6.9.2008
The
Government of Sri Lanka refuted certain assertions made
by Amnesty International (AI) on 04 September 2008, in a
statement to the Human Rights Council on supposed “severe
problems of protection and assistance for displaced persons
triggered by the intensification of hostilities,”
according to a media release of the Ministry of Disaster
Management and Human Rights.
The
media release also stated the following:
The
Government appreciated Amnesty’s recognition that
the situation of the civilians caught up in the conflict
is exacerbated by the unwillingness of the Liberation Tigers
of Tamil Eelam to allow these people to move to areas of
relative safety and security. The denial of freedom of movement
and the right to physical and human security is a serious
violation of international humanitarian and human rights
law and the Government calls upon AI and other concerned
organizations to continue to pressurize the LTTE to comply
with these fundamental norms.
Despite
the ongoing conflict in the north of Sri Lanka waged by
terrorist secessionist forces against a lawfully elected
and properly constituted government, the Sri Lankan state
continues to provide and facilitate humanitarian assistance
to its citizens caught up in the conflict. The Government
recognizes that much of the humanitarian assistance that
is sent to areas not yet cleared of LTTE presence does not
reach the civilian population, but is misused by the LTTE.
Added to this is the fact that IDP numbers are sometimes
artificially inflated by local officials due to pressure
exercised by the LTTE so as to generate increased amounts
of humanitarian assistance. Despite all this, the Government
continues to deliver supplies and services for the stated
numbers, whilst continuing with the provision of social
services through government officials paid by and answerable
to the government.
With
regard to supplies, the Ministry of Nation Building has
for instance supplied nearly 10,000 metric tonnes of mixed
food items to the Wanni in the January to August period.
This is indicative of the Government’s commitment
to ensure the welfare of Sri Lankan citizens wherever they
are located. This commitment – proven by longstanding
practice – is unfortunately not reflected in AI’s
statement and is a striking omission. Contrary to the statement
regarding food security and the nutritional status of persons
in the Wanni, the WFP has not only assisted the Government
to transport food into the Wanni (7,000 MT) but has also
procured and distributed 3,650 MT of rice within the District
due to a surplus of rice production. The Ministry of Health
has supplied over 330 million Rupees worth of medical supplies
to the North (including Rs. 70 million to the Districts
of Kilinochchi and Mullaitivu) in 2008. The Ministry of
Resettlement and Disaster Relief Services has supplied Rs
35 million in emergency supplies to IDPs in these districts
in response to requests from local administrators.
In
its statement, AI refers to a number of 70,000 persons newly
displaced in the Kilinochchi and Mullaitivu Districts since
May this year. This figure is debatable since the movement
of persons already displaced in Mannar District who were
compelled to moved again into Kilinochchi have been recounted
as “new” displacements. The Government, however,
does not believe in hair-splitting over numbers in an emergency
situation but, as stated above, supplies assistance based
on figures received from its local administrators. These
figures are jointly monitored, agreed upon and published
by the ministries of Nation Building, Resettlement and Disaster
Relief Services and UNHCR. The AI statement asserts that
UNHCR has stopped releasing official figures due to the
due to the security situation. This is factually incorrect
as UNHCR has never released IDPs figures independently and
is unable to do so as they are not mandated to collate IDP
figures nor involved in the registration process of IDPs
(unlike in the case of refugees). Figures released by the
UNHCR are numbers collated by the respective GAs and, following
a review of the figures by the Ministry of Resettlement
and Disaster Relief Services together with the Ministry
of Nation Building and UNHCR, the numbers are published
on UNHCR’s website. The current delay in releasing
the July 2008 “new” IDP figures is a result
of the Ministry of Nation Building awaiting clarifications
from local administrators in Kilinochchi. The confusion
in the Amnesty statement may be due to ignorance, but in
future we hope that will be greater care, and checking at
source.
