British Duplicity in ‘The PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS in Sri Lanka’
Lakshman I.Keerthisinghe LLB, LLM. MPhil
Attorney-at-Law
The British,
with their dubious history on protection of human rights should mind
their own business and leave the other Sovereign Nations in the world to
find their own solutions to any human rights violations in their lands.
Sri Lanka is in a process of reconciliation and there is peace and
tranquility in our country
The West won the world not by superiority of its ideas or values or
religion but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence.
Westerners often forget this fact, non Westerners never do.’ Samuel. P.
Huntington as quoted by J.B. Muller in his dissertation Anglophiles,
Eurocentric Arrogance and Reality –The Island November 5, 2010.
|
UK
Parliament |
There were recent media reports that British Members of Parliament
have called on their government to boycott this year’s Commonwealth
Heads of Government Meeting in Sri Lanka, at a debate held in the Houses
of Parliament recently. The debate, saw MPs from across the political
spectrum speak out against Sri Lanka and slamming international inaction
on the issue, with many calling for the British Government to refuse to
attend the CHOGM due to be held in Sri Lanka, and called for robust
action at the UN Human Rights Council. Many of the lawmakers blasted the
Sri Lankan government’s human rights record, with Siobhain McDonagh
saying,
"If the Queen were to put her foot on the soil in Colombo it would be
regarded as a vindication of the Sri Lankan Government’s actions—and
this is at a time when at least 40,000 people are still dying or
missing."
Lee Scott also added,
"Should we forget Auschwitz, Rwanda or the atrocities committed in
Northern Ireland? No, we should not. That would be an insult to the
memories of the people who lost their lives on all sides, and that is
not acceptable."
To remind the British of their past actions in Sri Lanka consider
what J.B. Muller states in the dissertation quoted at the outset of this
piece referring to the General Order issued in 1818 during the British
Colonial Rule in Sri Lanka (then Ceylon) to put down the rebellion in
Uva-Wellassa as follows: ‘Kill every man, woman and child including the
babes suckling at their mother’s breast. Destroy all dwelling houses.
Burn all crops. Cut down all fruit trees. Slaughter all cattle; take
what meat is necessary to feed the troops and burn the rest. Destroy all
reservoirs, canals and channels. Poison the wells. Lay waste utterly the
countryside denying any relief whatsoever to the rebels.’ Muller further
states: ‘This order was carried out, laying waste Uva and Vellassa, a
destruction from which it is yet to fully recover.’ British writers
commented that every tree from Ratnapura to Badulla was devastated with
hung bodies of rotting human beings that gave off a revolting stench.
The word ‘genocide’ was coined in the 1940’s meaning the wiping out of a
people, but if this wasn’t genocide then, what is? This is the manner in
which the British who have now become human rights crusaders against Sri
Lanka dealt with a rebellion by the Ceylonese people at that time.
Channel 4 documentary
It was reported recently in the print and electronic media that the
Eighth Report from the Foreign Affairs Committee (FCO) of Session
2010-12 titled Response of the Secretary of State for Foreign and
Commonwealth Affairs presented in the House of Commons, the lower House
of the British Parliament by the Secretary of State for Foreign and
Commonwealth Affairs by command of Her Majesty in September 2011 from
paragraphs 137-141 inter alia contained the following recommendations
concerning Sri Lanka: Recommendations 38 and 39.
|
One of the
LLRC sittings. |
Paragraph 138: We commend Channel 4 for its documentary Sri Lanka’s
Killing Fields, which showed horrific scenes of crimes carried out in
2009. We reaffirm the view of our predecessor Committee and call on the
UK Government to press for the setting up of an international war crimes
inquiry to investigate allegations of atrocities carried out by both
sides in the Sri Lankan civil war (Paragraph 161).
It further states,‘We share international concern about the
credibility of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission process,
but the Sri Lankan government has indicated that the Commission will
consider the allegations contained in the Channel 4 documentary. We will
consider all further options in light of the Commission’s conclusions
and recommendations.’
It is well known that the British are methodical and meticulous in
their dealing with any situation and that they strive to do justice in
all given circumstances. If the British are to sit upon judgement on the
Sri Lankan government’s dealings during what they term the ‘Sri Lankan
civil war’, the British should first establish a Committee of Inquiry to
investigate their own vicious scorched earth policy they used to put
down rebellions in the colonies in the British Commonwealth and human
rights violations committed by the British troops under the General
Order given in 1818,and the historical evidence available on the
devastation they caused in 1818 (193 years ago) in Uva Wellassa during
the rebellion.
Horrific scenes
Wellassa (Wel lakshaya in Sinhala) was composed of hundred thousand
paddy fields yielding a substantial crop, which has not yet recovered
from the scorched earth policy of the British. If the proponents of the
Channel 4 video were present at that time they could have recorded
horrific scenes of babes suckling at their mother’s breast being
snatched by British soldiers and their throats being slit in the
presence of their wailing mothers, who were then shot. Setting fire to
acres and acres of golden paddy fields resplendent with crops resulting
in the wanton destruction of the fruits of hard labour of the poor Sri
Lankan farmers all of whom were killed then would have met the eyes of
the Channel 4 team.
