறுவர், சிறுமியர் குறித்து திட்டங்கள் உள்ளனவா?
5. போரினால் ஊனமாகிப் போனவர்களின் வாழ்க்கையைக் கொண்டு நடத்த ஏதுவான திட்டங்கள் உள்ளனவா?
6. பெண் போராளிகளின் வாழ்க்கைத் தரத்தை மேம்படுத்தும் திட்டங்கள் உள்ளனவா?
7. போரினால் சீரழிந்து போன வடக்கு கிழக்கை மீளக் கட்டியெழுப்ப எவ்வளவு பணம் தேவை. அது குறித்து கூட்டமைப்பு மதிப்பீடு செய்துள்ளதா?

8. போர் முற்றுப்பெற்ற 2009ஆம் ஆண்டுக்குப் பிறகான கடந்த 6 ஆண்டு காலத்தில் அவசர அவசியமாக மேற்கொள்ளப்பட வேண்டிய விடயங்கள் குறித்து கூட்டமைப்பு கவனம் செலுத்தியதா?

ஆம் மேற்கூறியது போன்ற பல விடயங்களில் கூட்டமைப்பு கவனம் செலுத்தியது. அதன் பெறுபேறு இது தான் என்று கூட்டமைப்பு முன் வைக்குமாக இருந்தால் கூட்டமைப்பு கூறுவது போன்று தமிழ் மக்கள் பேரவை தேவையில்லைதான்.
ஆனால் கூட்டமைப்பால் இந்த கேள்விகளுக்கான பதிலைக் கூற இயலாது.
அப்படியானால் தமிழ் மக்கள் பேரவை இன்றைய காலத்தில் தேவை என்பதை கூட்டமைப்பினர் ஏற்றுக் கொள்வர்.

அந்தவகையில் தமிழ்த் தேசியக் கூட்டமைப்பு என்ற மாபெரும் அரசியல் சக்திக்கு சமாந்தரமாக தமிழ் மக்கள் பேரவையும் பயணிப்பது காலத்தின் தேவையாகும்.
மொத்தத்;தில் முரண்பாடுகளையும் வசைபாடுதல்களையயும்  துடைத்தெறிந்துவிட்டு ஒட்டுமொத்த தமிழ் மக்களின் நலன் கருதி கூட்டமைப்பும், தமிழ் மக்கள் பேரவையும் கைக்கோர்த்துப் பயணிப்பதே சிறந்தது.

வீ.தேவராஜ்
நன்றி: தமிழ்த்தந்தி (வாரமலர்)
27-12-2015

A letter to Zeid On Deferral Of Sri Lanka War Report

Hon. Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein
UN High Commissioner for Human Rights
Palais des Nations
CH-1211 Geneva
Switzerland.

Sri Lanka Publication of UN Investigation into war crimes

Dear High Commissioner,

I am writing to add my voice of protest at your outrageous decision to postpone the release of the UN investigation into war crimes in Sri Lanka (OISL) from March 2015 to September 2015.

I am an Australian citizen of Sri Lankan descent originally from the majority Sinhalese community. I have campaigned for more than six decades (1948 to be specific) for the right of the Tamil people – the Plantation ‘Indian’ Tamils in 1948, and the ethnic Tamils since 1956, to live with equality, dignity and safety (and now to live at all) in Sri Lanka – the Tamil North and East in particular.

My concerns are, and have always been, the violation of basic human rights by a succession of Sri Lankan governments, the worst being the one led by Mahinda Rajapaksa.

As the High Commissioner for Human Rights, I am entitled to believe that your concerns should be the same – the protection of human rights. Your actions should not be to ensure that the trauma which these people are undergoing is prolonged.

I sent you my recently published book “Sexual Violence of Tamils in Sri Lanka”. I clearly set out the problems faced by the people in the North and East, an area run by the Sri Lankan (Sinhalese) Armed Forces who treat the area as ‘Occupied territory’ and the people as ‘The spoils of war’ to be used and abused with no accountability.

I drew attention to the outstanding publication of Human Rights Watch “We will teach you a lesson: “Sexual violence against Tamils by the Sri Lankan Security Forces” This is one of the most damning indictments of the Sri Lankan government ever published on the subject. Coming as it does from one of the most important human rights organizations in the world, what have you, as the High Commissioner for Human Rights done, other than to give another six months, possibly longer, for this outrageous situation to continue?

I refer to the Report by Yasmin Sooka “Án Unfinished War:Torture and Sexual Violence in Sri Lanka 2009-2014”. Yasmin Sooka needs no introduction. She was one of three international experts appointed by the UN Secretary General Ban ki-Moon to advise him as to what happened in the closing stages of the Armed conflict in Sri Lanka.. She says that the findings in her recent investigation should be referred straight to the UN Security Council. Have you done that? No you have not. Why not?

The International Crisis group published “Sri Lanka: Women’s Insecurity in the North and East (Asia Report No 217), which establishes just that – women’s insecurity in the North and East –an area run by the Sri Lankan Armed Forces.

There is documented evidence that the Sri Lankan Armed Forces will remain in the area. What have you done about this? To give them anther six months to continue to do what they have done. Is that a responsible or acceptable act – coming as it does from the High Commissioner for Human Rights? I do not think so.

Here is what you said in your Opening Statement at the Human Rights Council 27^th Session on 8 September 2014:

“Moreover, I attach great importance to the investigation on Sri Lanka mandated by this Council, on which OHCHR (Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights) will report later….” High Commissioner, note your word “mandated”.

You then go on to quioe the Preamble to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

“Recognition of the inherent dignity and the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world”.

Do you really think that the Sri Lankan Armed Forces that have been, and will continue to remain in the area and who have, as pointed out by credible international human rights organizations, to be the main cause of the violation of the ‘dignity and the equal and inalienable rights’ of the Tamil people, will result in “freedom, justice and peace”? Or are these just words with no meaning despite the fact that you call them ‘resonant words’ (your words, not mine).

Let me get to the current fiasco. On 16 February 2015 you ‘explained’ the reasons for your decision to defer the Report.

You start by saying that “This has been a difficult decision”. I cannot see the ‘difficulty’. Your predecessorNavanaethen Pillay picked three eminent people – the former President of Finland, the former Governor General of New Zealand and the former President of the Pakistan Human Rights Commission and asked them to present their Report to the UN Human Rights Council in March 2015 –some 9 months away. I cannot see a particular ‘difficulty’ in your doing so.

You then go on to say that “There are good arguments for sticking to the original timetable” High Commissioner, there are no ‘arguments’. Three well known experts backed by a dozen investigators and coordinated by a UN Senior Official were given a job of work to do. They had to present a Report in nine months. What exactly is the ‘argument’?

You go on “There are also strong arguments for deferring the report’s consideration a bit longer”. Why a ‘bit longer?

You go on to answer this by saying “..given the changing context in Sri Lanka”

May I ask ‘what changing context’?

A tyrant Mahinda Rajapaksa has been replaced by his Health Minister, Maithripala Sirisena. Sirisena has said clearly and unequivocally that the murderous Sri Lankan Armed Forces that have been responsible for almost all the serious violations of human rights in this area, will stay in the area (the North and East). Is that a ‘changing context’? If it is, I fail to see it.

