|
Ten Questions that Mr.Cox may have
asked
15 May 1984
|
"The Government controlled Sri
Lanka Daily News of the 16th of April 1984,
reported that Mr. Cox, a British Member of
Parliament and his wife, who were on their way to
spend the Easter vacation with their son in
Hongkong, had 'thought that this would be a good
opportunity to see what was happening in Sri
Lanka.' They stayed in Sri Lanka 'for a crowded
week of travel and meetings with President
Jayawardene, a number of Ministers and Members of
Parliament'.
Mr.Cox declared: 'It is only
when you walk among the people that you realise
the truth. I saw a smiling people going about
their daily duties in the fullest confidence. I
saw children playing wherever I went. In
predominantly Tamil areas where I went, the
evidence of normalcy was the same.' We are
reminded of the visits of foreign dignitaries to
Hitler's Germany during the early 1930s - they
too saw smiling people everywhere and they too
were persuaded that the Jews were safe in
Hitler's hands..."
|
Mr.Tom Cox is a Member of the United Kingdom
Parliament. He is also a member of the Labour Party. On
both counts, his views merit attention. The Government
controlled Sri Lanka Daily News of the 16th of April
1984, reported that Mr. Cox and his wife, who were on
their way to spend the Easter vacation with their son in
Hongkong, had 'thought that this would be a good
opportunity to see what was happening in Sri Lanka.'
Mr.Cox, again to quote the Daily News, stayed in Sri
Lanka 'for a crowded week of travel and meetings with
President Jayawardene, a number of Ministers and Members
of Parliament'. Mr.Cox had apparently come to see for
himself. He declared:
'It is only when you walk among the people that
you realise the truth. I saw a smiling people going
about their daily duties in the fullest confidence. I
saw children playing wherever I went. In predominantly
Tamil areas where I went, the evidence of normalcy was
the same.'
We are reminded of the visits of foreign dignitaries
to Hitler's Germany during the early 1930s - they too saw
smiling people everywhere and they too were persuaded
that the Jews were safe in Hitler's hands. Many of them
were taken on conducted tours of ghettoes which were set
up 'for the benefit of the Jews' where the Jews lived in
peace and joy - and where, surprisingly, as it were,
'children were playing.'
Some were even granted interviews with Hitler and
were impressed by his charm and his intelligence. Others
were secretly thrilled at the attention that they had
received - it was not altogether unpleasant to walk in
the corridors of power.
In more recent times we have had tours conducted by
the racist regime in South Africa to persuade opinion
makers in the United Kingdom that the blacks were being
looked after, in a fatherly sort of way in Nambibia and
elsewhere, that this was in the interests of the blacks
themselves and that perhaps at some time in a convenient
and distant future, the blacks may even be treated as
humans and accorded human rights.
But, then a conducted tour is sometimes a convenient
way of seeing things for oneself in a foreign land
inhabited by a people who speak a foreign tongue,
specially when time is short, and when one has made a
stop over, on the way, to Hongkong.
Mr.Cox sought to 'realise truth' by walking amongst
the people of Sri Lanka. To use his own words, 'it is
only when you walk amongst the people that you realise
the truth'. There are ofcourse about 15 million people in
Sri Lanka and Mr.Cox must have been compelled to be
selective. He stated that he did not go to the North of
Sri Lanka. He declared:
"No, I did not go to North Sri Lanka. But the
situation there, being created by the terrorists, is I am
sure, similar to what has been going on in Northern
Ireland for several years. Mr.Cox added complacently:
"It has been necessary for Britain to deploy
thousands of armed troops there to control the
activities of terrorists. It was to be hoped such
action would not be necessary in Sri Lanka."
Great Britain has failed to find an answer to the
continuing violence in Northern Ireland for the past
several years, and it would seem that Mr.Cox looked
forward with a certain cheerful equanimity to a similar
situation developing in Northern Sri Lanka.
But, more seriously, Mr.Cox appeared to be content to
look merely at the surface of things. He missed the point
of the Northern Ireland analogy. The presence of the
British army in Northern Ireland is a reflection of the
links that the British people have with the Protestant
settlers in Ireland. It is not dissimilar to the links
which the Tamils of Tamil Nadu have for their brothers
and sisters in Sri Lanka.