The
Minister of Disaster Management and Human Rights chairs
the Consultative Committee on Humanitarian Assistance (CCHA)
and the IDP Coordination Meetings which bring together all
relevant state actors including Senior Advisor to the President,
Hon Basil Rajapaksa and the Secretary, Ministry of Defence
as well as Secretaries of key ministries such as Disaster
Management and Human Rights, Nation Building, Health, Resettlement,
Education and Foreign Affairs, along with the Commissioner
General of Essential Services, the Peace Secretariat, Police
and Armed Services as well as the District Secretaries (GAs)
of Kilinochchi, Mullaitivu, Vavuniya, Mannar, Trincomalee
and Batticaloa. These fora provide opportunities for collaboration
and collective decision making between Government and its
international partners who are also represented at these
meetings. The UN Resident/Humanitarian Coordinator, heads
of agencies from UNHCR, UNICEF, WHO, WFP, ILO and UNOCHA,
the US Ambassador representing the Co-Chairs to the Peace
Process, the Ambassadors of Japan, the Delegation of the
European Union and France which currently holds the EU Presidency
as well as the ICRC, ECHO and the Consortium of Humanitarian
Agencies represent Sri Lanka’s partners in its humanitarian
work.
Concerted action based on open dialogue and a common commitment
to the safety and welfare of Sri Lankan civilians is facilitated
through these mechanisms. Practical issues connected with
fuel allocations for humanitarian actors, health supplies
and services, food, non-food relief items as well as access
issues are put forward and consulted upon, woth coordination
of arrangements and finding of solutions to problems. On
numerous occasions Sri Lanka’s international partners
have welcomed facilitation initiatives under the aegis of
the CCHA. For example AI refers to long delays in security
clearance for supplies to uncleared areas. The CCHA after
discussion facilitated the sealing of WFP truck carrying
essential supplies prior to departure which enabled smooth
and expeditious passage through checkpoints. AI also talks
of “changing and increasingly stringent” security
clearance procedures which supposedly cause delays and confusion.
Fora such as the CCHA exist for the clarification and communication
of new procedures. Relevant actors are thereby fully informed.
AI’s statement which purports to be a serious commentary
on the humanitarian situation in Sri Lanka omits mention
of this important Government–led instrumentality.
This reflects a one-sided approach in its analysis, which
appears over-dependent on secondary sources and media reports
inimical to the Government.
The
AI statement refers to the Universal Periodic Review in
May 2008 and the recommendations accepted as well as pledges
and voluntary commitments made by Sri Lanka which contain
inter alia several issues of direct relevance to IDPs. The
assertion that the IDP situation was deteriorating is wrong,
and the government position in May was quite accurate, inasmuch
as the situation of the IDPs in the East had improved radically,
with most having returned to their place of origin. However
new operations have led to a fluid situation in the North,
where the LTTE’s intransigence places pressures on
the humanitarian situation. However, the Government reiterates
its commitments made at the Human Rights Council and is
taking steps to implement those pledges. Efforts include
confidence building and stabilization measures, communication
and consultation with IDPs, information sharing and policy
and legislative initiatives to secure, guarantee and advance
the rights of IDPs in line with national and international
obligations.
Reading
AI’s statement, it is clear that it does not appreciate
the complexity of the IDP situation in the country. It fails
to mention that there are three clearly disparate groups
of IDPs; some displaced for well over a decade due to the
conflict, i.e. those who were forcibly evicted from the
North by the LTTE in the early 1990s; others have been displaced
more recently as a consequence of natural disasters (the
2004 tsunami) and another group displaced after 2006 due
to the resumption of hostilities when the LTTE launched
massive attacks which had to be repulsed with measures taken
to ensure that they could not be repeated. Re-displacement
of some of these IDPs has further added to the complexity
of the situation.