Internationally credible human rights organizations – Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and International Crisis Group will not be admitted to the area. Is that a ‘changing context’? Your own credibility would have been less damaged if you had agreed to the postponement from March to September 2015 provided that international human rights organisations, one of them (AI) a Nobel Prize winner, are admitted to the area,. You did not do so. Why not?

The notorious Prevention of Terrorism Act, condemned by every major human rights organization which has enabled so many serious violations of human rights to take place – sexual violence, torture, ‘disappearances’, abduction and detention without charge or trial at undisclosed locations for long periods of time without access to lawyers or even family members, will not be repealed. Bishop Rayappu Joseph of Mannar, has asked that this be removed. It will not be. So where is the ‘changing context’?

High Commissioner Zeid, your claim that there has been a ‘changing context’ is not supported by facts.

You can point to the replacement of a bogus ‘Chief Justice’ Mohan Pieris by Dr Shirani Bandaranayake (for one day!) and the dismantling of the Executive Presidency. Welcome though they may be, these are not the problems facing the vulnerable Tamil people in the North and East. Their problem is security or rather the lack of it, in an area where the Armed Forces and the Police do what they want to whoever they want with no accountability or consequences.

High Commissioner Zeid, can you even at this late stage see that you have missed the point? Having done serious damage to the Tamil civilian population in the North and East, can you even now insist on the immediate admission of international human rights groups such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch into the area? If not, why not? Are there ‘strong reasons’ or any reason at all why this cannot be done? Why has this very obvious action not been taken?

Not surprisingly, there has been an outrage worldwide to an extent that I have never seen. Dr. Karunyan Arulanantham – President – US Tamil Political Action Council (USTPAC) is a much-respected senior doctor in the US who has campaigned for the Tamil people for years. His letter to you has been forwarded to me.

Let me quote from it:

“The mass atrocities that transpired in 2009 were not a singular event, but rather an especially heinous manifestation of the decades-long oppression Tamils have suffered. Our community has been and continues to be systemically disadvantaged by Sri Lankan institutions of power. The OISL investigation and timely release of a strong and credible report are critical steps towards addressing this deeply rooted injustice. We have heard repeated promises of internal accountability measures, but to date there have been no credible domestic investigations. We do not think President Sirisena’s mention of a domestic process is sufficient to believe this would change”

I completely agree with what Dr Arulanantham says. I note that what he has said has been endorsed by 15 major Tamil organizations representing a million expatriate Tamils. In the six decades that I have been involved in all this, I have never seen such a massive ‘coming together’ of this number of people. It must surely send a very strong message to you that what you have done is simply wrong.

Just in the past few days I have had a copy of a letter written to you by the Northern Provincial Council (NPC) in Sri Lanka whose Chief Minister is former Supreme Court Judge C.V. Wigneswaran. It is signed on behalf of the Council by M.K. Shivajilingam a Member if the Northern Provincial Council, and a former Member of the Sri Lankan Parliament. It says that the Tamil people are highly disappointed and dismayed at your announcement on Febriuary 16, to delay the OISL investigation on Sri Lanka.

Yes, High Commissioner Zeid, ‘disappointed and dismayed’

Recently, this Council unanimously adopted a Resolution tabled by Justice Wigneswaran on Genocide of the Tamil people. I myself have written extensively on this and even recorded a dvd “Sri Lanka: Genocide, Crimes against Humanity, Violation of International Law”

I have just heard that some 250 people, ordinary Tamil civilians, had launched a public protest in Jaffna, in the Tamil North, against your decision to postpone the tabling of the OISL Report. High Commissioner Zeid, these are ordinary people who are taking the not inconsiderable risk of launching a public protest. You will not understand how risky it is to do so with a murderous Sri Lankan Armed Forces and Police who effectively run the area and do what they want with no accountability. The fact that they decided to take this risk speaks volumes about how distressed they are by your irresponsible action.

You do not have to suffer the consequences of your action, they do. As the High Commissioner for Human Rights, it is their fears, based on valid reasons,that should be of concern to you, not placating the regime in Colombo whose new President was a senior Cabinet Minister, indeed the acting Minister of Defence at a time when the worst atrocities were taking place. I am certain that you know, or should know, all this. Yet you decided for the most absurd reasons, to allow these people to suffer for another 6 months, if not longer.

In addition to being an insult to your distinguished predecessor, Navanethem Pillay, who decided to set up this international investigation after the passage of Resolution put forward by the United States of America at the UN HRC in March 2014.

The Human Rights Council has a dreadful past record. A week after the mass murder of thousands of Tamil civilians in the North and East of Sri Lanka (which ended on 18 May 2009), on May 26 and 27, 2009, the UN HRC in a ‘Special session’, clearly sponsored by Sri Lanka, passed a Resolution commending Sri Lanka. Human Rights Watch slammed the Resolution: “Sri Lanka: UN Rights Council Fails Victims”

In an interview with the BBC, Geoffrey Robertson QC, a world authority on Human Rights, called the Human Rights Council “a highly politicised body. It is made up not of experts on human rights, but of paltering diplomats”. His entire interview can be seen in the dvd I have recorded which I have referred to earlier.

You had a chance to change this ‘highly politicized body’ into something that really did what is expected of it – to safeguard the human rights of people who suffer serious violations under brutal regimes. However, it is clear that you have failed.

What is now in question is not only the integrity of the Human Rights Council but your own. It is a pity because you had the power and authority to do what had to be done – to table the findings of the OISL in the March meeting of the HRC, but failed todo so.

I gather that you will be going to Sri Lanka before September 2015, to see things for yourself. I am sure you will be shown the things that ‘the regime wants to show, not what has to be hidden. If there is nothing to hide, on what grounds are AI, HRW and ICG excluded from the country? The Sri Lankan government, whether it be run by Rajapaksa or Sirisena cannot have it both ways.

I ask you again whether even at this late stage when all the damage has been done, you will ask the Sri Lankan regime to admit Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and International Crisis Group into Sri Lanka with immediate effect. If not, why not?

Yours sincerely

Brian Senewiratne

Whoever becomes president, It’s the same for the Tamils!

Since the call for the Presidential election in Sri Lanka, we have seen statements, press releases and opinions from various quarters. So far, not a single Sinhala politician has made a call or a positive statement about finding a political solution to the problems underpinning the six decades of bloody conflict in Sri Lanka.

On the contrary, from both sides, the government and the opposition, there have been many verbal statements voicing the fact that they are not bothered about the Tamil’s leading political party – Tamil National Alliance – TNA or the Tamil votes.

It seems ridiculous when we see statements made by so-called Tamil diaspora leaders. What have they got to do with the Presidential election in Sri Lanka? Do they have a vote? Not even the Tamils in the ground who live with various difficulties seek out the opinion of these individuals.

Some among the diaspora demand a boycott of the elections; others say not to vote in the election and yet another funny group says ‘not to boycott the Presidential election like what happened in 2005’! The diaspora members who make public their opinion on the Presidential election are not even capable of lobbying their own government regarding a political solution in Sri Lanka.

The funny crowd which blames the diaspora for the boycott are ignorant of what actually happened in 2005. At that time, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam – LTTE were in a strong position and they made their decision based on the information they had gathered. It’s true that their decision changed the island’s history. But what has the diaspora got to do with 2005 boycott?