The Protestant minority in Ireland sought union with
Great Britain as a way of protecting themselves against a
Catholic majority. It was this which led to the partition
of Ireland and the coming into being of the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. The day is
not far when the Tamils in the island of Sri Lanka, in
the face of a continuing oppression by a Sinhala majority
will exercise their right of self determination and seek
to join the Tamils of Tamil Nadu to whom they are bound
by a common language, a common culture and a common
religion.
If Mr.Cox had visited the North of Sri Lanka he may
have learnt that the large majority of the people of
North and East in the island of Sri Lanka are Tamils in
the same way as the large majority of the people of
Northern Ireland are Protestants. If Mr.Cox had 'walked
amongst the people' in the North of the island, he may
even have 'realised the truth' that a few miles of water
cannot separate a people who share a common language, a
common culture, a common religion and a common
heritage.
But, unfortunately, for his quest 'to realise truth',
Mr.Cox 'did not walk amongst the people' of the North of
Sri Lanka. It may be that the Sri Lankan government did
not believe that the Tamil areas were of sufficient
tourist interest to be part of a conducted tour, although
it is not without relevance that one of Mr.Cox's
colleagues, Mr.Jeremy Corobin did find it both necessary
and possible to visit the North. But then, Mr.Corobin was
perhaps, not on a conducted tour.
Be that as it may, although Mr.Cox did not go to the
North, he did 'walk amongst the people' in the South.
Mr.Cox saw people going about 'their daily duties in the
fullest confidence'. But it does not appear that Mr.Cox
considered it necessary or useful to speak to those
Tamils who survived the attack by Government organised
goon squads in July and August 1983 when hundreds of
Tamils in Colombo and in the South were killed, some were
burnt alive, and thousands were rendered homeless.
If he had, Mr.Cox may have acquired some understanding
'of what was happening in Sri Lanka' beyond that of a
tourist on a conducted tour. He may have acquired some
understanding of that which is set out in the report of
the International Commission of Jurists dated March
1984:
"During the communal violence in the summer of 1983
many lives were lost, but so far no one seems to have
been able to say exactly how many, and estimates vary
widely up to around 400 or even more. It is probable
that all of them were Tamils, but again no one seems to
be sure...
In the course of my mission, I met several survivors
of these events, both Tamil and Sinhalese, who gave me
their own accounts as eye witnesses, and many more such
accounts have been published in the press, both in Sri
Lanka and abroad. But the greatest mystery surrounds
the question of how these events in fact started. One
thing is quite clear; they did not start
spontaneously.
On the morning of the 24th July, many people
apparently went about their ordinary business in
Colombo, with no forebodings and no expectations of
anything untoward. And then suddenly, the streets were
full of goondas, Tamil houses and shops were on fire,
Tamil possessions were being destroyed, and Tamils were
being killed."
It would seem that Mr.Cox was not taken to the right
people and so believed that the Tamils in Colombo, who
were subjected to this planned assault in July and August
1983, were a few months later 'going about their daily
duties in the fullest confidence'.
And Mr.Cox made his statement at a time when the Sri
Lankan army was continuing to murder Tamils in their
traditional homeland in the North and East of Sri Lanka
and President Jayawardene in a magazine interview
reported on the 16th of April 1984,(on the same day as
the Daily News reported the interview with Mr.Cox)
declared:
"If India invades us, then that is the end of the
Tamils in the country. Now, we have only guerilla
warfare in the North. Suppose it starts in Colombo...
are you going to stop the slaughter of Tamils in
Colombo'
But to Mr.Cox, 'in the predominantly Tamil areas I
visited, the evidence of normalcy was the same.' Mr. Cox
saw a 'smiling people'. They must have thought that
President Jayawardene was joking.
But apart from 'walking amongst the people' in order
that he may 'realise the truth', Mr.Cox presumably looked
around at the dwellings and factories in and around
Colombo. If he had he would have seen rows upon rows of
charred and deserted buildings which remain today as grim
reminders of the murder and arson of July and August 1983
and in this way Mr.Cox may have furthered his
understanding 'of what was happening in Sri Lanka.'
