Evidence of meeting #8 for Subcommittee on International Human Rights in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was lanka.
A recording is available from Parliament.
1:40 p.m.
NDP
Wayne Marston NDP Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and my thanks to our witnesses for being here today.
I want to emphasize something. The hearings we are holding today, including your testimony, will be used in a request to the Canadian government to go to the United Nations to support the call for an open, independent international investigation of the final days of the conflict. Much of the testimony has been about what's happened afterwards. That's the focus of what we are trying to do. In light of the Channel 4 video in Britain, and what was documented there, there's evidence of atrocities, apparently on both sides. I want to stress that as well.
Mr. Neve, you haven't had a chance to comment, so if you want to go beyond that I would appreciate it.
1:40 p.m.
Secretary General, Amnesty International
Thank you, Mr. Marston.
I would like to make some recommendations that Amnesty International has for the Canadian government, which I think speak to some of the points you've just raised. We're concerned about the long-standing lack of justice and accountability, not just in the final weeks and months of terrible abuses by both sides, but also the previous decades of abuses and violations. We are very much of the view that this time Sri Lanka needs to get it right. There needs to be justice and accountability to ensure that we're not going to see a repeat of those long-standing, terrible patterns of abuse.
The United Nations has been grappling with that. The Secretary-General signed a joint communiqué with Sri Lanka's president promising that there was going to be some justice and accountability. The Sri Lankan government convened its Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission. The Secretary-General convened his independent panel of experts, which agreed, after extensive work, that there was a need for an independent international investigation into the abuses and that domestic accountability was not going to be enough.
That's where we stand now. The Sri Lankan government continues to resist that call aggressively. We think there are at least two key forums in which Canada should be working hard to advance the progress towards the needed international investigation. One is the United Nations Human Rights Council. In September, Canada brought forward a resolution—although it didn't go ahead—that would have opened a discussion within the United Nations Human Rights Council on justice and accountability in Sri Lanka. It was very mild; it was not confrontational at all. It followed the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission more than the independent panel's report. It was a welcome step forward and we very much appreciated the leadership Canada took. But the Sri Lankan government opposed even this. In the end, the Canadian government decided not to pursue it at the September session of the Human Rights Council. We understand they are inclined to do so at the next session of the council, which would be in March 2012. We would strongly endorse that as a step forward and hope that Canada will diligently work towards this initiative between now and March. It will take a lot of effort to find allies, to work across regions within the United Nations system, to ensure that the resolution can go ahead as strongly as possible.
The other front is the Commonwealth. I think you've already heard testimony and are aware that the Canadian delegation—the Prime Minister and Minister Baird—had some strong things to say about Sri Lanka's human rights record at the most recent CHOGM, the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting. The focus was on the next session, which is going to be in Sri Lanka in 2013. The Canadian government has made it clear that unless there is some meaningful progress on accountability and human rights reform, it's unlikely that Canada will attend.
It is encouraging that this bar has been set. We urge the government not simply to put this on the back burner and only to come back to it in 2013, but to use these two years and the leverage that has been put on the table to push very much for the accountability agenda to move forward, including an international investigation.
So those two forums are absolutely key. We welcome both the United Nations Human Rights Council and the Commonwealth. We welcome some of what we've heard and seen recently from the government, and we think that direction needs to be maintained and strengthened.
1:45 p.m.
Conservative
Russ Hiebert Conservative South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC
Thank you.
I'll be sharing my time with my colleague Ms. Grewal.
Mr. Samathanam, at the end of your testimony you talked about people saying that if you didn't renounce the comments you made in the National Post, your wife wouldn't receive the police clearance she needs to travel.
Can you tell us who told you that?
1:45 p.m.