Today those who criticize the LTTE were the ones who had been waiting for a very long time to destroy the LTTE. Today half of these people are still working with the Sri Lanka intelligence agencies gathering information locally and internationally. The other half is regretting their blunders. Now they are unable to generate any income on pretexts relating to the LTTE. In fact, these individuals and organisations sold the Tamil nation for their self-gain.

Politics of Rajapaksa

Everyone knows the politics of Mahinda Rajapaksa who amended the constitution so as to contest for the third time. Since the defeat of the LTTE, he has claimed that “there is neither a minority nor an ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka”. Outrageously, Rajapaksa says that the 13th amendment and the recommendations of his hypocritical ‘Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission’ - LLRC have been already implemented. This is the reason why today Sri Lanka is under international scrutiny and Tamils have sympathy and support.

The people who coordinated the Common Presidential candidate are silent on the ethnic issue. Former President Chandrika Kumaratunga, Ranil Wickremasinghe, General Sarath Fonseka, Former Chief Justice Sarath N Silva, Mangala Samaraweera and others are cool and calm about anything concerning the Tamils.

Both leading contestants feel that if they give any importance to the ethnic issue, they may lose the election. It is obvious that the Sinhala voters are totally against any political settlement. The majority of them believe that Sri Lanka is exclusively a Sinhala Buddhist country.

To win the voters in the South, on 1 December, President Rajapaksa indirectly and fearlessly admitted that he is in fact, guilty of the war crimes allegations that are being levelled against him. In other words he has admitted that he is responsible for the massacre of unarmed Tamils.

There is no difference between Rajapaksa’s statement and former President J.R.Jeyawardena’s statement on 11 July 1983 to UK Daily Telegraph. Jeyawardena said: “Really if I starve the Tamils out, the Sinhala people will be happy”.

Whoever starves the Tamils or massacres the Tamils in Sri Lanka will get more votes in the South. This is the reality in Sri Lanka. It has taken a very long time for the international community to realise this fact.

Opposition leaders

Now let us analysis some of the opposition leaders who formed the ‘opposition coalition’ and signed a MoU on 1 December.

Former President Chandrika Kumaratunga successfully served her two terms in office with a military action, code named “war for peace”. During her time in office - how many Tamils in the North and East disappeared including 600 people buried in mass graves in Chemmani, Jaffna; many others arbitrarily killed and assassinated; massacres which took place including the bombing of St Peter’s Church in Navaly, killing 120 people who had taken shelter in the Church etc. Had she apologised or delivered any justice for those victims or has Rajapaksa who replaced her, instigated any inquiry into those and many other heinous incidents?

Soon after the defeat of the LTTE, General Sarath Fonseka wanted to recruit 200,000 soldiers to militarise the North and East. Also we can’t forget the interviews that he gave when he was in charge of the military. If Rajapaksa wins in the forthcoming President election, Fonseka will gradually join Rajapaksa.

Mangala Samaraweera did the maximum damage to the Tamils. When he was the External Minister, he went around the world portraying the Tamil’s political struggle as ‘Terrorism’. He worked hard and successfully banned the LTTE in a few countries. Last October when the European Court of Justice (ECJ) declared that the Council of the European Union’s ban on LTTE is illegal and ordered payment of court costs; immediately Samaraweera travelled to UK to feel the pulse of the Tamils. Also he wanted to join Rajapaksa’s government as the Minister of External affairs to work further on the LTTE ban. If Rajapaksa wins in the Presidential election, he will be first opposition member to join Rajapaksa.

Former Chief justice, Sarath N Silva is the root cause of many problems in Sri Lanka. He sowed the seeds for Rajapaksa to be in the all-powerful position he is in today! He was the one who started to politicise the judiciary in Sri Lanka. One fine example is his verdict on the demerger of the North and East.

SLFP and Tamil political rights

Under the coordination of these people, today the longest serving General Secretary of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party - SLFP has become the Common Candidate. During his Secretary-ship the SLFP has suppressed the political rights of the Tamils, even more than Chandrika’s father S.W.R.D. Bandaranaiyke did in June 1956 – with the Sinhala Only Act.

Maithiripala Sirisena may be an honest individual, but what can someone who cannot open his mouth about the ethnic conflict during the election campaign, do later?

In his first speech as a common candidate, he praised Sarath Fonseka. This is enough for the Tamils to understand what the future will be under Maithiripala Sirisena. Somebody said on his behalf, that he will implement the LLRC recommendations.

What is the LLRC? On the advice of Mahinda Rajapaksa’s international propagandists, this was formulated to eye-wash the international community. The recommendations of the LLRC were not fully accepted by the international community. Also there is no specific political solution proposed in the LLRC. So, Maithripala Sirisena is going to implement the LLRC to ‘satisfy the Tamils’, who have been struggling for their political rights for the last six decades with huge sacrifices of lives and serious losses in socio-economic terms too.

As I have mentioned before in my articles, there are only two paths to a durable political solution for the people in the North and East. One is to fully implement the 13th amendment. In order to achieve this, India which is the equal partner of the Indo-Lanka accord has to take the lead. The other one is through the United Nations, of course through the support of the international community.

If the impending international investigation can establish that what happened to the Tamils for so many decades is a ‘genocide’ or ‘ethnic cleansing’, then the Tamils can continue their struggle for ‘right to self-determination’ with the support of the international community. Other than these two routes, all other bogus promises and dreams will lead to the Tamils ending-up with ‘minority ‘status rather than ‘Nation-hood’.

Those who don’t know the definition of the ‘interim administration’, say that Tamils need an ‘interim administration’. Others say that there should be a referendum for a separate state. Good to hear all these castles in the air. Can these two objectives be achieved?

As I mentioned above, if the report of the UN international investigation is a positive one, then at some stage there will a referendum as has happened in a few other countries.

Since Mullivaighzhal – end of the war in May 2009, the homeland of the Tamils for thousands of years in the North and East of the island, has been under Militarisation, Sinhalisation, and Buddhisation.

Tamil homeland

Within the last five years, about 400 new Buddhist temples have been erected in the Jaffna peninsula alone and thousands of Singhalese civilians and military personnel have been settled in the North and East.

Tamil paramilitary groups and some individuals who had personnel grievances within the LTTE helped the Rajapaksa government to defeat the LTTE. These people are the ones responsible for all that has been happening during the last five years. There is no doubt that the LTTE made mistakes. This was even acknowledged by the LTTE itself. It was waging a war against a chauvinist government and safe-guarding the people and land for nearly two and a half decades. What have those who helped the government to destroy the LTTE, achieved for the people within the last five years?

Unlike any elections before Mullivaghzhal (2009), today none of the leading candidates are talking about the political rights of the Tamils. With the defeat of the LTTE, Tamil people have become non-grata to both sides – ruling and the opposition.

Will those who coordinated to have a Common candidate, agree to support the International investigation? Will they allow the international investigators to enter the island? Will they stop the ongoing colonization, singhalisation, buddhisation in the North and East? The answer is certainly ‘No’.

