SL poised to become maritime hub – Part II:

Trafficking and its global impact

Banquet address by the Chief Guest Mahinda Samarasinghe MP, Minister for Plantation Industries and Special Envoy of the President on Human Rights at the Official Banquet, Galle Dialogue 2012 on December 13, 2012

Of course there are some vital challenges that we all must acknowledge and commit to deal with. Sri Lanka has some special insight into some of these challenges. Trafficking in contraband – such as drugs and weapons – and in persons, human smuggling and piracy are some of these. Networks of human smugglers operate throughout the region and the Sri Lanka Navy has recorded outstanding successes against some of these networks.

Minister Mahinda Samarasinghe

The manifestation of piracy, especially in the Gulf of Aden, is directly attributable to socio-political instability in some coastal countries. Similarly drug trafficking, human trafficking and the illegal weapons trade pose threats to domestic security and have a corrosive effect on institutional stability and public safety.

Organized criminal networks engaged in these activities must be identified and neutralized.

There are also environmental challenges due to climate change as well as natural disasters which must be guarded against and their worst effects offset. All these are within the broader paradigm of safety and security which nations, governments and peoples must come to deal with as a broad, inter-connected set of issues that must be addressed on a priority basis.

Efforts at counter terrorism – both domestic and international – are also an important area that must command your attention. The Indian Ocean is a vital supply route for terrorist organizations.

These activities could have devastating impact upon countries affected.

Apart from ensuring a relatively low risk supply of arms and ammunition, other logistical support is also sourced by sea, providing a lifeline and giving sustenance to these organizations that threaten communities, nations and regions.

All those who realize the threat posed to national and regional stability, and the concomitant global impact, will take note of the need for coordinated, cohesive and cooperative efforts to counter this menace.

As I mentioned, Sri Lanka’s geographical position is key to its future prospects. Post conflict Sri Lanka’s vital interests, going forward, are inextricably intertwined with issues of maritime security. Nearly 30 years of terrorism that plagued the island was successfully defeated through a well planned and executed humanitarian operation.

The Sri Lanka Navy contribution to this endeavour cannot be gainsaid. It was able to counter all forms of threats posed at sea with a large degree of success.

The Navy’s victories over the seagoing arm of one of the most feared terrorists groups – one of the most inventive and dangerous outfits of its kind – was an integral part of Sri Lanka’s overall success. The contribution was not limited to surveillance, interdiction and combat operations at sea.

The Sri Lanka Navy made an immense impact through its humanitarian work transporting essential food and commodities and evacuating the injured,even when the ICRC was reluctant to provide their flag of convenience to transport food and other essential items to the more than 300,000 Sri Lankans who were held hostage by the LTTE, it was the Navy that provided the escort for commercial ships hired by government of Sri Lanka to continue to provide humanitarian assistance.

Humanitarian operation

I recall that, on another occasion, when, at the height of the conflict,I visited the Kankesanthurai Harbour with heads of different UN Organizations we saw, at first-hand, how the Sri Lanka Navy was unloading vital food and medical supplies to be rushed to the people trapped by the conflict.

This amply demonstrates the immense commitment shown by the Navy to care for the civilian population of the North.

This operational experience has moulded the Sri Lanka Navy into a flexible, innovative and robust force, especially in irregular warfare at sea. Sri Lanka proudly stands ready to share its experience in countering maritime terrorism and lessons learnt with the rest of the world.

When we were subject to the initial Universal Periodic Review (UPR) in May 2008 before the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva, one of the recommendations made to us, which we accepted, was that Sri Lanka should share its experience in fighting terrorism. Of course, that was almost a year before the final success of the humanitarian operation in May 2009.

Even at that juncture, in 2008, the armed services had recorded some significant victories against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam and had liberated the Eastern Province.

Minister Mahinda Samarasinghe

I am happy to note that both the Army and the Navy have taken the opportunity to organize conferences of this nature to showcase Sri Lanka’s undeniable achievements in combating terrorism and saving its people from the debilitating effects of internal armed conflict.