It
should be noted that return or resettlement of the tsunami
IDPs as well as the post 2006 IDPs in the East has been
successfully conducted to a considerable extent. The old
problem however, ignored by successive governments when
reacting to LTTE activities was slow, is now being addressed
systematically. So as to identify and implement durable
solutions for protracted ‘old’ IDPs the Government
of Sri Lanka is, in partnership with UNHCR, organising a
National Consultation on this issue which will take place
later this month. This Consultation has been organised as
a follow-up to the visit to Sri Lanka by the Representative
of the Secretary-General of the UN on the Human Rights of
IDPs, Professor Walter Kälin in December 2007. Professor
Kälin is supporting the government in this initiative
by his presence and contribution to the National Consultation.
The
successful resettlement of approximately 180,000 IDPs in
the Eastern Province should also be noted, as it will provide
a model to solve the current problems of IDPs in the North.
UNHCR acknowledged that the returns were voluntary and in
line with international standards. The Government is confident
that the remaining 18,000 IDPs in the East will be resettled
as soon as demining is completed.
In
relation to the IDPs in the Wanni, the Ministry of Defence
has recently announced a proposal on a humanitarian corridor
for civilians which is seen as vital for their movement
to safety and for humanitarian access and provision of essential
items and services. This has been welcomed by the Consortium
of Humanitarian Agencies as well as the UN which states
that “the UN in Sri Lanka acknowledges the announcement
by the Government of Sri Lanka of additional measures that
are intended to facilitate the freedom of movement of civilians
who have been affected by fighting in the Vanni.”
In this connection, the Government is also supporting the
development of a humanitarian hub in Vavuniya just south
of the uncleared areas where humanitarian actors will be
facilitated to store and distribute supplies. Civilians
are being encouraged to move to these areas in order that
they may access humanitarian assistance in greater safety
and security.
Based
on past experience and well founded information, the Government
is aware of LTTE attempts to infiltrate their cadres into
the ranks of IDPs. In keeping with the need to ensure the
safety and security of the general populace, the security
authorities are obliged to carefully check the IDPs to confirm
the genuineness of their status as IDPs and in some instances
restrict their free movement until cleared. Until proven
otherwise these persons are all treated as IDPs and are,
accordingly, provided with all necessary assistance. These
procedures are carefully monitored and issues pertaining
to their welfare are openly discussed at mechanisms such
as the CCHA. The AI statement makes a reference to the Kalimoddai
Welfare Centre as a “de facto detention centre”.
As noted, children go to school from there, and movement
is permitted during the day though, for obvious security
considerations, there are restrictions on staying away overnight.
However the provocative language used by AI is misleading,
reminiscent as it is of measures taken in other countries
during the World War, and is unsuitable for an international
organization that positions itself as the global human rights
watchdog.
AI
ultimately makes an attempt to create a nexus between the
Sri Lankan conflict, the situation of IDPs and the hackneyed
call for international monitors. The Government has made
its position on international monitors abundantly clear
on numerous occasions. While stating that the security situation
makes it difficult for humanitarian actors to operate, AI
at the same time calls for the deployment of monitors in
a theatre of conflict. This is a bizarre proposal at best
that once again highlights AI’s complete lack of insight
into ground realities. With regard to the specific needs
of IDPs in the Wanni, the Government’s efforts are
complemented by seven specialized agencies of the UN with
relevant expertise in the provision of food, shelter, health,
water and sanitation as well as several international organizations
recommended by the UN (numbering 14) and the ICRC whose
operations in the area are facilitated by the Government
to access the IDP population. These partners of the Government
have the local knowledge, experience and expertise to assist
the Government in its efforts to alleviate the situation
and challenges faced by IDPs.
In
light of the foregoing, the Government of Sri Lanka finds
itself unable to accept AI’s exaggerated statement
due to the numerous deficiencies in fact and reasoning that
characterizes yet another extreme intervention. The Government
remains acutely aware of its obligations – to its
own citizens and to the global community – and is
not helped by statements that are not directed at constructively
addressing the situation in Sri Lanka based on existing
ground realities. |