Re-assure their faithfulness

All of a sudden, the EPDP leader says that “only Mahinda Rajapaksa can find a solution to the ethnic conflict”! What has Rajapaksa done for the Tamils other than spending money on changing the demography of the Tamil homeland? Can the EPDP leader explain to the people, why Rajapaksa could not settle the ethnic conflict with his two third majority in the parliament? If the EPDP leader believes that Rajapaksa has a solution to the ethnic conflict, can he firmly say what he is going to do and when?

It is believed that Rajapaksa has told his friends that if the EPDP leader is coming to see him, it means that he is coming for (salley) money.

Another joker, after heavy boozing, shed ‘crocodile tears’ with his broken English in the parliament, blaming a few for what they have done to the Tamils. But he never said a single word about Mahinda Rajapaksa. It’s obvious that these two jokers’ statements are to re-assure Rajapaksa of their faithfulness.

Let us carefully listen to and analyse the speeches made by Maithiripala Sirisena and other members of the opposition. They all say that whether Rajapaksa wins the Presidential election or not, they will never allow Rajapaksa and other leaders to be tried for war crimes!

The statement made by former President Premadasa’s son Sajith, is more racial than factual. He says that once the opposition wins the Presidential election, they will destroy the rest of the LTTE-ers who live in foreign countries.

While his father President Premadasa was having negotiations with the LTTE, this same Sajith praised the LTTE for their bravery, fighting against the Indian Army. Also he wanted to take photographs with LTTE political advisor Anton Balasingham, Yogi and other LTTE members who were in Colombo. A special day and time was allocated for Sajith to have his photograph taken with LTTE members and he was really amazed by this gesture. We don’t know where he has hidden those photographs now!

Freedom to vote

For nearly two decades we were accused as LTTE, LTTE supporters, terrorists, etc while the Sri Lankan government tried persistently to tarnish our image, we ignored everything and continued our task internationally, all alone, seeking justice for the victims. Of course a few non-Tamils stood with us. The government media – English, Tamil and Singhalese wrote fictional news and articles about our activities. Not only the extreme Singhalese, but also some opportunist Tamils attempted to sabotage our efforts. But we stood firm and worked hard.

However, today, with the best coordination of many individuals, international institutions, organisations, countries and also well-coordinated actions of some diaspora organisations after 2009, the international community has finally opened its eyes. Today, the human rights and political issues of the Tamils are internationalised.

Now it is the duty of every member of the Tamil diaspora to keep up this momentum with good coordination and solidarity with those who helped us to reach this stage. In any circumstance, if we are reluctant in our international task, once again we will be cheated by the rulers of Sri Lanka.

For everyone’s information - former President Chandrika Kumaratunga has a good relationship with important members of the ‘Democratic Party’ in the USA. Therefore, if Maithiripala Sirisena wins the Presidential election, then through the influence of Chandrika, the present commitment of the Americans on Sri Lankan affairs may not be there in future!

People in the North and East should not allow anyone to buy them. If this happens, they will end-up going ‘from the frying pan into the fire’.

In the coming Presidential election, there will not only be the two leading candidates, there will also be a few others candidates. Therefore, it is not a must that people in the North and East cast their vote for either of these two candidates. Using their freedom to vote, they can cast their ballot for anyone of their choice.

Saurce Sri Lanka Guardian

Stortinget, tirsdag den 10. juni 2014, dagsorden (nr.79): Interpellasjon fra representanten Marit Nybakk til utenriksministeren

Stortinget.no

Møte tirsdag den 10. juni 2014 kl. 12 (midlertidig)

President: Line Henriette Hjemdal 

Dagsorden (nr.79):

Marit Nybakk på stortinget om Sri Lanka

Se denne videoen etter 2t:55m:27sekunder

http://www.stortinget.no/nn/Hva-skjer-pa-Stortinget/Videoarkiv/Arkiv-TV-sendinger/?mbid=/2014/H264-full/Storting/06/10/Stortinget-20140610-115110.mp4&msid=10955

Sak nr. 6 [14:47:40]

Interpellasjon fra representanten Marit Nybakk til utenriksministeren:

«18. mai var det 5 år siden den blodige borgerkrigen på Sri Lanka sluttet. I perioden januar-mai 2009 ble den tamilske befolkningen fanget inne i kampområdene - uten humanitær hjelp, uten mat, uten legetilsyn. Regjeringen nektet helsepersonell å komme inn og brøt dermed internasjonal humanitær hjelp. En FN-rapport anslår at rundt 70 000 sivile mistet livet på 4 måneder. Tamilene utsettes fortsatt for undertrykking. Norge har i perioder spilt en viktig rolle for å sikre fred på Sri Lanka.

Hvordan vil utenriksministeren følge opp, og vil regjeringen arbeide for en uavhengig internasjonal gransking av krigshandlingene vinteren 2009?»

Marit Nybakk (A) [14:48:46]: Vi feirer i år 200-årsjubileum for den norske grunnloven, en veldig radikal grunnlov som la grunnlaget for den videre utviklingen i Norge, en utvikling mot demokrati, velferd og menneskerettigheter. Det finnes mange steder i verden i dag der noen kjemper en kamp for frihet, rettferdighet og selvstyre. Vi har akkurat lagt en debatt bak oss, og jeg skal ta opp et annet sted.

På Sri Lanka utgjør tamilene en stor minoritet som kjemper for rettferdighet under et undertrykkende regime. Den 18. mai for fem år siden endte den blodige borgerkrigen mellom regjeringen og de såkalte tamiltigrene, eller LTTE. Tamilene ble knust, bokstavelig talt drevet opp i et hjørne i nord på øya som utgjør Sri Lanka. 300 000 tamiler ble internert i leire, og det var en prekær humanitær situasjon for store deler av den tamilske befolkningen. LTTE er nå en helt ubetydelig maktfaktor på Sri Lanka.

Vi har mange tusen tamiler i Norge. Jeg var én av dem som registrerte og fulgte krigen og de massakrene som skjedde i 2009. Jeg opplevde sinnet, raseriet og frustrasjonen hos våre innbyggere med tamilsk bakgrunn.

Sri Lankas regjering brøt folkeretten og internasjonal humanitær rett. Den tamilske befolkningen ble fanget inne i kampområdene – uten nødhjelp, uten mat, uten medisiner eller legehjelp. Regjeringen nektet helsearbeidere å komme inn. De slapp heller ikke inn forsyninger, som medisiner og annet nødvendig utstyr, til de internt fordrevne flyktningene. Dette ble de også fordømt for av verdenssamfunnet i 2009. Så er det nødvendig å legge til at dette var en borgerkrig der brutaliteten var stor på begge sider. Krigen mellom tamiltigrene og singaleserne ble avsluttet 18. mai 2009, etter store sivile tap. En FN-rapport anslår at rundt 70 000 sivile mistet livet bare mellom januar og mai. Mange ble utsatt for store overgrep.

