Registering and remembering the disappeared
August 30th is the day chosen by the United Nations to commemorate
missing persons, a subject that is of great concern to Sri Lankans. Its
official title is the International Day of the Victims of Enforced
Disappearances, and we are claimed to have the second highest number of
such disappearances in the world.
Though that statistic is based largely on past history, namely the
large numbers of those alleged to have vanished during the JVP
insurrection of the eighties, it is nevertheless a sad reflection on us
that we have not provided clarifications to the UN Working Committee on
Disappearances which maintains those statistics.
There are several reasons for working on this expeditiously, not
least the fact that the figure is thrown about freely by extreme
elements in the diaspora and the international community who imply that
it relates to the recent conflict.
Spiritual support
We should in all cases however take steps to have the figure reduced.
This is connected with what seems to me the main reason for working
on the problem, namely that we need to do whatever is possible to
assuage the grief and the problems of those who have no idea as to what
has happened to their family members. For this purpose we ourselves
should maintain records and ensure not only material support for those
who lost their breadwinners but also spiritual support to help them cope
with indeterminate loss.
For this purpose we must pay more attention to the development and
deployment of counselling services.
This has been grossly neglected over the years, and I fear our
efforts to fast forward training, when the Peace Secretariat noted in
2008 that there would be great need of more trained Counsellors in the
near future, were not successful.
Social services
Though I had discussions with both WHO in Geneva, and those
spearheading the programme in Colombo, we could not get concerted
action. Indeed, because of what seemed to be internal rivalries, the
excellent programme begun by John Mahoney, shortly after the tsunami,
was brought to a close, and the poor man had to leave, to be redeployed
later in Vietnam which clearly had a greater sense of purpose about this
than we did.
Dealing with the difficulties then of those who have been, not just
bereaved, but deprived of loved ones with no certainty as to what has
happened, should be a priority. At the same time we know that sometimes
the state has no idea as to who is referred to in the statistics that
are cited so often, with only the bare bones of a name being referred to
us. This is why we should have our own index, which is best maintained
at Grama Niladhari level.
As I have often advocated, the Grama Niladharis, with the help of the
Police who now allocate at least one officer to every Division, should
maintain a vulnerability index. I had initially thought this would focus
on women and children in need, and though this still remains the most
important area in which preventive measures should be taken for
protection, recently it has been suggested that elders and the disabled
should also be registered.
In the process the schedule could also note cases of alleged
disappearances, obviously those that have rendered family members
vulnerable, but also others. With due consultation of the Women and
Children's Unit which the Ministry of Child Development and Women's
Empowerment has proposed for every Divisional Secretariat, a programme
could be put in place to provide at least basic psycho-social support
for those who have suffered in this regard, with mechanisms to provide
appropriate social services as required.
Keep searching
This component of the Vulnerability Index I have suggested could then
be the basis of a more comprehensive response to both the ICRC and the
UN.
The former I believe check with their sources, and if over two years
they do not get confirmation that there is still an outstanding case,
they remove the name from their lists.
This does not happen with regard to the UN, but a few years back I
suggested that we should adopt a proactive approach and urge the UN
Working Group to check once again, in the cases of the over 10,000
relating to the distant past, whether there is still a problem.
We found after all, in trawling through the reports of the
Commissions of the 90s to go into those earlier cases, that several
cases had been dealt with through compensation and the issue of
certificates.
This was complicated by both the alternative spellings that are
adopted when Sinhala and Tamil names are transliterated into English,
and the fact that in many cases surnames and first names can be
transposed. Still, after some clear findings were made about records
regarding those thought to have been missing, those names were removed
from the list.
We should now go further and make it clear that the state has done
its best to match names with those about whom the state has records; but
to do more we require more information, which has to be sought from the
original informants.
In seeking this, the UN can also check whether there is in fact still
an outstanding uncertainty, or whether the matter has been brought to
satisfactory closure.
The bottom line is that we must concern ourselves with those who have
suffered, and we must promote mechanisms to ensure that their lives will
not be blighted by lingering uncertainty, and concomitant guilt about
the need to keep searching. |