Sajid Karim' s letter to European Parliament commissinoer - from our (SLMIC) diary ( January 2006)

Dear All

We are pleased to inform you that Mr.Sajjid Karim , a member of European Parliament has written a letter the European Commissioner on Sri Lanka. It is encouraging that we have a MEP to air our grievances in the European parliament. He is committed to the promotion of democracy and pluralism in Sri Lanka. We reproduce his letter below with our emphasis and kindly request all of you to make your representations to him to show our solidarity.

With Regards
Seyed Bazeer
Director

For and on behalf of SLMIC (UK)

www.srilankanmic.org.uk

Letter to Commissioner Ferrero-Waldner on Sri Lanka

Written by Sajjad Karim MEP on Mon 23rd Jan 2006

Dear Commissioner Ferrero-Waldner,

I am writing to follow-up on a question I posed to the Commission in

Parliamentary Question Time, on Tuesday 17 January 2006, regarding the

current state of the peace process in Sri Lanka. I understand that you

were unable to attend this session, due to other commitments, and

appreciate the answer provided by your colleague, Commissioner Kovacs.

However, as Mr Kovacs was unable to provide a full and detailed

response to the supplementary question I posed, I would like to take the

opportunity to outline my concerns to you and look forward to receiving

a detailed response.

I understand that Sri Lanka is a personal priority of yours and find

your dedication to making progress on this issue commendable. It is an issue

which I find myself becoming more and more involved in as it finds

parallels with the work that I have done, for instance, on Kashmir and

Israel-Palestine. It is also an issue, which has captured the attention

of my constituents and I now receive weekly correspondence from activists

and campaigners from all sides of this multi-faceted conflict.

The destruction wrought by the December 2004 tsunami, grabbed the

attention of the world and put Sri Lanka firmly on the socio-political

radar. Reconstruction work continues to take place, but not at a pace

to match the needs of those affected. Nearly a year on, government

bureaucracies and delays in international financing have left most of

the displaced still in temporary shelters. These efforts have also been

clearly hampered by a worsening human rights situation in Sri Lanka and

a succession of political killings that by June had reached the alarming

level of one per day. The EU must engage all parties on a humanitarian

level and put pressure on both main parties to declare a moratorium on

the violence for the duration of the reconstruction process and the LTTE to

abstain from the threat of war as a negotiating tactic.

Many feel that the post-tsunami political environment offered a unique

opportunity for peace building and reconciliation, for those most

affected by the country's protracted civil war. This opportunity seems to have

been wasted as sectarian interests hijacked aid distribution mechanisms,

compromising the modest successes of the post-tsunami recovery and

rehabilitation effort. The Post-tsunami Operations Management Structure
seemed flawed from the outset by the failure to address the diverse
needs and aspirations of all affected communities, particularly those of the
Muslim community and Eastern Tamils. Nearly half the victims of the
tsunami were Muslims, yet they were not a full party to the
negotiations of the Joint Mechanism. The Tamils cannot be regarded as synonymous

with the LTTE and consulting the LTTE does not equate to consulting the

Tamils of the North and East. This is a crucial error in the light of reported

complaints by tsunami-affected Tamils in the North that they have not

been receiving the aid collected on their behalf by the LTTE.

I welcome the Commission's pledge to develop an alternative base to

deliver reconstruction to the north and east to compensate for the

absence of consensus between the key players. First and foremost in this

endeavour must be an effort to obtain assurances and commitment, from all

parties, for the protection the civil and political rights of all individuals

and political organizations working in the reconstruction effort and

respect for the right to free _expression and free association. More

specifically, any new scheme must recognise and rectify the shortcomings of the Joint

Mechanism. Certain protections for the Muslim community are currently

in place, through a process by which decisions can be challenged. However,

the interests of the Eastern Tamils are not similarly protected. Tamils

in the East have increasingly taken an independent stand against the

northern LTTE, at great risks to their lives. This protection for these

marginalised and disenfranchised communities needs to be strengthened

through offering them a much more active and consultative role, which

will simultaneously act as a confidence building measure as we try to move

forward with the peace process. There must be guarantees that any new

scheme for post-tsunami assistance will not become yet another vehicle

for repression and exploitation.

Contrary to early predictions from NGOs, following the tsunami, the
LTTE's practice of recruiting child soldiers decreased during the first half
of 2005. However, the practice increased significantly in the later part
of the year, with UNICEF recording over 483 cases of child recruitment,
139 of which were in July alone. Bearing in mind these disturbing
statistics and, as the Austrian Presidency has highlighted, the priority in EU
human rights policy is the protection of advocates of human rights and of
children in armed conflicts, notably the implementation of the EU
Guidelines in this regard, the EU must do all it can to reinforce the
2003 action plan, signed by the LTTE and the Sri Lankan government, and see
to it that the LTTE abide by their agreement to release children from its
forces.