Og igjen: Krig fjerner ikke underliggende konflikter, heller ikke på Sri Lanka. 18. mars 2010 hadde representanten Eva Kristin Hansen en interpellasjon om situasjonen, og to år senere hadde Peter Skovholt Gitmark en ny interpellasjon. Begge interpellasjonene ble besvart av Jonas Gahr Støre, som den gangen var utenriksminister. Gahr Støre sa bl.a. i sitt hovedinnlegg i 2010:

«Ti måneder etter krigens slutt er ikke en politisk løsning rykket nærmere. De etniske skillelinjene er snarere blitt forsterket gjennom de store sivile tapene, behandlingen av internflyktningene og en økt tilflytting av singalesere til områder tidligere dominert av minoritetene. Srilankiske myndigheters svar på det nasjonale problemet blir trolig økonomisk utvikling og gjenoppbygging i nord og øst snarere enn satsing på å få til en politisk løsning som er akseptabel for minoritetene.»

Jeg tror at for å forstå situasjonen på Sri Lanka er det nødvendig å se på landets historie. I 1505 tok portugiserne denne øya og kalte den for Ceylon, et navn som i 1972 ble byttet ut med Sri Lanka, som er et singalesisk navn. I 1638 ble portugiserne stått av Holland, som da tok over Ceylon. Under Napoleonskrigene fryktet imidlertid britene at franskmennene skulle ta øya. 14. februar 1815 koloniserte britene Ceylon. I det 20 århundret vokste det fram en velutdannet sosial klasse – som stort sett besto av tamiler – som gikk inn i statsadministrasjonen. Det sies at tamilene var britenes yndlinger. Singaleserne utgjør 75 pst. av Sri Lankas befolkning, tamilene 18 pst. – de er altså en minoritet, men en stor minoritet. I tillegg er det selvfølgelig også andre minoriteter, ikke minst muslimske minoriteter.

Dette landet ble uavhengig 4. februar 1948. Vi husker sikkert i Norge de to statsministere – Bandaranaike og, etter hans død, hans kone Sirimavo Bandaranaike, som tok over etter sin mann i 1960 – med et Moskva-orientert sosialistisk styre.

Jeg tror det er viktig, når vi ser på hva som videre skjedde, at det er veldig stor forskjell på singalesere og tamiler. Singalesisk og tamilsk er to helt forskjellige språk. Singaleserne, som er i flertall, er buddhister, tamilene er hinduer.

Bandaranaike-regjeringene undertrykket og rensket ut tamiler og tamilsk språk og identitet. I 1956 ble singalesisk eneste offisielle språk på Sri Lanka. Innenfor høyere utdanning ble det etter hvert innført kvoter – man tillot bare noen få tamilske studenter.

I 1983 startet geriljakrigen. De såkalte tamiltigrene, eller LTTE, var en brutal og kompromissløs frigjøringsbevegelse, men dette var en tøff krig. I 1983 flyktet nærmere 150 000 tamiler og søkte asyl i andre land, ikke minst i europeiske land.

De fleste vil huske at rundt 2000 fikk Norge oppdraget med å mekle mellom partene på Sri Lanka. Det var en vanskelig jobb, det var en tøff jobb. Det ble etter hvert inngått en fredsavtale – den ble inngått i 2002 – men konfliktene var ikke løst. Partene aksepterte etter hvert ikke denne fredsavtalen, og borgerkrigen brøt ut på ny. Og det var den som ble blodig, og noen vil mene endelig – på Sri Lanka. Som sagt, tamiltigrene ble knust 18. mai 2009.

Det kom krav om en uavhengig gransking av de mange påstandene om krigsforbrytelser og brudd på humanitærretten de siste dager og uker før krigens slutt. Forsoningsprosessen på Sri Lanka er vanskelig uten at vi får en uavhengig internasjonal gransking.

Enhver løsning må også ivareta minoritetenes identitet og gjøre slutt på den diskrimineringen som tamilene har vært utsatt for helt siden uavhengigheten fra Storbritannia, da Ceylon ble til Sri Lanka – altså et singalesisk navn. Fortsatt utsettes tamilene for overvåking og undertrykking. Det er bare å gå inn på nettsidene til ulike menneskerettighetsorganisasjoner for å se det. Det er viktig at det internasjonale samfunnet ber Sri Lankas regjering stoppe utslettingen av tamilsk kultur og tamilsk identitet. Det er viktig at tamilene får en slags selvbestemmelse i de nordlige områdene.

I norsk politikk har det vært stille en stund om tamilenes situasjon. Men vi blir minnet om den i hvert fall hver mai måned, da tamilene har flere arrangementer for å minnes det som skjedde i 2009. Vi skal i vår grunnlovsrus huske på at andre grupper i verden også kjemper en kamp for rettferdighet, demokrati og frihet.

27. mars vedtok FNs menneskerettighetsråd at det skal foretas en uavhengig gransking av mulige krigsforbrytelser på Sri Lanka våren 2009. FNs menneskerettighetsråd besluttet å iverksette en etterforskning av krigsforbrytelser begått av Sri Lanka. Det sa selvfølgelig Colombo – altså Sri Lanka – nei til med én gang. Men det er verdt å understreke og verdt å registrere at Menneskerettighetsrådet nå er mye klarere enn det har vært ved de tidligere møtene angående etterforskning – som er ordet som blir brukt – istedenfor bare å anbefale at det blir en gransking, som har vært gjort tidligere.

Norge sitter i Menneskerettighetsrådet, og mitt spørsmål til utenriksministeren er rett og slett: Hvordan følger Norge i dag opp dette vedtaket i Menneskerettighetsrådet?

Svein Roald Hansen hadde her overtatt presidentplassen.

Utenriksminister Børge Brende [14:58:39]: Jeg vil få lov til å takke representanten Marit Nybakk for at hun tar opp situasjonen i Sri Lanka.

Jeg vil innledningsvis gi min vurdering av den politiske situasjonen i landet og deretter redegjøre for hvordan vi stiller oss til spørsmålet om en uavhengig, internasjonal gransking av handlingene som ble begått i krigens siste faser. Jeg vil også redegjøre for hva Norge gjør i dag for å bidra til å bedre situasjonen i Sri Lanka – som representanten og interpellanten etterspurte.

Regjeringen ser med bekymring på utviklingen i Sri Lanka. Det er svært bekymringsfullt at demokratiske institusjoner og grunnleggende rettsstatsprinsipper har blitt svekket de siste årene. Sivilsamfunnet og medier er under press, og den generelle menneskerettighetssituasjonen er bekymringsfull – ikke bare i de tamilske områdene. Det rapporteres bl.a. om forsvinninger og vilkårlige arrestasjoner samt angrep på religiøse minoriteter. Alvorlige styresettutfordringer, inkludert korrupsjon, påvirker hele landets befolkning.

Sri Lanka har ikke vist fremgang i arbeidet for en politisk løsning der også minoritetenes interesser er ivaretatt. Det militære nærværet i nord er fortsatt omfattende. Det så jeg ved selvsyn under et besøk for et par år siden.

Hjemvendelse av internflyktninger har startet opp, og det har vært gjenoppbygging og økonomisk vekst samt avholdelse av valg i nordprovinsen. Fem år etter krigens slutt må vi likevel fastslå at Sri Lanka ikke har tatt de nødvendige skrittene mot forsoning og politisk løsning. Valget i nord i fjor var viktig, men er ikke i seg selv tilstrekkelig som en politisk løsning for landets minoriteter. Når dette er sagt, vil jeg være helt klar på at Norge ser for seg en politisk løsning som ivaretar Sri Lankas territorielle integritet.

