News
Geneva controversy: Ambika hits back hard at Foreign Ministry
Human Rights Advocate Ambika Satkunanathan has alleged that the culture of impunity is well documented, not only by civil society organisations, human rights defenders and the UN, but most importantly the Supreme Court and the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka. Since 2020 several incidents of violence by state officials have been publicly recorded. Yet, to date, the number of persons held accountable is negligible.
The former member of the Human Rights Commission said so in a statement issued in response to a statement titled ‘Human Rights: FM challenges Neelan Tiruchelvam Trust over its representations to Geneva ‘ in Feb 5, 2022 edition of The Island. The following is the text of her statement issued in response to the Foreign Ministry statement that dealt with Satkunanathan’s representations before the European Parliament Sub-Committee on Human Rights:”The FM statement contains numerous misrepresentations and insinuations, and appears to be aimed at silencing critique of government policies and actions.
In my statement to the Sub-Committee, I spoke of a number of issues, many of which I have previously written about with supporting evidence. This is available in the public domain. These are issues that other civil society organisations and activists have raised and documented over the years. In this context, the government labelling my statement “misleading”, appears to be an effort to downplay the issues raised and deceive the public.
It is disturbing the government has taken umbrage at my appeal to the European Union (EU) to advocate with the government to fulfil its international human rights obligations using GSP Plus trade privileges as a conduit. The GSP Plus privileges are dependent on the recipient fulfilling human rights obligations. The said human rights obligations are obligations the government has a duty to fulfill as a member of the United Nations and signatory to several UN conventions. These are obligations that provide protections to the citizens of Sri Lanka.
It is regrettable the government refuses to acknowledge that any adverse outcome of the GSP Plus review process would only be due to its failure to fulfill the GSP Plus scheme’s requirements. Hence, it is the government that has to take responsibility for any adverse outcomes. Instead, the government implies that those who advocate for the protection of the marginalised, such as Free Trade Zone workers, are responsible for a possible adverse outcome because they highlight the government’s failures. This is an attempt to deflect blame. To ensure there is no adverse impact on vulnerable communities, the government needs to acknowledge that the crisis is the result of its poor policy decisions, taken without bearing the best interests of citizens in mind.
Efforts to bring lasting peace to Sri Lanka are undermined by denials of the root causes of the armed conflict, i.e. discrimination. Instead, the MFA statement labels discussion of the root causes as LTTE propaganda. This is ominous given the decades long strategy of weaponising the PTA against Tamils. Implying such discussion is a danger to communal harmony, as the Ministry does in its statement, can be used to weaponise the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Act to stifle dissent. The government’s use of these phrases will create fear amongst civic activists, especially in the North and East, and shrink civic space further. The very space the government denies is shrinking.
In this regard, the insinuations made in the Ministry’s statement are dangerous. My attention has been drawn to articles peddling false information about my supposed links to the LTTE being circulated on social media in the wake of the statement. The statement therefore could cause persons with racist ideologies to harass and perpetrate violence, including cyber violence against me.
The culture of impunity is well documented, not only by civil society organisations, human rights defenders and the UN, but most importantly the Supreme Court and the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka. Since 2020 several incidents of violence by state officials have been publicly recorded. Yet, to date, the number of persons held accountable is negligible.
The “war on drugs” (erroneously referred to as war and drugs in the statement) is being used to justify arbitrary arrests and detention as well suspected extra-judicial killings by police in Sri Lanka. The Bar Association of Sri Lanka too has raised concerns about this. It is important to curb the supply of drugs and international drug trafficking. However, such policies need to adhere to human rights standards.
Although the MFA claims Sri Lanka is a secular country, several statements have been made by the President in which he mentions inter alia, that ‘’protection of Sinhala Buddhists is his foremost responsibility’’ and that “all others who would love to live in unity have to be assimilated into this main socio-cultural basis of this country, based on rich Buddhist values”. This is illustrative of the Sinhala Buddhist nationalism to which I referred in my statement. Another example is the Presidential Task Force on Archeological Heritage Management in the Eastern Province, which has the membership of Buddhist clergy and is headed by a Buddhist monk. The ‘One Country One Law’ Task Force is chaired by Gnanasara Thera, who has publicly made inflammatory and discriminatory statements and incited violence against Muslim community. Such an appointment begs the question whether the government is concerned about the preservation of social harmony.
