Britain claiming to
be vibrant democracy:
Vague excuses to silence President - GL
“Is threatening the life of a community in a British city, to
prevent the expression of a point of view, acceptable in a functioning
and vibrant democracy,” External Affairs Minister Prof GL Peiris asked
the media in London on December 2.
Minister Prof GL Peiris |
Speaking at a media briefing at the Sri Lanka High Commission,
London, to explain current political developments in Sri Lanka and the
situation arising from the prevention of President Mahinda Rajapaksa
addressing the Oxford Union due on December 2, Prof Peiris said that two
statements by the Oxford Union showed an immense degree of pressure and
threats being brought on the Union for the purpose.
Oxford Union
He said this went against the core values of Oxford, which believed
in the freedom of speech, the articulation of differing views, however
disagreeable they may be and the ability to counter in words the views
of another, state one’s own position and challenge the views of a
speaker.
If one were to sum up this spirit of the Oxford Union it was best
done by the words of Voltaire that “I disagree with every word you say,
but shall defend unto death your right to say what you have to say...”
Two statements by the Oxford Union its public statement on why it had to
withdraw the invitation to President Rajapaksa to address the Union, and
a personal letter to President Rajapaksa from the President of the Union
showed the nature of the danger the Union and the community in Oxford
was faced within this situation.
Expected protests
While the public statement referred to the sheer scale of expected
protests, that they did not feel the talk can reasonably and safely go
ahead as planned, the letter to President Rajapaksa presented this
danger in more detail and in its true perspective. It said that the
“disruption and danger that residents and citizens and community would
face is by far too great to justify hosting the speech. This is to say
nothing of our members who, similarly, could be directly placed in
danger should he expected protests turn violent.”
It added that the “Thames Valley Police have strongly advised that
they will most likely not be able to guarantee the security of the
Union, its members, its neighbouring businesses, or your delegation.
Quite simply the expected protests are likely to be on a scale that
would have been unprecedented in Oxford, placing immense strain on the
local police.”
He recalled how on the last occasion when President Rajapaksa
addressed the Union two years ago, there had been a very lively exchange
of views between the President and the members of the Union. In inviting
President Rajapaksa again, the Union was ready to once again learn from
him, his views on the future of the country.
Regretting the inability to proceed with the arrangement, due to the
threat posed by those opposed to this, the President of the Union had
said he was sure President Rajapaksa would have shared a fascinating
insight into the political climate in Sri Lanka and its international
neighbours.
The Professor noted that in delivering his speech as planned today,
President Rajapaksa would have had the opportunity to defend his vision.
Prof Peiris who had himself obtained a Doctorate from Oxford and was
a frequent visitor to Oxford, said the threat that compelled the Union
to cancel the talk by President Rajapaksa was clearly a direct threat to
the community, the businesses, offices and pedestrians of Oxford,
placing a whole community to ransom, to achieve the undemocratic aims of
a small groups, the LTTE and its supporters, who were clearly opposed to
free speech and the values of democracy in this land of democracy.
He asked whether such intolerance of differing views could be allowed
in a democracy, and warned of the dangers that such threats posed to the
very fabric of democracy and British society.
This is not an attack on Sri Lanka or President Rajapaksa but on the
values of democracy in the UK and was wholly incompatible with the
British political system and the hallowed traditions of Oxford, he said.
Professor Peiris asked, “Is this acceptable” that a speaker is
silenced in a country that enjoys the freedom of speech?
Clear message
The External Affairs Minister said the principal motive of President
Rajapaksa’s decision to come to the UK was to transmit a very clear
message about the government’s aims about the future of Sri Lanka.
Had he be able to speak at the Oxford Union, President Rajapaksa’s
message would have been one of reconciliation in this by Sri Lankans in
all parts of the world, expressing the government’s wish to reach out to
all Sri Lankans in the UK, irrespective of religion, race, political
persuasion.
He would have used the opportunity in the UK to reach out to all Sri
Lankans in the UK to join in the new task of nation building, in the
renaissance of Sri Lanka after nearly 30 years of bloody conflict.
He called for the need to be objective in the appraisal of Sri Lanka
referring to the ongoing resettlement of IDPs with the provision of
economic opportunities and livelihood for all of them.
