Brazen contempt of truth and justice

Eddie Adams will always be remembered in the annals of war photography. He served in the United States Marine Corps during the Korean War as a combat photographer, but some of his most searing portraits come from his work during the Vietnam War.

It was then that he took his best known photograph - a photo so iconic that it reminds most people of the Vietnam War. He won the Pulitzer Prize for this photo of Vietnamese Police Chief Nguyen Ngoc Loan executing a Vietcong prisoner, Nguyen Van Lem, on a Saigon Street on February 1, 1968, during the opening stages of the Tet Offensive that eventually saw the defeat and ignominious exit of the US from Vietnam.

There is now a crude and sinister attempt to make what is sought to be presented as an iconic image of the last days of the war against the LTTE in Sri Lanka. Set going by the nondescript group of Journalists for Democracy in Sri Lanka, ably assisted by the UK’s Channel 4 News, the London Times and BBC, and now interested persons in the United Nations, too, there is an attempt to create a collective Eddie Adams, of those who so clearly doctored the video clip of the supposed Tamil civilians being facing alleged summary execution of prisoners by persons said to be Sri Lankan troops.

That this video clip does not stand the test of scientific examination has already been clearly stated. It was clearly devastating to BBC and its presenter who brought an employee from the Tamil Service of BBC TV to comment on the video, when he said there was no way to establish its authenticity as there was no indication of date, time or place when the video was made. He added that many such videos unauthenticated and unverified photos have been seen around for some time. The world is expected to believe that it was from a mobile phone of a soldier who was at the alleged killing, based largely on the Sinhala sounding voices in the background, and the showing of the persons who did the shooting either in uniforms of Sri Lankan troops or in camouflage, which latter could be from anywhere.

For those who believe in the absolute truth of the camera, whether still or video, it is interesting to quote from Eddie Adams himself, on later reflection about his Pulitzer Prize winning photo known the world over. Writing to Time magazine about the Police Chief who did that brutal shooting Adams later said: “The general killed the Viet Cong; I killed the general with my camera. Still photographs are the most powerful weapon in the world. People believe them; but photographs do lie, even without manipulation. They are only half-truths. ... What the photograph didn’t say was, ‘What would you do if you were the General at that time and place on that hot day, and you caught the so-called bad guy after he blew away one, two or three American people?” It is a strong and compelling statement, which raises a whole lot of new issues about the conditions under which the Sri Lankan troops had to fight to defeat the LTTE with its record of brutal terror, without in anyway lending credibility to the video clip, and the heavily charged allegation it seeks to make against Sri Lanka, its conduct of the war and its treatment of civilians affected by war.

The pressure mounts

More than three months after the defeat of the LTTE, and now close to one month after the arrest of the self-proclaimed successor to Velupillai Prabhakaran and the controller of its vast reserve of funds, there is certainly great interest among those who were believing in the invincibility of the LTTE, to raise new issues to keep up their pressure on Sri Lanka, and reverse the gains to the country from the defeat of terrorism.

We see how the Channel 4 and video clip, was well in sync with the meeting of the United States US Institute for Peace (USIP) in Washington D.C. Workshop on Peace and Reconciliation in Sri Lanka on Friday August 28.

What is significant about this USIP’s so-called initiative, by an allegedly non-government body funded by the US Congress, is that its workshop for “Peace and Reconciliation in Sri Lanka”, having as its main speakers Pakiasothy Saravanamuttu of the Centre for Policy Alternatives and Jehan Perera of the National Peace Council, and moderated (if that could be the proper word) by Teresita Schaffer of The Center for Strategic and International Studies, once the US Ambassador to Sri Lanka. All three of them have shown very strong support for the position of the LTTE, and have always thought it proper to lump the Sri Lankan State with the LTTE, a clearly identified terrorist organization, especially by the United States.

When looking at the synchronization of events one can also see the report of the alleged death threat to Pakiasothy Saravanamuttu by post, a few weeks ago also being an interesting coincidence, coming so close to the sinister fake of Channel 4 and this workshop of the USIP.

Ratcheting

While the voices ranged against Sri Lanka are getting increasingly strident, especially with regard to the Channel 4 video and the ratcheting of calls for international investigations into non-existent allegations of war crimes et al, there is now a most unusual development that these forces are using in their propaganda blitz against Sri Lanka. It is the adherence by Sri Lanka to the Rule of Law.

J. Tissainayagam has been a cause celebre for the anti-Sri Lanka lobby from the time of his arrest, with organizations such as Amnesty International organizing a massive letter writing campaign calling for his release, and Reporters sans Frontiers (RsF) and Human Rights Watch making crude attempts to get President Rajapaksa to intervene and even interfere with the judicial process in his case.

Now that the High Court has given its considered verdict, Tissainayagam is thrust forward as new image of intolerance of dissent in Sri Lanka, with a special journalism award, and even President Barack Obama, being prompted to cite him as an example of the intolerance of Freedom of Expression and Media Freedom in these parts of the world.

It is necessary to pause to ask President Barack Obama, who correctly decided to close down Guantanamo, what comments he had ever made about the Al Jazeera photo journalist Sami Al-Haj, who was illegally detained and tortured by US authorities for seven years in Guantanamo, before being released in May 2008 with no charge laid against him.

One must also question Obama’s silence about Bilal Hussein, an Iraqi photojournalist for The Associated Press, who was been held in a U.S. prison in Iraq for a year without charge, until his release in April 2008, by an Iraqi Court after new agreements with the US.

In contrast the issue of J. Tissainayagam, which a New York Times journalist told me sent chills down the spine of some Sri Lankan journalists, was one where there was absolute due process, under a legal system inherited from the British. He was detained for a length of time allowed under the Emergency Laws in place, which are renewed each month by Parliament, which is the supreme legislature of the land.

Tissainayagam, unlike the Al Jazeera and AP journalist from Iraq, had access to his lawyers, was adequately defended by learned counsel, and also had persons of good social standing give witness on his behalf. It was the final decision of the Court after weighing all evidence placed before it, not just the writing of two articles as alleged, but also obtaining funds from a terrorist organization that led to his being sentenced to 20 years RI on three charges.

What is being wholly ignored is that he has two more chances for appeal -to the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka, both of which have been known to show little hesitancy in turning down bad judgments made in, lower courts, which speaks much for the independence of the judiciary in Sri Lanka.

There is a rowdy raving today about the sentencing of Tissainayagam and even calls for an immediate pardon by the President even before the ink is dry on the order given by the learned High Court Judge, and with not even a scrap of paper being produced as to why the President should, exercise his prerogative in this instance alone, when there are many others found guilty of involvement with terrorism.

The lesser the unthinking screams about the Tissainayagam Case, the better it will be for him, and for the further strengthening of the Rule of Law here. One can have intelligent discussions about this verdict, but certainly not go down to the depths of RsF which said this” extremely severe sentence on Tissainayagam suggests that some Sri Lanka judges confuse justice with revenge,” ......and went on to state that “We strongly hope that the appeal process adheres to the facts of the case and the spirit of the law.” There is more here than a touch of contempt for the judiciary both in the trial already concluded and in a possible appeal that may be heard later. Such strident voices do not serve the cause of justice for Tissainayagam or media freedom.