But then again, in the same way as he was not taken
to the right people, he was, perhaps, not taken to the
right places. It would not be surprising if burnt down
buildings did not form part of the itinerary of a tour
conducted by a government which had itself been accused
of arson and murder.
Mr.Cox may have been able to check the facts recounted
by Ian Ward in the Daily Telegraph on the 6th of August
1983:
"...News of the extent of the violence directed at
the centre of Nuwara Eliya by Sinhala mobs was somehow
contained by the town remoteness...But no point in
Colombo or the surrounding suburbs matches the
mess...Whole blocks have been reduced to charred
rubble. Only a handful of provision shops belonging to
Sinhala traders remained...Remarkably only sixteen
people died in the inferno."
If he had checked with Ian Ward, Mr. Cox may have been
able to persuade the government to include Nuwara Eliya
in the itinerary of the conducted tour. Nuwara Eliya
after all is not in the North. It is where the tea comes
from and it is a prime tourist resort worthy of inclusion
in any conducted tour. There was, ofcourse, the
limitation of time and there is so much that one can
squeeze into a short stay of one week.
Mr. Cox must have been aware of the dangers of drawing
simplistic conclusions from a 'walkabout' and he must
therefore have been happy to have had the opportunity of
'meetings with President Jayawardene, a number of
Ministers and Members of Parliament' as such meetings
would have enabled him to form a balanced picture of the
Sri Lankan scene. Mr.Cox was not reticent about his
meetings with President Jayawardene although he was
perhaps, a trifle on the defensive. He declared:
'The discussions I had with President Jayawardene
are no secret. He told me of his deep concern at the
events in Sri Lanka during the last few months, and of
his responsibilities towards the people who live in
this country.'
Mr.Cox then added:
'I endorse all President Jayawardene has said and
I have no doubt that those at Westminister will be
similarly inclined.'
We do not know whether President Jayawardene
reiterated to Mr.Cox that which he had told Ian Ward of
the Daily Telegraph on the 11th July 1983:
"I am not worried about the opinion of the Tamil
people... now we cannot think of them, not about their
lives or their opinion... the more you put pressure in
the north, the happier the Sinhala people will be
here... Really if I starve the Tamils out, the Sinhala
people will be happy."
If he had, presumably Mr.Cox would not have endorsed
'all that President Jayawardene' had said. He may have
even asked President Jayawardene whether 'his
responsibilities towards the people who live in this
country' included the Tamil people as well - unless
ofcourse Mr.Cox felt that this may have offended the
susceptibilities of a kind and gracious host.
Again we do not know whether President Jayawardene
reiterated that which he had declared many years ago in
June 1957:
"The time has come for the whole Sinhala race which
has existed for 2500 years, jealously safeguarding
their language and religion, to fight without giving
any quarter to save their birthright... I will lead the
campaign."
If he had, Mr.Cox may have found it difficult to
endorse a statement which smacked of a racist 'fight
without giving any quarter'. Again, Mr.Cox, in his search
for truth, may have, inquired from President Jayawardene,
whether he was today engaged in an undeclared war against
the Tamil people - in a fight without giving any quarter.
But then again, it may be that Mr.Cox may not have wished
to offend the susceptibilities of a kind and gracious
host.
It was unfortunate that Mr.Cox's visit was a casual
stop over, as it were, on the way to Hongkong. If it had
been planned, he may have taken the trouble to be briefed
about Sri Lanka and the happenings there during the past
several years. He may have even read the report of the
International Commission of Jurists in 1981 which
stated:
"The tension between the ethnic communities creates
an extremely dangerous situation in Sri Lanka which may
escalate into major violence in Island and negate all
efforts to develop the Island economically... As a
minimum, the Tamils are entitled to protection of their
physical security within Sri Lanka. This protection can
no longer be taken for granted...
The long term solution to the ethnic conflict in the
interests of the entire population can only be achieved
on the basis of respect for the rule of law and
relevant human rights standards.