Resettlement was an exercise where the future well-being those being
re-settled was addressed in all aspects and was not a matter of
statistics alone, although one could be proud of having reduced nearly
290,000 IDPs to just over 10,000 within 15 months,
Affected areas
The minister mentioned that the Sri Lankan Government is currently
undertaking a number of measures, including the revival of industry,
agriculture and fisheries, as well as improvements in infrastructure,
communications, transport, railways and irrigation in the conflict
affected areas and that there was a great opportunity for participation
in this task of reconciliation and rebuilding. The Government would
pursue its policy of seeking to make all Sri Lankans, wherever they
live, to participate in this.
Action had already been taken to have talks with the political
parties of all minorities towards achieving a political solution to
issues faced by the Sri Lankan people.
President Rajapaksa has held, and will continue to hold, talks with
Tamil leaders to reach implementable political solutions.
On the issue of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission,
Professor Peiris said that it was important that the investigation is in
harmony with local circumstances.
He added that in less than two and half months, the commission has
received over 500 testimonies and an inter-agency committee (comprising
seven ministries) is preparing to implement the interim recommendations
of the LLRC.
He stressed that was a ‘proper sequence’ in which Sri Lanka was
seeking to consider to achieve true reconciliation:
* Humanitarian relief-the resettlement of IDPs
* Economic renaissance of the North and East
* Address the need to remove ‘the scars of the past’
“We must encourage people to get on with their lives,” he said adding
that it was necessary to learn from the past and to gather from the
actual stakeholders their known ideas.
Responding to a question about the immediate plans of President
Rajapaksa after the withdrawal of the Oxford Union invitation, Prof
Peiris said President Rajapaksa met Dr Liam Fox on December 2.
He also met three members of the Foreign Affairs Committee of
Parliament.
He also met Secretary General of the Commonwealth; the principle
purpose of the visit was to address OU, but not the sole reason.
Q: (Michael Aldridge, BBC): How do you see the relationship
between the British Government and Sri Lanka in light of the OU
cancellation?
A: The British Government was not involved in any way in the
decision.
It was the Oxford Union that was forced into the cancellation of the
program facing threats, which it considered serious and advice of the
local police.
Q: (Michael Aldridge, BBC): Can you comment on the WikiLeaks
revelations, specifically Ambassador Butenis' statement that civilian
and military leaders were responsible for war crimes?
A: Communications between governments is confidential and must
remain so.
Should any major concerns be raised or revealed, we will take up all
necessary concerns through proper diplomatic channels.
Misconceptions must be resolved by direct negotiations and
discussion.
Q: (Jonathan Miller, Channel 4): Why has the Government not
allowed an independent investigation into the alleged war crimes?
Why have members of the UN investigating team been barred from
entering Sri Lanka?
A: We have put in place the necessary measures that are most
appropriate for Sri Lanka.
The LLRC has written to organisations, such as Amnesty International,
Human Rights Watch and the International Crisis Group inviting them to
testify, in order for us to ascertain the truth.
On the issue of the latest footage released (by Channel 4) of alleged
atrocities, Professor Peiris pointed out that the timing of the releases
has been purposefully scheduled to coincide with key events, e.g.
meeting regarding the GSP+ facility, his (the minister's) meeting with
UK Foreign Secretary Hague in October and now on the eve of President
Rajapaksa's visit to the Oxford Union.
It was always aimed at attacking Sri Lanka, but the material is not
verified, authenticated and the sources not revealed. All of this can be
placed before the LLRC.
Q: (Owen Bowcott, The Guardian): David Cameron has supported
calls for an independent investigation, please comment.
A: That is what we have in the LLRC. 3
Q: (Owen Bowcott, The Guardian): I think he means
international
A: No, he didn't say that, he said independent and that is
what we have.
Do not put words into his mouth, to convey your own expectations.
Q: (Jessica Baldwin, Al Jazeera English): Putting the scars
behind us, surely this means an international investigation everyone
would buy into?
A: There isn't one solution to all problems.
There are plenty examples of solutions to work as a homegrown, home
spun remedy. We have looked at the examples of the Truth and
Reconciliation Commission in South Africa and the Chilcott Committee in
the UK on Iraq.
We will draw from the best lessons from anywhere, but the solutions
must be in keeping with our own traditions. The pressure for an
international commission is almost colonial in nature.
Q: (BBC Sinhala): You quoted from Voltaire...but international
journalists have not been allowed to report in some areas of the
country. People have also been denied permission to put up posters.
Please comment.
A: In any country where there are problems, there are
restrictions (cited example of the IRA leaders being taken off the
British Media).
We cannot look to the past, we must propagate the message of
reconciliation and this is the President's message. |