La meg så gå videre til spørsmålet om uavhengig internasjonal gransking av krigens siste fase.

FNs generalsekretær nedsatte etter krigens slutt et ekspertpanel som fikk i mandat å vurdere om alvorlige brudd på humanitærretten og internasjonale menneskerettigheter hadde funnet sted i krigens siste fase. Ifølge ekspertpanelets konklusjoner var det rimelig grunn til å tro at slike krenkelser hadde blitt begått av begge parter i konflikten, herunder krigsforbrytelser og forbrytelser mot menneskeheten. En av de sentrale anbefalingene fra panelet var iverksetting av en genuin og uavhengig gransking av hendelsene fra srilankiske myndigheters side.

Sri Lanka nedsatte en egen kommisjon, Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission, LLRC. Kommisjonen kom opp med en rekke konstruktive oppfølgingstiltak som ville ha hatt en positiv betydning for forsoning og styrking av menneskerettighetene dersom de hadde blitt gjennomført i sin helhet. Srilankiske myndigheter har imidlertid vist begrenset evne og vilje til å iverksette disse tiltakene, særlig de som er relatert til gransking.

FNs menneskerettighetsråd vedtok i 2012 en resolusjon som oppfordret Sri Lanka til å iverksette anbefalingene fra landets egen forsoningskommisjon, LLRC – som jeg refererte til – og å følge opp mulige brudd på folkeretten. Norge var medforslagsstiller til resolusjonen.

I oppfølgingsresolusjonen, som ble vedtatt året etter, ble Sri Lanka oppfordret til å gjennomføre en uavhengig og troverdig gransking. Norge var medforslagsstiller også til denne resolusjonen, selv om vi i 2013 ikke lenger var medlem av MR-rådet.

Sri Lanka var igjen på dagsordenen under MR-rådets sesjon i mars i år. Høykommissæren for menneskerettigheter la der frem en kritisk rapport om situasjonen i Sri Lanka, som konkluderte med at regjeringen ikke hadde iverksatt troverdig gransking av de alvorlige anførslene om brudd på menneskerettigheter og internasjonal humanitærrett, og vist begrenset fremgang når det gjaldt iverksetting av den nevnte LLRC-rapportens øvrige tiltak.

Dette førte til en ny resolusjon, som etablerer en internasjonal granskingsmekanisme i regi av Høykommissærens kontor. Denne skal forestå gransking av hendelser begått av begge parter i perioden 2002–2009 og ikke bare i krigens siste fase. Norge var også her medforslagsstiller, i mars.

Når interpellanten spør om regjeringen vil arbeide for en uavhengig internasjonal gransking, er svaret ja. Vi har vært medforslagsstiller til samtlige resolusjoner vedtatt i MR-rådet i denne saken. Norge gikk tidlig ut med støtte til resolusjonsutkastet om internasjonal gransking, og vi deltok aktivt i konsultasjonene om teksten i Genève.

I det norske innlegget under debatten om Sri Lanka uttrykte vi også bekymring over menneskerettighetssituasjonen i landet, og vi kom med tydelige budskap om hvorfor vi mener etableringen av en internasjonal granskingsmekanisme er nødvendig.

Norge har for øvrig også tidligere tatt opp situasjonen i Sri Lanka i innlegg vi har holdt i MR-rådet. Vi har oppfordret Sri Lankas myndigheter til å styrke menneskerettighetene, styrke uavhengigheten til sentrale institusjoner og ivareta grunnleggende rettigheter som ytringsfrihet og pressefrihet.

Nå har jeg i mitt innlegg brukt mye plass på spørsmålet om gransking. Jeg vil få understreke at fra norsk ståsted er det også viktig å arbeide for en politisk løsning og for gjenoppbygging av områdene som ble ødelagt under krigen. De ødeleggelsene som skjedde i nord, var svært omfattende. Det har jeg selv sett.

Gjennom finansiering av minerydding, bygging av brønner og støtte til kapasitetsbyggings- og sysselsettingstiltak har Norge bidratt til gjenoppbygging og utvikling i de tidligere konfliktområdene i nord og øst. Norskstøttede tiltak har også bidratt til økt landbruksproduksjon, sysselsetting og økt inntjening for fattige familier.

Siden krigen tok slutt i 2009, har mer enn 270 mill. norske bistandskroner blitt brukt til gjenoppbygging og utvikling i de tidligere konfliktområdene.

Norge har også fortsatt å støtte sivile samfunnsorganisasjoner som jobber med forsoning, menneskerettigheter og demokratisering.

Sri Lankas president og regjering har i dag et solid flertall bak seg i parlamentet. I våre samtaler med myndighetene i Sri Lanka har vi gitt klart uttrykk for at de må bruke den muligheten som denne posisjonen gir dem, til å lansere en politisk løsning som er akseptabel også for Sri Lankas minoriteter. Dessverre har regjeringen vært lite lydhør overfor våre, og det internasjonale samfunnets, anbefalinger.

Slutten på krigen i 2009 betydde også slutten på Norges særskilte rolle i Sri Lanka. Handlingsrommet for internasjonalt engasjement er også begrenset i dagens Sri Lanka. Landets regjering ser i liten grad ut til å la seg påvirke av internasjonale aktører. Dette gjelder også for land som USA og India.

Norge vil likevel fortsatt arbeide for å bedre situasjonen i Sri Lanka. Samtidig må vi være realistiske med hensyn til hva det vil være mulig å få til. Det er viktig å understreke at det er Sri Lankas egen regjering som er ansvarlig for å finne en politisk løsning, skape forsoning og samarbeide med FNs høykommissær for menneskerettigheter i granskingen av mulige krigsforbrytelser og brudd på humanitærretten i krigens siste fase.

Marit Nybakk (A) [15:06:38]: Takk til utenriksministeren for et veldig klart og klargjørende svar. Jeg er glad for at Norge aktivt vil bidra til en internasjonal granskingsmekanisme når det gjelder å etterforske det som skjedde på Sri Lanka i 2009.

Det er riktig som utenriksministeren sier, at en politisk løsning naturligvis må ivareta den territorielle integritet, samtidig som minoriteter, særlig den tamilske, får et visst selvstyre. Men det er langt fram til reell forsoning, tross forhandlinger. Situasjonen er svært bekymringsfull.

Jeg nevnte i hovedinnlegget mitt flere menneskerettighetsorganisasjoner. Ifølge Reporters Without Borders er det kontinuerlig vold mot Sri Lankas minoriteter, først og fremst mot tamilene. Tamilske journalister trakasseres og fengsles. Minst 39 mediefolk er blitt drept eller har forsvunnet. Aviser og mediehus bombes. Mange journalister har måttet flykte fra landet. Sri Lanka rangeres nå som nr. 162 av 179 land på pressefrihetsindeksen, dette fortsatt ifølge Reporters Without Borders. Den 3. april i år ble en tamilsk avis angrepet. To ansatte ble alvorlig skadet. Det er altså lite som tyder på at situasjonen på Sri Lanka har stabilisert seg etter krigen. Det er lite som tyder på at myndighetene vil ta tak i behovene for forsoning og finne en politisk løsning som vil sikre en demokratisk utvikling og hindre diskriminering av minoritetsgruppene.