The Ministry has conflated the process of militarisation, with the military occupation of land. The former includes the military undertaking tasks that were and should be within the purview of civilian entities. The phenomenon of militarization has been meticulously recorded by civil society, including myself, and is publicly available for reference.
Despite the Ministry’s claim the government views civil society as partners and not adversaries, regrettably, its statement singling out my statement to the EU, is the perfect example of the government’s intolerance of dissent. Furthermore, several civil society organisations and activists, particularly from the North and East, have been questioned by the Terrorism Investigation Division (TID) during the last year. That they are being subject to these “routine security checks” when there is no prima facie evidence of wrongdoing, casts doubt on the government’s assertion of partnership with civil society.
As a Sri Lankan citizen, it is my right and civic duty to question the actions of elected representatives of this country when such actions lead to the suffering and marginalisation of vulnerable communities, and demand accountability. Only a country that respects this right can be considered truly independent and democratic.
Finally, the Ministry has referred to my position as Chairperson of the Neelan Tiruchelvam Trust in the statement. However, I did not make the statement to the Sub Committee as Chairperson nor represent the Trust at the hearing. I delivered the statement in my capacity as a human rights advocate, and it in no way has any relationship to the Trust.”
Latest News
Sun directly overhead Neriyakulam, Punewa, Kebithigollewa, Pankulam and Sinhapura at about 12.10 noon today (31)
The sun is going to be directly over the latitudes of Sri Lanka from 28th of August to 07th of September due to its apparent southward relative motion.
The nearest places of Sri Lanka over which the sun is overhead today (31) are Neriyakulam, Punewa, Kebithigollewa, Pankulam and Sinhapura about 12.10 noon.
News
BASL takes exception to Justice Ganepola being denied a place in SC
… highlights injustice caused to Justice R. Gurusinghe
The Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) has alleged that due to the failure on the part of President Anura Kumara Dissanayake to fill the existing vacancies in the Supreme Court, a Senior Justice of the Court of Appeal, Justice Dhammika Ganepola, retired at the age of 63 without being considered for, or granted, a promotion to the Supreme Court, to which he was well entitled. The BASL pointed out at the time of Ganepola’s retirement there were four vacancies in the Supreme Court.
In a letter dated 17 August, 2026, addressed to President Dissanayake, the BASL declared that the failure to promote and recognise Ganepola’s distinguished judicial service, resulting in his retirement at the age of 63, is indeed a loss to the Judiciary.
A top BASL spokesman told The Island yesterday (30) that the Bar Council, over the weekend, had decided to release the hitherto confidential letter.
The official said that they also wanted to remind the President of his assurance given to BASL, on 12 August, 2026, that vacancies in the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal would be filled as soon as possible, within a month.
The following is the text of the BASL letter, signed by Rajeev Amarasuriya, President, BASL, and its Secretary Nalin De Silva: “We write further to our letters dated 29th December 2025 and 30th June 2026 in relation to the above, to which we have not received any response.
We also refer to our meeting with Your Excellency on 12th August. As discussed during the meeting, there have been vacancies in the Supreme Court since May 2025, and the number of vacancies has now increased to four (04). There are also four (04) vacancies in the Court of Appeal. These are all matters we have already written to Your Excellency about.
Your Excellency informed the BASL Delegation when we met that you would be taking steps to make recommendations to fill these vacancies as soon as possible, within a month.
We write to reiterate the importance of giving due consideration to the criteria set out in our aforesaid letter dated 29th December 2025. We also wish to emphasise that, in making judicial appointments and promotions, seniority should be given due priority, in keeping with longstanding practice, until such time there are objective and defensible guidelines governing the assessment of merit.
The only justifiable departure to this criterion would be where there exists a specific and recognized demerit in respect of the particular Judge concerned or such other known compelling circumstances that are objectively identifiable such as where a Judge has previously been overlooked for promotion unfairly or conversely, where a Judge has been unfairly previously granted promotions above others.
This approach will safeguard both the integrity of the Judiciary and the trust reposed in it by the public.