The strategy of destroying the food supply of the civilian population
in an area of conflict has been banned under Article 54 of Protocol I of
the 1977 Geneva Conventions. The relevant passage says: ‘It is
prohibited to attack, destroy, remove, or render useless objects
indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, such as
foodstuffs, agricultural areas for the production of foodstuffs, crops,
livestock, drinking water installations and supplies, and irrigation
works, for the specific purpose of denying them for their sustenance
value to the civilian population or to the adverse Party, whatever the
motive, whether in order to starve out civilians, to cause them to move
away, or for any other motive.
Pearl of the Indian Ocean
The British were never invited to Sri Lanka, then Ceylon. They
invaded this peaceful little island, known as the Pearl of the Indian
Ocean and robbed it of all its wealth in the form of tea, rubber,
coconuts and coffee. They improved the infrastructure in the form of
roads, railways etc, not for the love of the local population but to
improve the economy to fill their own pockets. They terrorized the local
population and made them their slaves. J.B. Muller in his dissertation
referred to above further states: ‘In the plantation Raj I met a man in
his sixties by the name of Kalu Banda. He had a sinister furrow curved
diagonally across the face from above his right eye to below his left
ear lobe. He told me that the road on which we were standing was once a
horse-track and the European who owned a tea plantation a few miles away
was to ride this way often.
He met him one day and failed to remove his turban and bow. For this
act of ‘disrespect’ the European struck him across the face with his
leather riding quirt, drawing blood and leaving a huge gash which healed
slowly. He told me tales of labourers being tied to trees and whipped
until their backs were shreds of torn flesh. There was no one to
complain he said. Then, pretty women or girls as young as 12 years from
the Labour Lines or the village were ordered to be brought to the
bungalow at dusk – properly bathed and with the coconut oil in their
hair washed out thoroughly. The plantation areas have many bastard
children-some with blue eyes and blonde hair - the result of the sexual
exploitation of the voiceless in ‘the good old days.’ The British left a
trail of similar human rights violations all over the world in the
countries they subjugated in their quest for expanding the British
Empire.
The term ‘commonwealth’ implies, though unintentionally, that the
British plundered the wealth of all the countries they brought under
their rule.
Those were the deeds of the British, who have now become the greatest
protectors of human rights in Sri Lanka. The Bible states, ‘No man
should sit upon judgement on another lest he be judged.’ This saying is
more relevant when applied to a wrongdoer assuming the role of a judge
over others. As that great British Jurist, then Master of the Rolls Lord
Alfred Thompson Denning once questioned: ‘Who made thee the ruler and
judge over us?’ repeating the saying in Exodus 7.27 – The Bible, the Sri
Lankan Nation can now question the British in the same manner. How could
the British sit upon judgement on Sri Lankans when their fore-fathers
have committed blatant unmentionable atrocities and human rights
violations in our country and in all the other countries that came under
their rule? The British have no right whatsoever even to debate such
matters concerning Sri Lanka being well aware of the atrocities and
human rights violation committed by their own forefathers during the
British rule in Sri Lanka.
The Sri Lankan government should establish a Commission of Inquiry
into the human rights violations and economic devastation caused in Sri
Lanka, then Ceylon, during the British Rule and based upon the findings
of such an inquiry call upon the Government of the United Kingdom to pay
suitable compensation for those atrocities committed by the British
during their rule in Sri Lanka, then Ceylon. Much publicity has to be
given to the findings of such an inquiry supported by historical
evidence available in many documents so as to expose the barbaric manner
in which the Sri Lankans were dealt with by the British. In the
alternative the Sri Lankan government ought to call upon the Secretary
of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs of the United Kingdom to
initiate such an inquiry and display their genuineness on accountability
in such matters.
Tamil Diaspora
The British members of Parliament are acting in this manner due to
the fact that their electorates consist of the members of the Tamil
Diaspora whose franchise is needed to bring them to come to power. Their
actual selfish intention is covered up by crocodile tears that they are
shedding regarding alleged human rights violations in Sri Lanka. If the
British wish to open old wounds that are best forgotten then Sri Lanka
could also open older wounds that would expose the true barbaric nature
of the British themselves who were indeed the initial human rights
violators in this country to their dismay and utter disgrace.
The British, with their dubious history on protection of human rights
should mind their own business and leave the other Sovereign Nations in
the world to find their own solutions to any human rights violations in
their lands. Sri Lanka is in a process of reconciliation and there is
peace and tranquility in our country.
Our people regardless of any differences whatsoever should unite and
through a process of consultation, compromise and consensus reach our
own solutions to any conflicts or disputes that we may have without
inviting foreigners, especially those who have devastated this country
once, to intervene again and let history repeat itself.
In conclusion let me repeat the saying in Psalms in the Bible thus:
‘Behold how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together
in unity.’ |