As an Individual
When we didn't get the police clearance, I told my wife to contact the clearance office. She contacted them, and they said it was with the National Intelligence Bureau. We can't talk directly to the NIB, so my wife contacted a Sri Lankan deputy minister and asked if he could help her in this situation. Then he called the NIB director who said I had gone to Canada and talked to the National Post. He asked why I had talked to them and said I had to go to the Sri Lankan consulate in Toronto and give a statement because my statement was all false. After I did that, they would give me a police clearance and my wife may then leave Sri Lanka.
The pre-clearance has been requested by the Canadian high commission. Normally they ask for a police clearance for any sponsor. If it's a tourist visa, she can come any time, but because there's a sponsor she has to get police clearance. That's normal procedure, but the NIB is refusing.
Yesterday I called the consulate in Toronto and told them what the situation was. He said they cannot do that and asked who told me this. I said that the NIB was telling my wife this and that the minister had mentioned it, and so what do you want me to do? He told me to come back next week. That is the situation.
1:45 p.m.
Conservative
Russ Hiebert Conservative South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC
So again, to make the source of this information clear, who is asking you? The minister or somebody the minister talked to? Do you have a name?
1:45 p.m.
Conservative
1:45 p.m.
As an Individual
I don't know his name but he is the director of the National Intelligence Bureau of Sri Lanka.
He said if I do that, then the minister can write to my wife. My wife told me to do that, but I just can't. This is blackmail.
1:45 p.m.
Conservative
Russ Hiebert Conservative South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC
From what you can tell, how many people are still in prison?
1:45 p.m.
As an Individual
In the detention centre in Boossa there were about 150 when I was there in 2008. At the inquiry headquarters in Colombo, there are about 50 to 60 people most of the time for what are just inquiries. These are illegal, not legal, detention centres.
At the Boossa one they have about 55 to 60 females and about 100 males, so there are somewhere between 150 to 200.
1:45 p.m.
Conservative
Russ Hiebert Conservative South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC
Can you tell me what things are like today?
1:45 p.m.
Conservative
1:45 p.m.
As an Individual
On Boossa I don't have specific numbers, but there are more than 200. About 50 or 60 are detained at the TID; and then at the detention centre at Welikada Prison, there are 59 to 70; and at Anuradhapura Prison in the centre of Sri Lanka, there are another 70. It goes on like that at different locations.
1:45 p.m.
Conservative
November 17th, 2011 / 1:45 p.m.
Conservative
Nina Grewal Conservative Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC
Thank you, Chair.
Do you think the Tamils are being included in any domestic reform or reconciliation processes?
1:45 p.m.
As an Individual
That has just not been happening in the past two or three years. From the day I was born in 1970--I am 40 years old--there have been ethnic riots. Tamils were chased in the 1958 riots, the 1977 riots, and in 1983. Our family was personally affected by all three riots.
So this reconciliation thing is all false. I don't believe anything about it because they're not changing. For example, a UN special representative visited our prison and recommended that we should be taken to court, and there should be a judge. Nothing has happened yet.
My house and belongings were burned in the 1983 riots and in the communal riots. In 1977 when I was seven years old, they burned it down, so we went to a refugee camp. We built it again in 1983.
I was not even born ion 1958, but my parents told me that Colombo was totally burned then. I studied in Colombo at S. Thomas' College. My wife is Sinhalese, and I have nothing against any Sinhalese.
But at that time the opposition party ruled the country. So both parties have ruled after independence and nothing has happened. Both are the same, so something different has to happen.
1:50 p.m.
NDP
Ève Péclet NDP La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC
Thank you very much for being here.
Do they have translation?
Can everyone understand?
I could ask my question in English, but it's just not going to be as fluid and as clear as I would wish it to be.
So we want the United Nations to have a study. We want the United Nations to go to Sri Lanka and have an independent trial, if we can say that, or a study.
What are the obstacles? Why is the United Nations not making the decision? We have the proof, we have the witnesses, we have organizations that went into the field and know what happened. The government cannot deny what happened.
What are the obstacles preventing the United Nations from taking those actions?