En annen foruroligende utvikling er at vi ser en del ganske tøffe angrep på hinduer og muslimer som singalesiske buddhister begår. Styresmaktene gjør ingenting for å slå ned på en økende hatretorikk mot religiøse minoriteter i landet.

Så vidt jeg vet, er Sri Lanka ikke tilsluttet Den internasjonale straffedomstolen i Haag, ICC, dvs. at etterforskning og straffeforfølging fra ICC ikke er mulig. Det blir derfor en uavhengig granskingskommisjon – eller en uavhengig internasjonal etterforskning, om man vil – som blir det mulige alternativet etter vedtaket i FNs menneskerettighetsråd. Den granskingskommisjonen som Sri Lankas regjering selv satte ned, og som utenriksministeren brukte litt tid på, har – så vidt jeg vet – hatt liten troverdighet internasjonalt.

Spørsmålet er hva Norge kan gjøre bilateralt, om Norge i tillegg til å jobbe i det internasjonale samfunnet fortsatt kan gjøre noe bilateralt når det gjelder Sri Lanka, med den historien vi tross alt har.

Utenriksminister Børge Brende [15:10:04]: Granskingsmekanismen som etableres under FNs høykommissær for menneskerettigheter vil få mandat til å gjennomføre en helhetlig etterforskning av anførte alvorlige brudd på internasjonale menneskerettigheter, også relatert til forbrytelser begått av begge parter under det samme tidsspennet som Sri Lankas såkalte Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission dekker. Høykommissæren ble også bedt om å etablere de faktiske omstendighetene knyttet til de anførte forbrytelsene, med det formål å forhindre at de som bærer det rettslige ansvaret for forbrytelsene, går fri for straff. Denne mekanismen er et viktig skritt videre i prosessen for å få til forsoning og hindre straffefrihet i Sri Lanka. Det er viktig at vi lar den mekanismen få muligheten til å utføre oppdraget de har fått mandat til, før vi tar stilling til muligheter for videre oppfølging.

Sri Lanka, som representanten Nybakk slo fast, er ikke tilsluttet den internasjonale straffedomstolen i Haag, ICC. Det har i FNs sikkerhetsråd ikke vært noen stemning for å henvise spørsmålet om gransking av hendelser i borgerkrigen i Sri Lanka til ICC. Etterforskning og straffeforfølging fra ICC er derfor ikke mulig. Det er bakgrunnen for behandlingen i MR-rådet, og at kontoret for høykommissæren for menneskerettigheter har fått oppdraget med granskingen. Det internasjonale samfunnet må sammen oppfordre Sri Lankas regjering til å samarbeide med kontoret til høykommissæren for menneskerettigheter. Sri Lankas regjering bør ha interesse av å finne løsninger slik at landet kan oppnå varig fred og forsoning. Det er samtidig grunn til å tro at samarbeid med srilankiske myndigheter om granskinger vil by på betydelige utfordringer. Regjeringen på Sri Lanka avviser MR-rådets resolusjon. Det er viktig å være klar over at også alle opposisjonspartiene i Sri Lanka, med unntak av TNA, også er imot kravet om internasjonal gransking idet de oppfatter resolusjonen som et angrep på landets suverenitet.

Norge har, som nevnt, vært en klar støttespiller i MR-rådet for alle tre resolusjonene om Sri Lanka. Vi ser nå frem til å få resultatet av granskingen. Norge vil fortsette med å fremme tydelige budskap i internasjonale fora, vi gjentar det i de bilaterale samtalene vi har, og vi vil fortsette å arbeide for å bedre situasjonen i Sri Lanka på ulike måter og gjennom ulike kanaler.

Når det gjelder situasjonen i nord, er det gjort fremskritt i gjenoppbyggingen av infrastrukturen og gjenbosettingen av internflyktninger i de tidligere konfliktrammede områdene. Sri Lankas regjering har lagt ned ikke ubetydelige ressurser for dette. Det gjenstår imidlertid utfordringer for både tilbakevendte og de gjenværende internt fordrevne, selv om de fleste har kunnet flytte tilbake.

Norge er bekymret over det betydelige militære nærværet i nord. Nasjonale sikkerhetshensyn finnes der, men fem år etter krigens slutt er det militære avtrykket og overvåkningen av sivilbefolkningen av en slik karakter at det underminerer forsoning og forsterker mistillit.

Lene Vågslid (A) [15:13:33]: Eg vil òg starte med å takke interpellanten for å reise ein viktig interpellasjon, og eg vil rose interpellanten for å setje interpellasjonen sin i den konteksta som ho gjer. Eg meiner det er viktig med tanke på at me er i eit grunnlovsjubileum.

Dei sivile er taparane i ein kvar væpna konflikt. Slik er det òg på Sri Lanka. Ingen kan vere urørte av den humanitære katastrofen og dei enorme lidingane krigen mellom folkegruppene på Sri Lanka førte med seg. Det har no gått fem år sidan krigen drap tusenvis av folk og dreiv fleire hundre tusen på flukt. FNs høgkommissær for menneskerettar slo tidleg fast at både LTTE og regjeringsstyrkane hadde gjort grove brot på internasjonale, humanitære reglar. På overflata er livet no tilsynelatande i ferd med å bli normalisert. Dei fleste kontrollpostane er fjerna, likeins dei fleste minefelta. Butikkar og hotell reiser seg, men likevel veit me at undertrykking av minoritetar i landet fortsett er utbreidd, slik både interpellanten og utanriksministeren viser til.

Ein framståande menneskerettsforkjempar sa det slik: Regjeringa vil gjerne tru at forsoning berre kan skje gjennom økonomisk utvikling, men ein byggjer ikkje fred med betong.

Gjensidig vilje og respekt er avgjerande for at folkegruppene skal kunne leve saman i fred og fordragelegheit.

Som både interpellanten og utanriksministeren tydeleg har vore inne på, utnemnde FN i 2010 ei ekspertgruppe som skulle sjå nærare på menneskerettane i landet, og i mars i år vedtok FNs menneskerettsråd ein resolusjon som kravde gransking av dei to partane sine krenkingar av menneskerettane i perioden 2002–2009. Her er det viktig at FN speler ei sentral rolle i dette arbeidet, og at Noreg støttar opp i den samanhengen. Det internasjonale samfunnet må yte press på regjeringa i Colombo for å sikre at rettane for den tamilske delen av befolkninga blir ivaretekne. Samtidig er det viktig å bidra til at tidlegare militante grupper kan integrerast i samfunnet igjen og med det bidra konstruktivt til gjenoppbygginga.

Vegen til politisk innflytelse må gå gjennom stemmeurna og ikkje gjennom valdelege handlingar og terror. Det langsiktige målet må vere å få i stand ein forsoningsprosess mellom befolkningsgruppene. Noreg har tidlegare, med blanda hell, spela ei sentral rolle i forsøket på å få til ein fredeleg utgang på konflikten i Sri Lanka. Tidlegare utanriksminister Jonas Gahr Støre tok våren 2010 initiativ til ei ekstern evaluering av fredsprosessen og Noregs rolle. Det var eit viktig initiativ. Skal me i framtida kunne bidra til internasjonal konfliktløysing, må me ta lærdom av erfaringane og til ei kvar tid føreta kritisk vurdering av om og korleis Noreg faktisk kan spele ei positiv rolle i den aktuelle fredsprosessen.

