Subcommittee on International Human Rights Committee on Nov. 21st, 2013

[Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu]

Yes, the high commissioner came in August of this year. She spent a week in Sri Lanka, which apparently was her longest single-country visit in any part of the world. That particular statement comes from the media conference she had at the end of her visit. What she did do, and this is a requirement of a March 2013 resolution on Sri Lanka, was give an oral report of the situation in which she reiterated the remarks that she had made in Sri Lanka at the end of her visit. There is to be a complete report in March 2014 on progress made on the resolution of March 2013. There is then the possibility of a further resolution being made.

The UN, apart from assisting in the development activities of the country, has not taken any further steps. There is a human rights advisory section to UNDP that is based in Colombo, but the government resists any attempt to have a field office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights or to engage the UN more proactively in the human rights situation. What the government has done, on the other hand, was to come up with further commissions. This may well turn out to be more of a cosmetic exercise to deflect criticism in March 2014 than a serious and sincere effort to deal with the situation.

[Nina Grewal, Conservative, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

From my understanding, the Sri Lankan government has invested in many development projects over the last several years. Has this development contributed to the process of reconciliation and developing national unity?

[Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu]

The focus of the development projects of the government has been on economic infrastructure, a lot of road construction, that kind of thing. The argument has been that, particularly in the north, there has been insufficient or no consultation with the people concerned to ascertain what their priorities are. They are largely fishermen or farmers by occupation. Therefore, there is this concern that infrastructure and tourism, which is the other emphasis in the government's economic policy, are being designed and implemented to serve the needs of people outside the provinces. There is a fear that if there isn't an investment in persons, the people required for these economic development activities will come from outside the province, possibly resulting in demographic change under the guise of development. This would be an instance of sustaining sources of conflict to reproduce sources of conflict.

[Nina Grewal, Conservative, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Like many other countries around the world, Sri Lanka experienced an economic recession in 2008 and 2009 and has since worked towards regaining positive economic growth. What effect does the current economic situation have on the reconciliation process and the general attitude towards human rights violations? Has it been conducive to economic growth?

[Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu]

I think the feeling in the country at large is that it has been insufficiently inclusive. Certainly with the emphasis on economic development in the north, I think the verdict of the people was registered in the result of that Northern Provincial Council election in September of this year.

At the end of the day, I think we have an unprecedented opportunity here, because of the defeat of terrorism, to move ahead with economic development. What will be key in that respect is foreign direct investment to bump up our growth figures into double-digit figures. That has yet to happen. We are targeting something like 2.5 million tourists by 2016. There is insufficient evidence to say that we will definitely be meeting that kind of target.

I might mention, of course, the view that outside of Sri Lanka there is a pot of money that belongs to the Tamil diaspora that should be tapped. However, I think there are reservations on the part of the Tamil diaspora of sending money to Sri Lanka that would end up in the coffers of the central government to pay for interest on loans that were probably taken to buy arms in the war, or used for other development projects. Also, there are still...you know, if the Tamil diaspora were to come and invest in Sri Lanka, that they should also be offered dual nationality, so that they won't have to pay the taxes that, for example, foreign nationals are supposed to pay when they come into the country.

[Nina Grewal, Conservative, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Thank you, Ms. Grewal.

Professor Cotler, you are next.

[Irwin Cotler, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you for your presentation, Dr. Saravanamuttu, and for the work of the centre in particular.

[Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu]

Thank you.

[Irwin Cotler, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

One of the things I find most disconcerting is not only the spate of human rights violations but really the accompanying culture of impunity, and the need to achieve accountability if we're going to achieve reconciliation.

First, what can the international community do? What's the most effective exercise or action the international community can take with respect to combatting the culture of impunity in order to move toward reconciliation?

I'm referring, for example, to such things as the implementation of the recommendations by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights as decided upon by the UN Human Rights Council.

As a related question, what influence does Canada have in Sri Lanka, and how, in your opinion, could such influence be used to combat the culture of impunity, to promote accountability, and to move us towards reconciliation?

[Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu]

At the present moment, the forum in which the international community has been focusing on Sri Lanka has been the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva. The two resolutions of 2012 and 2013 have taken as their reference point the presidentially appointed Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission and the recommendations that came out of that.

