News

Civil society: Comparison of Tamil activist’s advocacy with LTTE claims unwarranted, mischievous and chilling

Published

5 years ago

2022/02/7

An influential section of the civil society has criticised the Foreign Ministry over a statement it issued as regards representations made recently by human rights lawyer Ambika Satkunanathan at the hearing of the European Parliament’s sub-committee on human rights.

Forty seven organizations and 161 individuals in a statement issued over the weekend frowned on what they called an attempt by the Foreign Ministry to draw an analogy between the independent advocacy of a Tamil activist and researcher with the claims of the LTTE as unwarranted, mischievous and chilling.

Satkunanathan told The Island that the headline ‘Human rights: FM challenges Neelan Tiruchelvam Trust over its representations to Geneva’ given to the Foreign Ministry statement carried in the Feb 5 edition of The Island is erroneous. She said that her statement to the European Parliament’s sub-committee on human rights had nothing to do with the Neelan Tiruchelvam Trust. The lawyer said that she did not represent the Trust or speak on its behalf. “NTT is not engaged in HR advocacy work and is a grant making foundation. The MFA is not challenging NTT but me in my personal capacity.”

The following is the text of the statement issued by the civil society in support of Ambika Satkunanathan: ” We are deeply concerned by the response of the Foreign Ministry, dated 4th February, 2022, to the statement made by human rights lawyer and advocate, former Commissioner of the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka, and Chairperson of the Neelan Tiruchelvam Trust, Ambika Satkunanathan, at the hearing of the European Parliament’s sub-committee on human rights, on the 27th of January, 2022. In her submission, Ms. Satkunanathan made a critical assessment of the human rights situation in Sri Lanka and its international and national obligations to its citizens, and provided recommendations to European Union member states.

Rather than engage substantively with the issues raised, the Sri Lankan Government instead chose to cast aspersions on an individual with an unimpeachable record of principled research, advocacy and public service for the improvement of human rights in Sri Lanka. The attempt by the Foreign Ministry to draw an analogy between the independent advocacy of a Tamil activist and researcher with the claims of the LTTE is unwarranted, mischievous and chilling. The insinuation that pointing out the differential impact of government policies, state institutions and their practices on Tamil and Muslim communities is in some way ‘stoking hatred among communities’ and harmful to ‘social harmony’ is also deeply troubling. Given how the PTA and ICCPR Act have been used in Sri Lanka in the recent past by the State to target critical individuals and members of minority communities, this characterization is ominous.

Retaining or losing GSP+ trade privileges is entirely based on the European Union’s assessment of the conduct of the Sri Lankan Government with respect to labour rights, human rights, environmental protection and good governance. The suggestion that it is human rights advocacy that jeopardizes GSP+ trade privileges which are crucial for the Sri Lankan economy is highly disingenuous.

We consider the targeting of outspoken members of civil society by a government institution using dangerous insinuations to be a form of intimidation aimed at stifling dissent and freedom of expression. Statements such as this by the Foreign Ministry, we believe, aim to constrain civil society engagement as an independent interlocutor with the international community on democracy and rights issues, standing up for the rights and protection of affected communities and individuals.

Like Ms. Satkunanathan, many in civil society have been raising concerns regarding the operational environment for civil society organizations and activists, and the threat of a repressive new law. We note with deep concern the continuing incidents of harassment of victim-survivors, human rights activists, media workers and civil society organisations by state actors. Creating an enabling environment for civil society will require more than mere assertions that civil society is treated as a partner, and the shifting of the NGO Secretariat to a new Ministry. We remain willing to engage with the government in an honest, principled and constructive dialogue on this, and the other substantive issues raised by Ms. Satkunanathan, which we share and stand-by.

However, the targeting of civil society activists in this manner by the Foreign Ministry does not inspire confidence or trust. We condemn this statement of the Foreign Ministry, and stand in solidarity with Ms. Ambika Satkunanathan and all other civil society activists engaged in the processes of promoting and protecting human rights, democracy and genuine reconciliation in Sri Lanka.”

All News Advertisement

News

Fast Attack Craft P 4447 recovered in successful salvage operation

Published

9 hours ago

2026/09/14

Priyan

The Sri Lanka Navy successfully recovered its Fast Attack Craft P 4447 following a successful salvage operation, bringing a multi-stage emergency response to a close.

The craft, which ran into distress during a routine patrol on 15th August 2026 off Angulana, was brought to the surface on 11th September, from a depth of approximately 80 feet. It was
subsequently towed to the Colombo Dockyard premises.
The initial phase of the operation immediately following the incident focused on search and rescue. A joint effort involving the Navy, Air Force, Police, and local fishermen from Angulana
resulted in the rescue of 11 crew members. The search and rescue phase drew to a close with the recovery of the remains of the Second in Command of the craft, on 4th September.

Following the search and rescue phase, specialized Navy diving and salvage teams launched a dedicated recovery phase against rough sea conditions and underwater challenges, adhering to
strict safety protocols. The Navy’s marine, hull, electrical, and electronic engineering teams utilized specialized technical know-how and equipment to raise the vessel in stages.