Regina Alexandrova (H) [15:17:14]: Jeg vil takke interpellanten Marit Nybakk for oppfølging av en viktig sak. Etter at den 25 år lange borgerkrigen tok slutt i Sri Lanka i 2009, har forholdene bedret seg, og situasjonen har stort sett stabilisert seg, men det har hele tiden vært utfordringer med menneskerettighetssituasjonen i landet, og i løpet av det siste året har man sett tendenser til noe økende uro.

Sri Lanka har ikke vist framgang for å finne en politisk løsning der minoritetene i landet ivaretas. Det er flere hundre tusen internt fordrevne flyktninger i Sri Lanka, og mange lever fremdeles under dårlige forhold i flyktningeleirer i nordøst, der det fremdeles er stort militært nærvær. Den generelle menneskerettssituasjonen er bekymringsfull. Det er lite som tyder på at myndighetene vil finne en politisk løsning på konflikten som vil sikre ytterligere framtidig stabilitet og hindre diskriminering av minoritetsgrupper.

Det at Sri Lankas regjering oppnevnte en granskingskommisjon som skulle undersøke og belyse konflikten, har hatt lite troverdighet internasjonalt, og regjeringen har blitt kritisert for ikke å gjennomføre en uavhengig gransking, som også utenriksministeren nevnte i sitt svar. Kritikken har blitt forsterket etter at et panel oppnevnt av FNs generalsekretær i april 2011 ga ut en rapport om krigsforbrytelser i landet. Rapporten meldte at begge sider i Sri Lankas borgerkrig har begått grusomheter mot sivile, og det kreves en internasjonal gransking av mulige krigsforbrytelser. Det internasjonale samfunn etterlyser konkrete, politiske initiativ fra myndighetene, slik utenriksministeren også har gitt uttrykk for.

Norge har hatt en viktig rolle i fredsarbeidet i Sri Lanka i mange år, og var en viktig pådriver for våpenhvileavtalen som kom på plass i 2002. Norge har engasjert seg i gjenoppbygging, i bistandsarbeid og i arbeidet med menneskerettighetssituasjonen i landet.

Jeg er glad for utenriksministerens tydelighet på at Norge fortsatt vil arbeide for å bedre situasjonen i Sri Lanka.

Marit Nybakk (A) [15:20:26]: Takk for innspillene! Og jeg merket meg særlig at utenriksministeren snakket om alvorlige styresettutfordringer på Sri Lanka – altså ikke bare undertrykking, men rett og slett at vi i tillegg har alvorlige styresettutfordringer med bl.a. korrupsjon og vanstyre i tillegg til undertrykking, internering og brudd på menneskerettighetene.

Så er det bekymring over stort militært nærvær i nord, som selvfølgelig underminerer forsoning. Og det ser egentlig ut til at Sri Lankas regjering verken ønsker å ta initiativ til en politisk løsning eller for den saks skyld gjennomføre det. Samtidig er det veldig viktig, som to tidligere debattanter understreket, at veien til en politisk løsning må gå gjennom politisk deltakelse, gjennom stemmeurnene og ikke gjennom krig og terror.

For å hindre ny, voldelig motstand er det samtidig av stor betydning at den politiske forsoningsprosessen kommer i gang. Det er fem år siden vi opplevde dette blodbadet i de nordlige områdene på Sri Lanka. I fem år har både tamilene og andre minoriteter og det internasjonale samfunnet ventet på og forsøkt å bidra til en forsoning, en politisk utvikling, som tar hensyn til minoritetene. I stedet opplever vi ytterligere undertrykking av tamilsk språk, tamilsk identitet, tamilsk kultur, og vi opplever at journalister trakasseres, særlig de som er tamiler, og vi opplever undertrykking av hinduer, som er tamilenes religion.

Jeg registrerer at utenriksministeren var opptatt av at man bidrar til gjenoppbygging, sysselsetting og landbruk i de nordlige områdene, og at også Norge kan tenke seg å bidra til dette gjennom det sivile samfunn, altså sivile organisasjoner på Sri Lanka.

Så er det slik at samarbeidet med srilankiske myndigheter om en internasjonal granskingsmekanisme er vanskelig. Jeg vil gjenta et spørsmål jeg hadde til utenriksministeren: Er det tenkelig – og jeg oppfattet også at to tidligere talere var inne på det – at Norge kan bidra med noe bilateralt med den historien vi har, eller er det vanskelig?

Utenriksminister Børge Brende [15:24:06]: Jeg vil igjen takke interpellanten Marit Nybakk for å ha reist viktige spørsmål. Jeg vil også takke for debatten og engasjementet i salen.

Regjeringen gir sin fulle støtte til det granskingsarbeidet som nå skal gjøres i regi av kontoret til FNs høykommissær for menneskerettigheter, som jeg har vært inne på.

Sri Lanka har også behov for en politisk løsning, som ivaretar minoritetenes interesser. Dette har srilankiske myndigheter selv forpliktet seg til etter krigens slutt. Jeg håper regjeringen på Sri Lanka får i gang igjen forhandlingene med TNA om en politisk løsning innenfor rammene av den srilankiske staten.

Etter min syn vil en politisk løsning kreve både vilje til forsoning og vilje til å ta et oppgjør med fortiden. Derfor er det nødvendig med en gransking. Fra norsk side er vi klare i vårt budskap til regjeringen på Sri Lanka om at de må samarbeide med kontoret til FNs høykommissær for menneskerettigheter.

Som representanten Nybakk var inne på, har Norge spilt en aktiv rolle gjennom mange år på Sri Lanka frem til borgerkrigens slutt. Vi er ikke uvillig til å spille en rolle bilateralt hvis de ulike partene skulle ønske det. Representanten la til «eller er det vanskelig?» Jeg tror at representanten er inne på noe vesentlig her. Det forutsetter i så fall at Rajapaksa, presidenten, og regjeringen ønsker å bruke Norge i en mulig forsoningsprosess fremover. Hvis et slikt ønske kommer, og jeg kan proaktivt fra Stortingets talerstol si at vi stiller opp, gjenstår det å se om det er noe som vil oppleves som interessant fra Rajapaksa og hans regjering på Sri Lanka i dag.

Vi ser jo at denne regjeringen på Sri Lanka og store deler av den tamilske diasporaen er på kollisjonskurs. Srilankiske myndigheter må nå gjennomføre troverdige rettsprosesser mot dem som måtte være mistenkt for terrorhandlinger. Det hviler her et tungt ansvar på srilankiske myndigheter for å skille mellom lovlig politisk virksomhet og ulovlig virksomhet. Sri Lanka er nå et mellominntektsland. Det vil derfor være i tråd med internasjonal praksis at bistanden til landet gradvis reduseres. Norge vil imidlertid fortsatt arbeide for å bedre situasjonen på Sri Lanka. Vi vil fortsatt bidra til støtte på ulike måter gjennom ulike kanaler.

Samtidig er det regjeringen på Sri Lanka som har hovedansvaret for å ta initiativet til politisk kompromiss og forsoning.

Presidenten: Da er debatten i sak nr. 6 over.

x