The Army and Navy under the guidance of the President in his capacity as Minister of Defence and the leadership of the Secretary to the Ministry of Defence and Urban Development, have not only enabled a sharing of Sri Lanka’s experience but have also helped create forums at which issues of regional and global significance could be deliberated upon. Our expertise and know how is being disseminated to enrich global efforts against terrorism. When we went back to Geneva for our second UPR in November this year, we were able to reflect the progress made in this regard in our National Report which,incidentally,was highly commended.

Sri Lanka can indeed share some of its best practices evolved during the course of the conflict from 2006 to 2009. Our cooperation with international organizations and bilateral partners in assuring that the humanitarian operation resulted in the rescuing of nearly 300,000 persons from the clutches of the LTTE – acknowledged globally as one of the most, if not the most, ruthless terrorist organizations the world has seen –was exemplary. We evolved unique mechanisms such as the Consultative Committee on Humanitarian Assistance (CCHA) which I had the experience of chairing. Associated with me was the Secretary of Defence,Gotabhaya Rajapaksa.

Rebuilding infrastructure

The Committee brought together government (at local and central levels), the UN system, international and local NGOs and even key diplomatic representation including the Co-chairs to the peace process, which discussed and resolved many important issues. We continued to do this for 2 ½ years. This was hailed by several visiting heads of UN agencies as a best practice. The UN Resident Coordinator and Heads of the respective Specialized Agencies coordinated with and supplemented the efforts of Government to provide humanitarian relief and assistance during the conflict and after wards. The bulk of the responsibility was undertaken by government, which is as it should be. Our main interest, the protection of non-combatant civilians, was common ground.

We were committed to work together and maximize our resources for the benefit of conflict-affected people. Of course, we had our differences, but we evolved means to resolve those differences and worked together in the larger interest of preventing the so-called 'humanitarian catastrophe'. That 'catastrophe' that was predicted, by LTTE propagandists and their supporters, among others never came to pass during the conflict or in its aftermath. The final outcome is that nearly 300,000 civilians, almost 12,000 ex-combatants (among them 594 child combatants), were received, housed, fed, taken care of and have now been largely resettled. Even the ex-combatants were processed through a legally mandated rehabilitation programme, reunited with their families and reintegrated into society. Our genuine concern for the protection of civilians was not confined to words but is demonstrated through our deeds.

Welfare villages

Post conflict, our efforts at rebuilding infrastructure, reestablishing transport linkages, restoring social infrastructure and renewing livelihoods are a matter of public record. I would urge those delegates, if they haven’t already, to witness for themselves the transformation of the conflict affected areas. Chief among our achievement was the closure of the complex of welfare villages at Menik Farm. This was in late September and was enabled by the resettlement of hundreds of thousands of displaced Sri Lankans. As at October we had resettled over 500,000 persons including those displaced before 2008. To aid in the process of resettlement, the total number of houses constructed in the Northern and Eastern Provinces up to September 2012, stands at 124, 184 at a cost of Rs. 33.34 billion. Preparatory to that was the intensive demining of vast tracts of land – an effort that was spearheaded by the armed services which was responsible for over 80 percent of the demining operations. At the same time, securing the former theatre of conflict and ensuring that a peaceful environment was maintained and law and order restored, was of the highest priority.

We did not overlook reconciliation initiatives to ensure that there was restitution and compensation for the conflict affected and measures taken to ensure accountability. Our overall objective was non-repetition of the tragic events of the past three decades.

In Geneva, I traced the many areas in which the Government had taken action on. Chief among which was the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) and the implementation of the action plan to implement its recommendations, pursuant to a decision by the Cabinet of Ministers. I gave the Council specific examples of implementation. The President appointed the LLRC in May 2010 in order to strengthen the national reconciliation process and to ensure the dividends of peace to all Sri Lankans. The Cabinet, in May 2012, decided that a Task Force headed by the Secretary to the President would monitor the implementation of the recommendations of the LLRC. In July this year, a matrix containing the National Plan of Action to implement the LLRC recommendations developed by the Task Force was approved setting out the main focus areas for implementation. The main focus areas are IHL Issues, Human Rights, Land Return and Resettlement, Restitution/ Compensatory Relief and Reconciliation.