It is regrettable that certain government and
United National Party actions such as the actions and
remarks of certain government and party members, the
actions of security forces, the stripping of the civic
rights of Mrs.Bandaranaike, the Parliamentary vote of
no confidence in the Leader of Tamil United Liberation
Front as well as the adoption of the Terrorism Act have
undermined respect for the Rule of Law in Sri Lanka
"
If Mr.Cox had read the report he may then have
inquired from President Jayawardene about the
circumstances that led to a Parliamentary vote of no
confidence on the Leader of the Opposition particularly
because that would have been of some considerable
interest to 'those at Westminister'.
Mr.Cox may then have been in a position to ascertain
whether the International Commission of Jurists was right
in its assessment that the Sri Lankan government had
undermined respect for the rule of law. It was
unfortunate that Mr.Cox was not adequately briefed before
his conducted tour.
If he had been briefed he may have learnt of the
comments of Orville H.Schell, former President of the New
York City Bar Association, current Chairman of the
Americas Watch Committee, and Head of the Amnesty
International 1982 fact finding mission to Sri Lanka in
the New York Times on the 24th of August 1983:
"...The Government (of Sri Lanka) has repeatedly
denied that its security forces violate fundamental
rights. However, as head of an Amnesty International
fact finding mission in January 1982, I received first
hand evidence that incommunicado detention under the
Prevention of Terrorism Act was widespread and that the
army and the police regularly tortured political
suspects and carried out political killings in June
1981, similar to those recently confirmed by President
Jayawardene.
I believe that recent killings by security
authorities follow a pattern previously set...The
government must bear full responsibility for these
breaches of the right to life and other violations of
human rights, especially in light of the wide powers
that in recent years it has given the security
forces."
If Mr.Cox had seen the comments of Amnesty
International, we feel certain that he would have
persuaded President Jayawardene that acts of 'terrorism'
in the North are not the cause but are the result of the
failure of successive Sinhala governments to treat the
Tamils of Sri Lanka fairly and equally and that state
terrorism was not the answer to the Tamil national
question.
He may have urged President Jayawardene (to use the
words of an Amnesty International report date lined 18th
June 1984) "to prevent deliberate killings of civilians
by the country's armed forces and to restrict the wide
powers of arrest under the current emergency
regulations"
If Mr.Cox had been properly briefed he may have agreed
with the comment of Mr.Paul Sieghart, Chairman, Justice,
British Section of the International Commission of
Jurists that 'if terrorism is to be contained or
eliminated, the legitimate expectations of the Tamil
community must be met.'
He may have even used the opportunity of his meetings
with President Jayawardene and his Ministers to raise
some basic questions which may have furthered his under
standing beyond that which he had gained after a
''walkabout' among some of the people of Sri Lanka.
He may have asked President Jayawardene
-
|
1. Whether the Government of Sri Lanka will
act on the 1981 International Commission of
Jurists Report:
"Policies concerning the use of Sinhala, inter
alia, have seriously lessened the opportunities
of Tamils for government employment. The
government should adopt a system for recruitment
for government service which provides equal
opportunities for all persons regardless of
ethnic origin."
- and repeal the Sinhala Only Act and adopt
a system of recruitment which provides equal
opportunity for Tamils?
2. Whether the Government of Sri Lanka will
act on the 1981 Report of the International
Commission of Jurists:
"The government should give renewed attention
to Tamil concern over government sponsored
colonisation schemes which bring large numbers of
Sinhalese into Tamil areas and thus change the
ethnic composition in such areas. This is
particularly important in view of the insecurity
of Tamils due to communal violence against them
in areas where they are in a minority."
and the 1979 Minority Rights Group Report:
"In 1978 Tamil spokesmen complained that the
momentum of colonisation was greater than ever.
They referred in particular to the Mahaveli
Diversion project, supported by the World Bank,
in the Eastern Province, under which Sinhalese
families were being brought in from the South.
They pointed out that the Maduruoya Scheme in the
Eastern Province, backed by Canadian assistance,
was having the same effect."
- and stop State aided colonisation of
Tamil areas in the island of Sri Lanka?
3. Whether the Government of Sri Lanka will
act on the 1981 International Commission of
Jurists Report:
"The Government should re examine its policies
on university admissions with a view to basing
admission on merit rather than on racial grounds.