Thus, the salvage operation marked an outstanding achievement attained through the professionalism, technical expertise of Navy divers, and coordinated contribution of all
engineering and technical branches of the Sri Lanka Navy. Technical support and specialized expertise were also extended by the Sri Lanka Ports Authority and Colombo Dockyard PLC.

News

CIABOC member’s appointment: Controversy over Speaker under probe heading selection process

Published

11 hours ago

2026/09/14

Thilina Walpola

By Shamindra Ferdinando

The Opposition should intensity its focus on the forthcoming selection of a member of the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption (CIABOC) and remain vigilant as Speaker Dr. Jagath Wickremaratne, MP, the head of the Constitutional Council (CC) tasked with making the relevant recommendation, is under investigation by the CIABOC, sources familiar with the ongoing inquiry told The Island.

Chethiya Goonasekara, PC, is expected to complete his three-year term on Dec 31, 2026. Sources pointed out that CIABOC Commissioners are appointed by the President on the recommendation made by the 10-member Constitutional Council.

The CIABOC initiated the investigation following a complaint lodged by suspended Chief of Staff and Deputy Secretary General of Parliament Chaminda Kularatne in early February this year. Sources said that as Goonasekera is scheduled to complete his term toward the end of 2026, the CC would have to call applications soon to choose the successor.

Goonasekara received his appointment from President Ranil Wickremesinghe in January 2024. A Justice W. M. N. P. Iddawala was appointed Chairman of the CIABOC. The other commissioner is K. Bernard Rajapakse.

Asked whether Iddawala and Rajapakse, too, would complete their terms soon, sources said that in terms of the Anti-Corruption Act No 09 of 2023, the Chairman of CIABOC would hold office for a period of five years, second commissioner (K. Bernard Rajapakse) for four years and the third commissioner (Chethiya Goonasekara) for a period of three years.

Sources said that the Opposition as well as civil society representatives in the CC should take up the issue of Speaker facing an investigation by the CIABOC taking part in the forthcoming selection process. Responding to queries, sources emphasized that the issue was whether in terms of Section 107 of the Anti-Corruption Act the participation of the Speaker in the selection process amounted to a violation of the Act itself.

The current members of the CC are Dr Jagath Wickramaratne, Speaker and Chairman of the Constitutional Council, Dr. Harini Amarasuriya, Prime Minister, Sajith Premadasa, Leader of the Opposition, Bimal Rathnayake, MP, Aboobucker Athambawa, MP, Ajith P. Perera, MP, Sivagnanam Shritharan, MP, Austin Fernando, Civil society representative, Prof. Wasantha Seneviratne, Civil society representative and Ranjith Ariyaratne, Civil society representative.

Sources pointed out that in spite of the sensitivity of the case, the CIABOC recorded Kularatne’s statement in the second week of August, six months after he lodged the complaint.

The CIABOC on 3, 8 and 10 Sept recorded the statements from the Transport Officer, Deputy Director, Administration and Assistant Director, Finance regarding the use of facilities by the Speaker, those assigned to his staff and other relevant matters.

The NPP named Dr. Wickramaratne as the Speaker after Asoka Ranwala resigned over controversy regarding his higher education qualifications.

SJB lawmaker Dayasiri Jayaskera has repeatedly raised the issues concerning the Speaker with the focus also on the Speaker using two government-managed residences, relevant staff in addition to expenditure on food, transport and fuel provided to the Speaker’s private secretary.

Political sources said that trouble erupted after the Parliamentary Staff Advisory Council in late January sacked Kularatne accusing him of providing false information to secure his appointment. Before being appointed as the Deputy Secretary-General of Parliament in 2023, Kularatne held several high-ranking positions, including Secretary to the Chief Government Whip, Additional Secretary to the President, Additional Secretary to the Prime Minister, and Additional Secretary to the Leader of the Opposition.

The SJB declared in Parliament that Ranwala should be brought back as the Speaker as they have no faith in Wickramaratne. MP Mujibur Rahuman jokingly told parliament that the Opposition wouldn’t raise Ranwala’s educational qualifications.

News

GMOA: Countrywide cadre revision not done since 2015

Published

11 hours ago

2026/09/14

Thilina Walpola

Dhammika

The Government Medical Officers’ Association (GMOA) has stressed the need to conduct a comprehensive countrywide cadre revision urgently.

GMOA spokesman Dr. Lasitha Dhammika told The Island that the failure on the part of successive governments to conduct cadre revision caused the deterioration of the public sector health services. Due to the absence of required statistics, they hadn’t been able to fully comprehend the situation on the ground and to ascertain the requirements of the public.

Dr. Dhammika pointed out the expansion of the services without supporting statistics and the need to initiate an immediate cadre revision. According to him, the GMOA had raised this issue with successive governments without success. The GMOA spokesman said that they also sought relevant information from the Health Ministry in terms of the Right to Information (RTI) Act two weeks ago but was yet to receive response.

(SF)