LTTE propaganda

The LLRC has identified over 50 alleged incidents of violations of humanitarian law which are being gone into by a domestic inquiry. Many of the persons alleging violations of international human rights and humanitarian law were free to come before the LLRC and make any allegations and proffer any evidence they had. However, many of them failed to do so. Some notables among the international non-governmental organizations were invited to share their evidence but they refrained from placing this evidence before the LLRC but continue to speculate publicly on these issues. This brings into focus the question as to what their true agenda is. In my view the LLRC provided the best opportunity to initiate an inquiry into any allegation of substance.

Of course, the LLRC took basic steps to ensure the probity and integrity of the evidence it received. In contrast, the UN Secretary-General’s advisory panel of experts which advised Secretary General Ban on the Sri Lankan conflict procured 'evidence' for its report through a blanket of anonymity for those giving testimony extending for 20 years. This evidence cannot be tested for its evidentiary value. Untested evidence, hearsay, conjecture and repetition of LTTE propaganda spouted by diaspora apologists and proxies is hardly a basis for credible conclusions.

On the subject of accountability, a five-member Court of Inquiry was appointed on January 2, 2012 by the Army Commander under the Courts of Inquiry Regulations, read with the Army Disciplinary Regulations, promulgated under the Army Act and is headed by a Major General. This Court of Inquiry was tasked with inquiring into the observations made by the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) in its report on alleged civilian casualties during the final phase of the Humanitarian Operation and probing the Channel-4 video footage.

LLRC recommendations

Since its initial sitting in the first week of January 2012, as of October 2012, the Court of Inquiry had convened approximately 30 times and had examined many witnesses. It should be noted that the Court is investigating more than 50 incidents referred to in the LLRC report. Investigations cover whether or not any attacks were carried out by the Army on civilians, on hospitals or in the no-fire zones including the specific instances referred to in the LLRC Report. Irrespective of whether the Channel 4 story is authentic or not, the Court of Inquiry has been mandated to take measures to ascertain whether the uniformed persons featured in the Channel 4 footage can be identified as members of the Sri Lanka Army, and other violations of military law, if any.

Additionally, the Sri Lanka Army has commenced investigations by appointing a Board of Inquiry to study the LLRC recommendations and formulate a viable action plan to implement the recommendations that are relevant to the Army. The Sri Lanka Navy has also initiated similar measures. Some of our interlocutors in Geneva and in other international forums posed the question whether this process of the Army inquiring into its own conduct was independent and impartial. I made reference to several UN reports which show that similar action had been taken by several countries over allegations, particularly in Iraq and Afghanistan, and that we are no different from them. I might add that that was the end of the conversation.

The LLRC held its sittings in 2010 and 2011. It reported to the President who communicated the Report to Parliament thus placing it in the public domain in December 2011. As I said, after a study of the Report by Government, the Cabinet decided to concretize the proposals in the form of an implementable action plan in May. A mere 2 months later, the Action Plan was readied and endorsed by Cabinet. This orderly process, in keeping with local procedure and practice, was nothing if not indicative of our commitment to achieve genuine reconciliation.

Parliamentary Select Committee

While this process was ongoing, we were visited with a Resolution in the Human Rights Council (HRC) in March this year. The primary focus of the ill-conceived March 2012 Resolution in the Council was the implementation of the LLRC Report. Long before the adoption of the Resolution, we had assured the Council that we were committed to the implementation of the domestic process by way of an action plan and that we should be given time and space to achieve this objective. It is indeed ironic that the Resolution was urging us to do what was already in process. The March resolution was superfluous, ill-timed and unwarranted in every respect. However I must note that by November 2012, some of the 24 countries that felt compelled to support that initiative, acknowledged Sri Lanka’s gains although registering some issues on which they would like to see further progress. We will continue to engage with these countries – as we will with all our peers – within and outside the HRC and will continue to reassure them that we are working on matters of common concern.