What the resolutions have noted is that on the question of accountability, there were gaps and shortcomings in that LLRC report and the recommendations, but with regard to the more governance-oriented and human rights-oriented recommendations, they're very satisfied with it and ask for speedy implementation. The international community is on record as saying that more needs to be done beyond the LLRC, too, in respect of accountability.

The response of the Government of Sri Lanka has been very much to have military courts and come out and say, “Look, these accusations are baseless and there's no factual backing to them.” No action has been taken, but this of course is a rather weird situation, insofar as the main accusations are against the military, and the military seems to be investigating its own case. There is, therefore, the need for pressure and persuasion to be brought to bear on the Government of Sri Lanka to have independent investigations.

These independent investigations, if there are insufficient resources within the country and insufficient and inadequate trust in the credibility of institutions within the country, too, then call upon the international community to assist, and to participate as well, in that accountability mechanism; for example, if we were to go down the route of some sort of model or hybrid, no doubt, of the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission, that there be very definite international monitoring of the progress, or lack thereof, made by that mechanism in respect of truth and reconciliation. Without the international dimension, and mandated by, say, the Human Rights Council, or better still by the Security Council, but there are international political implications which might well prevent that from happening, without that international component, there isn't going to be anything that's going to happen here.

On the second point in terms of the influence of Canada, I think that as a consequence of Sri Lanka taking over the chair-in-office position for the Commonwealth for the next two years, and given the declaration at the end of CHOGM in respect of human rights and rule of law, etc., Canada, as a key and influential member of the Commonwealth, should exert its influence to ensure that the declaration is not just a piece of paper and hot air and rhetoric, but that all countries do adhere to that. Whether it be within the framework of the Commonwealth or in the Human Rights Council, Canada can bring its offices to bear on countries it has good relations with to inform them and make them more aware of what's going on in the country at large.

Certainly, I think with regard to bilateral relations the point is continuously made that human rights protection is absolutely integral to meaningful reconciliation and unity.

[Irwin Cotler, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

I thank you for your two fulsome answers on both those questions.

Let me ask you a question, if I may, relating to the question of accountability. It has to do with the involvement, of course, of the CPA and your public interest litigation involvement with regard to the issue of the removal of the former chief justice of Sri Lanka and the replacement by the former attorney general.

How might the removal of the former chief justice impact on the whole question of accountability and reconciliation?

[Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu]

I think what that impeachment process did was to create in the minds of the people a sort of completion of state capture. I think it confirmed to people that the judiciary, which they may hitherto have felt was an independent arm of the state and a protector of the rights of citizens, was also now being turned not into something that was executive friendly but into something that was very much an extension of the executive. The credibility of the judicial process, the trust and confidence of citizens in the judicial process, I think, has been more than just dented by that farcical impeachment process.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Thank you.

That finishes that round of questions.

Mr. Schellenberger, you are next.

[Gary Schellenberger, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

Thank you, Doctor, for your presentation. I must say that what happens when you get to be one of the last people to ask questions is that so many of the questions you had have already been answered.

The CPA conducts public interest litigation on language rights issues. Can you explain how language rights fit into the broader reconciliation process in Sri Lanka? How well are minority language rights respected in your country?

[Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu]

The constitution of Sri Lanka, since 1987, states that there are two official languages in the country, that is, the Sinhala language and the Tamil language. From 1956 to 1987, Sinhala was the only official language of the country. Now, very little had been done, and very little is being done in terms of making sure that the official language provisions of the constitution in the law are actually implemented on the ground, that is to say, to ensure that Tamils...[Technical difficulty—Editor]...to be able to make statements, and can make statements at police stations, for example, in Tamil, and that when they deal with state officers, they can deal with them in Tamil. In fact, in the north, in particular, where you have a heavy military presence and you have police officers, etc., who do not speak Tamil, it only accentuates and exacerbates the divide.

There is a Ministry of National Languages and Social Integration, too, which is a national ministry, but it has a paltry sum of money allocated to it in the national budget, which again reflects the importance with which this issue is being perceived and taken by the government. Earlier this year we had a situation where the military in the north were telling schoolchildren that they couldn't sing the national anthem in the Tamil language and that it should only be sung in Sinhala.