Tamil and Sinhalese young people alike will then
have equal rights to university education on the
basis of capacity rather than on race. One of the
major points of tension among many Tamil youth
has been the implicit racial quota under present
university admission policies which has barred
many competent youths from pursuing higher
education."
- and secure that University admissions are
based on merit rather than on an implicit ethnic
considerations?
4. Whether the Government of Sri Lanka will
give effect to article 1 of the International
Covenant of Civil and Political Rights:
"All peoples have the right of self
determination. By virtue of that right they
freely determine their political status and
freely pursue their economic, social and cultural
development."
And the 1981 International Commission of
Jurists Report:
"The Tamils could be considered to be a
'people'. They have a distinct language, culture,
a separate religious identity from the majority
population, and to an extent, a defined
territory.... The application of the principle of
self determination in concrete cases is
difficult. It seems nevertheless, that a credible
argument can be made that the Tamil community in
Sri Lanka is entitled to self determination. Self
determination does not necessarily mean
separation.... What is essential is that the
political status of the 'people' should be freely
determined by the 'people' themselves
- and recognise that the Tamils in the
island of Sri Lanka constitute a nation of people
and deal with them on that basis?
5. Whether the Government of Sri Lanka will
act on the 1981 International Commission of
Jurists Report:
"The South African Terrorism Act has been
called 'a piece of legislation which must shock
the conscience of a lawyer.' Many of the
provisions of the Sri Lankan Prevention of
Terrorism Act are equally contrary to accepted
principles of the Rule of Law."
and the 1984 International Commission of
Jurists Report:
"These provisions (in the Prevention of
Terrorism Act) are quite extraordinarily wide. No
legislation conferring even remotely comparable
powers is in force in any other free democracy
operating under the Rule of Law, however troubled
it may be by politically motivated violence.
Indeed there is only one known precedent for the
power to impose restriction orders under section
11 of the Sri Lankan P.T.A., and that - as
Professor Leary rightly pointed out in her Report
- is the comparable legislation currently in
force in South Africa... such a provision is an
ugly blot on the statute book of any civilised
country."
- and repeal the Sri Lanka Prevention of
Terrorism Act?
6. Whether the Government of Sri Lanka will
act on the 1984 International Commission of
Jurists Report:
"The freedom to express political opinions, to
seek to persuade others of their merits, to seek
to have them represented in Parliament, and
thereafter to seek to persuade Parliament to give
effect to them, are all fundamental democracy
itself. Those are precisely the freedoms which
Article 25 of the International Covenant of Civil
and Political Rights recognises and guarantees -
and in respect of advocacy for the establishment
of an independent Tamil state in Sri Lanka, those
which the Sixth Amendment (to the Sri Lankan
Constitution) is designed to outlaw.
It therefore appears to me plain that this
enactment constitutes a clear violation by Sri
Lanka of its obligations in international law
under the Covenant."...Support for a separate
Tamil State is a consequence of the perception by
the Tamil community of discrimination against
them, reinforced by extravagant counter measures
against terrorism. But to out law that support,
even if it is expressed peacefully and within the
framework of an open democratic system, plays
directly into the hands of the terrorists.
-and repeal the 6th Amendment to the Sri
Lanka Consitution because the Amendment violates
Sri Lanka's obligations under the International
Covenant of Civil and Poltical Rights?
7. Whether the Government of Sri Lanka will
act on the 1983 International Commission of
Jurists Report:
"...the Government's lack of respect for the
rule of law was evident in three cases in which a
mantle of protection was thrown over officials
who had exceeded or abused their powers. In the
first case two soldiers who had been arrested and
remanded in connection with the shooting of a
lame Tamil youth were released by the Magistrate
on the instructions of the Attorney General.
In the other two cases, the Government
promoted police officers against whom the Supreme
Court had passed strictures for exceeding their
authority. This was justified by the Government
on the grounds that the police must be able to do
their duty without fear of the consequences of
adverse court decisions... In face of this it is
not surprising that the police and army
increasingly take the law into their hands."
and the 1984 International Commission of
Jurists Report:
"The President freely conceded that he had
personally ordered the promotion of the two
police officers, and the payment out of public
funds of the damages and costs. This he said had
been necessary to maintain police morale....