As the Commission points out, "what we are seeing now is a dangerous

spiral." Aside from the military losses sustained by the Sri Lankan

Government, which the Commissioner outlined in his initial response to

me, an estimated 200 Tamils have been killed for apparent political reasons

and, as of September 2005, the SLMM had received 1,466 reports of

abductions, 641 of which it recorded as violations of the Cease-Fire

Agreement. In this context, many human rights defenders, particularly

Tamils in the North and East have been forced to stop work, or going

underground. Support for human rights defenders is a long established

element of the European Union's human rights external relations policy.

In the EU's Guidelines in this area, it states that "it is important to

ensure the safety and protect the rights of human rights defenders." In

this light, does the Commission have any concrete proposals to ensure

that the individuals and organisations, who are risking their lives to raise

human rights issues at the grass roots of Sri Lankan society, will be

protected in the current, violent, political climate?

As the parties have announced their commitment to re-examine the

Cease-Fire Agreement, the Commission must take steps to strengthen

respect for it by all parties to the conflict. The deterioration of the

ceasefire can be traced to the withdrawal of the LTTE from formal talks in April

2003. Following its withdrawal, the LTTE escalated its campaign of

political killings and insisted that negotiations resume on the basis

of its proposal for an interim administration. Had the peace talks

continued, the advisor on human rights to the peace process, Ian Martin, would

have presented a draft human rights agreement at the next session. The

absence of a concrete human rights agreement has been a fundamental flaw in the

Sri Lankan peace process and has allowed the escalation in human rights

violations during the ceasefire. Indeed, the large majority of the

ceasefire violations are human rights violations against civilians.

Such an agreement would be a critical step in ensuring the rights to life

and freedom of association that have been denied during the conflict, but

that could be respected by the warring parties to demonstrate their

commitment

to peace. As the peace process moves forward, past abuses and questions

about impunity could be addressed. I must take this opportunity to

underscore the vital need for a Human Rights Agreement that will put

human rights back at the heart of this peace process, which is facilitated by

an independent monitoring mission that compliments the agreement on the

ground. Such a mission could be led by the EU and should be empowered

with enforcement mechanisms. To me, this seems wholly in line with the more

effective integration of human rights into the EU's approach to crisis

management situations, which the Austrian Presidency has highlighted as

one of its priorities for the next six months.

Furthermore, this seventh session of talks was to "expand some

preliminary issues and a framework for political matters into a complete plan" and

move closer to discussing a permanent political solution which,

according to the Oslo agreements of 2002, committed the LTTE to exploring a

federal political solution. The LTTE has always avoided redressing the root
causes of the conflict. Instead, it has used the threat of war to consolidate
its control over the North and East and to entrench its ad hoc and interim
mechanisms. Similarly, the Government of Sri Lanka has also failed to

develop a consensus for a permanent political solution. The

international community's commitment to the peace process and the principles

underlying its support were stated in the Tokyo Declaration of June 2003. However,

neither the Sri Lankan Government nor the international community have

backed their commitment with the political will necessary to ensure the

Declaration's relevance to the peace process. The breaks in the talks

and the overall lack of continuity in the peace process have undermined the

confidence of ordinary Sri Lankans and those communities that were not

included in the peace talks.

While ceasefires involve the armed parties, a peace process and a

permanent political solution must involve all the people of Sri Lanka.

It is therefore critical that any recalibration of the peace process
should seek the inclusion of all communities and political organisations in
Sri Lanka. The peace process will only be durable if all legitimate

stakeholders are involved, either directly or through a process of

consultations. This is of particular importance now there is vocal

opposition to the parties to the peace process and conditions ripen to

alienate further sections of the population.

This principle of inclusiveness should be extended to the international

supporters of the peace process, who need to abide by their support for

the Oslo Declaration and commitments to the Tokyo Declaration. It is

time for the Co-Chairs to transform their role through constructively and

critically engaging all parties. Democracy and human rights are the

twin pillars of any real and just peace. Possibly the most persistent attack

on democracy has been the LTTE's claim to "sole representation", through
which it refused any independent Tamil and Muslim participation in the
peace process. A major omission of the international community was
their reluctance to reject this undemocratic claim to sole representation. I
welcome your personal commitment to meet with Mr Pirapaharan, but urge
you also to meet with the leaders of other Tamil, Muslim and Sinhala
communities, who are in closer contact with the people on a ground
level.We must not underestimate the impact of confidence-building measures,

from the grassroots up, to compliment the talks conducted by the key

political actors.

Three and a half years ago the people of Sri Lanka were encouraged to

support the peace process because of the third party facilitation and

its internationalised character. After decades of conflict, ordinary Sri

Lankans were given a renewed hope that Sri Lanka would emerge from its

history of violence and militarisation. Now, as the EU, as Co-Chair,

reconsiders the peace process, I urge you to take my thoughts and ideas

on this issue into account and ensure that we move forward on the basis of

a principled peace process, which enshrines democracy and human rights.

I look forward to receiving your response and to building a closer

working relationship with you on this, and other issues of mutual interest.

Yours Sincerely,

Sajjad Karim MEP