What I am trying to point out to you is that here is an issue that common sense simply tells us could be one that will bring communities together. It does require a diligent investment of a certain amount of resources to ensure that the state speaks to its citizens according to the laws enshrined in the constitution, and does not, in effect, alienate them by forcing them to be signing papers and documents, for example, in a language they do not understand. This is an area that will go quite far in ensuring there is conversation, dialogue, and communication among the communities, which will of course only enhance reconciliation and unity.

[Gary Schellenberger, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

What do you see as the most promising avenues for promoting reconciliation and accountability in the country?

[Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu]

I think the most promising avenue is this. In my meetings and exchanges with people in the north, for example, they make a very simple point. They say the government is saying that we are all one people now, that we should not be talking about being Sinhala, Tamil, and Muslim, or whatever, that we're all citizens of Sri Lanka, that we all belong to one country and we're all equal citizens. They make the point that equality has to be founded upon self-respect, dignity, and mutual respect, and in order for them to have that mutual respect, etc., they can't be told to forget about what happened to them. There needs to be an acknowledgement of what happened. What follows from that is we can debate the various mechanisms and processes, but what they want is an acknowledgement by the state, by the government, of the situation they went through and which they have come out of. It is only on that basis, on the basis of that acknowledgement, that they can even begin to think of themselves as equal citizens.

[Gary Schellenberger, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

I know you've already commented on the media and how they are treated by the government right now, but how do you feel the media can contribute to creating an environment that is favourable to reconciliation and accountability in Sri Lanka? I know you do have concerns about the respect of freedom of the press. How do you, in your own words, feel that the media may be able to be involved in this act?

[Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu]

Irrespective of what the government has done and is doing and the issue of self-censorship, I think the media need to look inwards and ask themselves whether they are part of the problem or part of the solution, as it were. The media don't adequately report on the extent of human rights violations in terms of the problems faced by citizens in accessing the law, the problems faced by their living in a militarized context.

As I said earlier, for example, how many ordinary, average Sri Lankan citizens would even begin to understand that there are 90,000 or 100,000 female-headed households in the north?

For example, we did a survey recently and found that only 30% of those surveyed—it was a national survey—actually knew about the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission. If that is the overarching priority, reconciliation and unity, the government also should be putting its resources behind making everyone aware of the requirements of reconciliation and of unity. This is one way of bringing people together. The media in that respect can do a lot more.

[Gary Schellenberger, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

Thank you, sir.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Thank you, Mr. Schellenberger.

We turn now for our final round. I understand that Monsieur Jacob and Madam Sitsabaiesan once again will be dividing their time.

Mr. Jacob, you have the floor.

[Pierre Jacob, NDP, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to thank our witness for being here with us this afternoon.

My first question is as follows: as a civil society organization, just how free does your organization feel in commenting on and challenging what the Sri Lankan government, police and military do? More specifically, do the threats from armed non-state groups worry you?

[Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu]

As an organization, the Centre for Policy Alternatives has faced a number of challenges in the work that it does, but we feel very strongly that we need to continue to do it, to take a public role in respect of the defence of these rights, and hopefully that provides some insurance against a backlash.

For example, I personally have received death threats. I am constantly subjected to a campaign of vilification in the state media. The government has put up posters around the country condemning me and accusing me of being a secessionist and a Tiger, an LTTE sympathizer, for taking stands that they do not agree with. They named us as well in the charges of impeachment against the chief justice.

The space for civil society is shrinking considerably, and there are only a few organizations that are willing and able at the end of the day to stand up, but we are, in the public discourse, controlled by the powers that be. In terms of government, we are seen and branded as traitors, as agents of foreign powers, as supporters of the LTTE, etc., so there is always the risk, the danger, the possibility of being detained at airports, taken in, “disappeared”, threatened. There is also the everyday reality of being castigated as traitors and agents of a foreign power in the state-controlled media.

[Pierre Jacob, NDP, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Thank you.

Mr. Chair, do I still have some time left?