The conclusion is inescapable that he was
deliberately seeking to teach the Judges a
lesson, in order to make them more pliable to the
Executive's wishes. If that is so, these were
grossly improper acts; but for the immunity from
all suit which the President enjoys under the
Constitution, they might well have been criminal
offences.
- and agree that Sri Lanka President
J.R.Jayawardene acted illegally in securing the
promotion of police officers found guilty by the
Supreme Court?
8. Whether the Government of Sri Lanka will
act on the 1981 International Commission of
Jurists Report:
"A primary concern of the government should be
the physical security of the minority Tamil
population and the avoidance of future communal
violence so frequently directed against Tamils in
the past... In this regard the government should
pursue a vigorous policy of investigation and
prosecution of police officers responsible for
the burning of many areas in Jaffna in May/June
1981.
And the comments of the Head of the 1982
Amnesty International Mission to Sri Lanka:
"It is regrettable that the government did not
institute an independent investigation to
establish responsibility for these killings (in
May/June 1981) and take measures against those
responsible. Instead, one police officer involved
was promoted and emergency legislation was
introduced facilitating further killings.
- and agree that an independent and
impartial inquiry should be held into the
incidents of murder and arson in Tamil areas in
May/June 1981 including the burning of the Jaffna
Public Library?
9. Whether the Government of Sri Lanka will
act on the 1981International Commission of
Jurists Report:
"The government should lead a major national
and international effort to rebuild and develop
the Jaffna Public Library destroyed by arson by
police in June 1981. Such an effort would
evidence the respect the government for the
cultural rights of the Tamils, help to remedy a
serious injustice done to the Tamil community and
contribute to restoring Tamil confidence in the
government."
- and reinstate the Jaffna Public Library
destroyed by arson by the Sri Lanka Police in
1981?
10. Whether the Government of Sri Lanka
will act on the 1984 International Commission of
Jurists Report:
"But what I find most extraordinary is that to
this day there has been no attempt to find out
the truth through an official, public and
impartial inquiry, when the situation in the
country cries out for nothing less.... So long as
no such inquiry is appointed in Sri Lanka,
rumours will continue to circulate, suspicion
will point to many individuals and groups who
cannot all be guilty, divisions between
communities can only be exacerbated, and the
Government's task in preserving order, peace and
harmony can only be made more difficult."
and on the undertaking given by its
representative before the United Nations
Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination
and Protection of Minorities in August 1983:
"The Sri Lankan authorities .... would leave
no stone unturned to bring to justice all those
responsible for killings, violence and acts of
destruction no matter who they were and
regardless of their status, ideology or political
alignments. There would be no exceptions
- and agree that an independent and
impartial inquiry should be held into the
allegation against the Sri Lanka government that
it engaged in a conspiracy to commit murder and
arson in July and August 1983?
|
We repeat - it is unfortunate that Mr.Cox was not
briefed about the events in Sri Lanka before his short
one week stopover, on his way to see his son in Hongkong.
If he had been properly briefed he may not have so
readily concluded that the British media had exaggerated
the events in Sri Lanka.
He may have been more cautious in endorsing the
statements of a President who had deprived his chief
Sinhala opponent of her civic rights and who had
effectively disenfranchised the Tamil electorate by an
amendment to the Constitution - an amendment which the
International Commission of Jurists has declared to be a
violation of Sri Lanka's obligations under the
International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights.
The Sri Lankan Daily News stated that Mr.Cox
had two messages. One was to the British media and that
was that they had got the wrong picture of the Sri Lankan
ethnic conflict. Mr.Cox failed to see that a conducted
tour is not the best way of getting the correct
picture.
The other message was that 'terrorism' must be
stamped out. Here, Mr.Cox appears to be content to look
at the symptoms of the problem - he chooses to refrain
from examining the causes.
If he had, he may have advised President
Jayawardene that state terrorism was not the answer to
the Tamil national question.
He may have even reminded President Jayawardene of the
words of United States Supreme Court Justice Brandeis in
1928:
"Our Government is the potent omnipresent teacher...
For good or ill it teaches the whole people by example.
Crime is contagious. If the Government becomes a law
breaker it breeds contempt for the law; it invites
every man to become a law unto himself; it invites
anarchy..."
|