Further, while there has been considerable discussion and representation by the Government regarding the importance of retaining experienced judges, as reminded to Your Excellency at our said meeting that, only a few months ago on 8th May 2026, a Senior Justice of the Court of Appeal, Justice Dhammika Ganepola, retired at the age of 63 without being considered for, or granted, a promotion to the Supreme Court, to which he was well entitled, and in which there were four vacancies at the time.
The failure to promote and recognise his distinguished judicial service, resulting in his retirement at the age of 63, is indeed a loss to the Judiciary.
We also drew Your Excellency’s attention at the said meeting to the fact that the Senior-most Justice of the Court of Appeal, Justice R. Gurusinghe, who joined the Judicial Service in 1996, who also Acted in the Office of President of the Court of Appeal (appointed by Your Excellency) on 11th May 2026, is due to retire at the end of this month. In fact, we learnt through the Media that Her Ladyship then Chief Justice Justice Murdu Fernando, PC, had previously in July 2025 recommended to Your Excellency the promotion of Justice R. Gurusinghe to the Supreme Court, but the same is pending from that time.
He too is well deserving of promotion to the Supreme Court and has already been recommended by the former Chief Justice, and his case must also receive due and urgent consideration before his impending retirement.
We hope that Your Excellency will take due note of and give due regard to the concerns of the Bar, as well as to the established principles, practices and conventions governing judicial appointments, when taking steps to fill these vacancies.
On this, Your Excellency is already open to the accusation that these vacancies have been kept open, to fill with favourites of the Government which is yet another serious indictment on the independence of the judiciary which accusation would be confirmed if recommendations are made outside established practice.
Moreover, the BASL expresses grave concern that withholding promotions of Judicial Officers for extended periods of time places undue pressure on Judicial Officers in the discharge of their duties and constitutes both directly and indirectly, interference with the independence of the Judiciary, in addition to the strain obviously caused to the dispensation of justice in other Courts and the stifling and delay of career progression of Judges legitimately entitled to promotions.
We do hope that Your Excellency would take due note and cognizance of the foregoing when effecting these judicial promotions which have been long overdue and which have already adversely impacted the efficiency and effectiveness of the administration of justice.”
The BASL has copied the letter to Prime Minister Dr. Harini Amarasuriya, Speaker Dr. Jagath Wickremaratne, Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa and all members of the Constitutional Council.
News
Sajith challenges govt. to hold PC polls
Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa on Saturday (29) challenged the government to hold the long-delayed Provincial Council elections, saying the polls would provide an opportunity to gauge the level of public support enjoyed by the administration.
Addressing a farmers’ meeting in Tissamaharama, Hambantota, Premadasa also criticised the latest Rs. 17 per kilogram increase in wheat flour prices, warning that it would push up the prices of bread, bakery products and other flour-based food items and place further pressure on households already struggling with the rising cost of living.
He said Sri Lanka ranked 120th among 130 countries in an international comparison of minimum wages, arguing that wages remained inadequate to meet the escalating cost of living.
Premadasa also questioned official assessments of living standards, asking whether a person could survive for an entire month on Rs. 17,315, a figure he attributed to the Department of Census and Statistics.
He claimed that between 30 and 40 percent of the population was living in poverty and called for a clear programme to help affected families improve their economic conditions.
Turning to the proposed 22nd Amendment to the Constitution, which seeks to increase the retirement age of superior court judges, the Opposition Leader accused the government of attempting to undermine judicial independence and interfere with democratic institutions.
He also criticised the government’s handling of poverty, employment, agriculture, healthcare and investment, saying more effective measures were needed to provide relief to people facing economic hardships.Premadasa called for stronger policies to attract foreign direct investment and urged the government to formulate a national strategy for developing the tourism industry.
-
News7 days agoMissing doctor’s body found in Mahiyanganaya
-
News7 days agoAustralia declines to release Finance Secy Suriyapperuma’s citizenship details
-
News4 days agoEight politicians in drug kingpin probe
-
News7 days ago22A: BASL suggests CJ recuse himself from hearing petitions
-
Features2 days ago“Wrap Me Up in My Blazer”— A Gentlemanly Bradby Reminiscence
-
Business4 days agoSri Lanka opens up: A new season of direct connectivity
-
Features6 days agoInsights from Chieftains of Uva: Genealogy of two Kandyan Families – Part II
-
Features4 days agoRedefining ageing in Sri Lanka