Despite all that we have done and all that we are committed to do in the future, we still face numerous challenges both internally and externally. Internally, we are faced with the necessity of a means to address the socio-political issues underlying the conflict.

Domestic politics

We have announced our commitment to a Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) process and are awaiting the nomination of Opposition Members of Parliament to get deliberations under way. I explained in Geneva the question of the larger discussion of the way ahead as a nation and the institutional and other arrangements necessary to unify the people and work together for a mutually beneficial future. I reiterated that a central feature of the government’s approach to evolving a consensus formula remains, primarily, the establishment of a PSC, aimed at achieving multi-party consensus in respect of political and constitutional measures. The motion was unanimously adopted by Parliament in November 2011. Mindful of the fact that all previous attempts at evolving a constitutional formula failed due to the lack of consensus, the government remains optimistic that the PSC would help achieve the required consensus, given its inclusivity, transparency, and adherence to democratic norms.

All this must take place in an environment in which we must ensure equitable development and sustainable economic growth for the entire country. Our commitment to reconciliation is equally strong. As I told Parliament last week during the conclusion of the budgetary process for 2013, we have committed substantial financial resources of Rs. 763 million and a further Rs. 500 million which will have a profound impact on the promotion and protection of human rights including funding required for the implementation of reconciliation initiatives identified by the Presidential Task Force that were based on the recommendations by the Lesson Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC). This has been given the highest priority. The initiatives to promote a trilingual Sri Lanka, social integration programmes, rehabilitation and reintegration of ex-combatants, issuance of land title documents and resolution of land related issues, providing housing needs and strengthening local authorities and public services have been and are regarded as priority areas. A budgetary allocation of this magnitude has been provided under the heads of relevant disbursing agencies, to address the above issues.

Our external challenges remain formidable. As far as foreign interest groups go, the fundraising networks of the defeated LTTE are still active. So is the extensive propaganda machinery. They are playing an increasingly important role in domestic politics in their host countries. Some of them do not wish to see a lasting peace in a united Sri Lanka. They are blinded by the animosity they feel towards their homeland. We are stepping up our efforts to engage with these groups and to invite them to visit and see the reality for themselves.

Others cynically exploit the opportunity to make a living out of propagating hatred and advocating ill will towards Sri Lanka. Overall, I see a refocusing of efforts to create a negative impact upon Sri Lanka despite the many demonstrable positives. There are also the international NGOs who dabble in geopolitics, promotion of regime-change and the pursuit of a reshaped global order according to the dictates of their paymasters. They use every resource at their disposal to influence opinion at a global level. Their 'interest' in Sri Lanka has not waned. Our response to them has to be equally sophisticated and focused.

As I said at the beginning, Sri Lanka enjoys a location astride one of the world’s busiest and most lucrative maritime trade routes, this is an opportunity for us but also could leave us vulnerable to machinations based on geopolitical interests. Compared with global strategic and geopolitical forces, we are relatively small and have to achieve internal economic independence and socio-political stability and, thereby, the strength to bargain on an equal footing to secure our national interests. That is our medium to long-term goal.

Sri Lanka, therefore, has to address all these challenges as a matter of priority, contemporaneously and comprehensively. I believe that we are well equipped to deal with them as long as our best efforts are directed at making real improvements on the ground. After all our primary responsibility is to all the people in Sri Lanka – whatever language they speak, whatever their socio-cultural, ethnic or religious background may be or wherever they live. As I said, our focus is on reconciliation and development and, if we accomplish the goals set out for us by the President’s vision for the future, we will be able to withstand any challenge – be it in Geneva or elsewhere. In Geneva in March 2013, if the agenda is purely the promotion and protection of human rights, we will be able to candidly answer any question, as we have been doing, based on our ongoing commitment to improvement in that sphere. However, if the agenda is one of advancing political interests using human rights as a lever or tool, we will expose those initiatives for what they really are. I am confident that we can deal with those issues as and when they arise.

In conclusion, I would like to extend my sincere appreciation to the Secretary to the Ministry of Defence and Urban Development and the Commander of the Sri Lanka Navy for having given me this opportunity to share some thoughts on the current issues confronting Sri Lanka.