Connect with us

Features

More on Japan, wonder woman Yukiko and an encounter in Tokyo’s red light area

Published

on

(Excerpted from Memories that Linger: My journey through the world of disability by Padmani Mendis)

While at ESCAP in Bangkok, Yukiko invited me to travel with her to the Maldives in 1988 and to Laos in 1989 to discuss CBR at National Workshops on disability sponsored in those countries by ESCAP. For many disabled people in those countries, it was their first opportunity to participate in an event such as this. And for as many, to meet a disabled person from another culture.

I will share one experience in Vientiane which illustrates Yukiko’s perfect fit in the role she carries out. We had finished dinner at a hotel not far from where we resided. There was not much traffic at that time of night, and we walked on the road itself. Yukiko was quite tiny in build. Because of impairment, Yukiko used a pair of crutches and walked very slowly. When I saw a large truck approaching us I said to her, “Yukiko, see that truck? Let’s move aside.” Her determined reply was, “Why should we? They can see us.” To me, that says it all.

Back home in Japan at the end of her three years, Yukiko set up the Asia Disability Institute or ADI to enable formal support for disability both within her own country and in others. Once, when I was in Tokyo, Yukiko and Shoji invited me to stay in their home. Yukiko took the opportunity to invite members of ADI for a meeting that evening. In the morning she told me she had to go to the supermarket to buy some stuff to prepare food for her guests. She asked me whether I would like to join her.

Yukiko had by this time discarded her cumbersome crutches, and with that, discarded the confinement that conventional rehabilitation had imposed on her. She exerted her right to choose. And she had chosen to use an electric wheelchair.

And what an experience it was for me going shopping with Yukiko. Out though the door and on the street, she just whizzed along at such a pace that I had to run alongside to keep up. Eventually I had to give up and just follow her. Inside the supermarket was another experience. She whizzed again in and out and along the aisles picking out what she wanted off the shelves and popping them into the bag hanging on her chair. We were soon done. I had been but an observer, but I was exhausted just watching her.

Yukiko is the embodiment of independence. Of inclusion. Of freedom.

The Asia Disability Institute provides a forum in which disabled people and professionals come together to discuss disability issues and to discuss possible solutions. It provides excellent opportunities where an understanding on these matters can be reached through debate and discussion. Sometimes the focus was on Community Based Rehabilitation (CBR). A hot topic for discussion at the time was disability-inclusion and participation. On one occasion when I went to Japan, Yukiko arranged for me to share my experience at a large symposium organised by the University of Tokyo. This was in 2001.

The topic I was to share was, “The Inclusion of Persons with Disabilities in the Community through Community-Based Rehabilitation, CBR”.

What’s in a name?

What’s in a name? That which we call a rose

By any other name would smell just as sweet.

William Shakespeare in ‘Romeo and Juliet’

Recently, I read about a large international forum discussing whether the words CBR should be replaced by Community-Based Inclusive Development. Some international organisations have Disability-Inclusive Development policies. Two comments: one is that we have learned globally through bitter experience that development must start with people, with the communities in which they live, start with a community-base. Imposing development from above brings no success. So prefixing the words “community-based” for development may be unnecessary.

Two, CBR is the strategy that has shown the way to disability inclusion in all development systems at all levels. What is important now is to ensure disability is included in development And call it what you will, until we find something better the strategy for disability inclusion will continue to be CBR.

What is a community?

By this time I had acquired a deep understanding of the “Community” in CBR. I am no sociologist and here I offer what I have learned on my journey. I believe that any one society is made up of a number of communities, one might say even a hierarchy of communities.

Starting with the very primary or neighbourhood community in which each of us lives, then in our immediate surroundings we may belong to women’s groups, youth groups and religious groups. Each individual thus belongs to many communities at the same time. Others may be common interest groups, professional bodies, sports, recreation and leisure groups, service clubs, development committees and councils and so on.

To me, the concept of disability inclusion must invade and permeate all these communities so that within society itself inclusion is built on a holistic foundation. CBR is a strategy that makes such inclusion and participation possible.

Moving with the Japanese

During the years that followed I was a frequent visitor to Japan. Formal addresses at the Universities of Nagoya and that of Osaka. Lecture tours and workshops to meet disabled people, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, NGOs and other professionals. On many of these I was accompanied by Masayuko Watanabe, himself a physiotherapist with an abiding interest in CBR.

A remarkable experience I had at this time was a very prestigious invitation to JICA headquarters for a meeting on CBR on JICA-NET. This was a video network used to bring together participants from JICA supported countries through video or internet conferencing. While the focal point was at the very modern JICA headquarters in Tokyo, JICA country offices were connected to this and to each other.

We had a very interesting and long discussion on CBR with Japanese disabled people and others associated with JICA in their member countries. Yukiko was the meeting facilitator. At that time this technology was a rarity and the meeting was a privilege. It has now been replaced by zoom and is an everyday occurrence.

Social Work Research Institute of the Japan College of Social Work

Meanwhile, the Asia-Pacific Decade of Disabled Persons declared by the UN which started in 1992 was coming to an end. At this time, the Social Work Research Institute of the Japan College of Social Work launched an initiative in the form of a research study. This was conducted from 2001 through to 2003. The study examined the outcomes of the decade within the region for the preparation of policies and strategies to ensure continuity of its impact.

Countries invited to participate in the study were Australia, Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Japan, Mongolia, the Philippines, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Thailand, USA and Vietnam, and ESCAP. Representatives from these countries and ESCAP were invited to Tokyo each year to meet and share findings. I was invited to represent Sri Lanka.

Comprehensive reports of the study were published each year and called the “International Comparative Study on Disability Policies and Programmes in the 21st Century in Asia and the Pacific”.

An experience in Shinjuku

At the yearly meetings working days were heavy. Some of us needed to get away in the evenings to relax and be refreshed for the next day. On the humorous side, there is a memory I like to recall when I am asked about my experiences.

The American, the Thai and I soon became a close-knit trio. I have never understood how strangers come together to form a friendship group in such a short time. Alas, these are temporary. During that short time, we would spend the evenings enjoying whatever we could of Shinjuku where we were located. Shinjuku itself, though a ward of Tokyo, is very large. There was no way we could use the subway by ourselves. Signage in English was rare. But there was plenty to be enjoyed traversing Shinjuku on our feet.

And so the three of us found ourselves one evening in Tokyo’s Red Light District. John the size XXXL American in the middle and on either side of him the M-sized, sareed me and the S-minus Thai lady Gini. An unexpected threesome striding along, looking quite out of place in this bustling area, full of lights and of colour and of a particular kind of activity.

And then came to us a young man to ask, “You want girl? You want boy? You want boy and girl? See my photos?” with which he proceeded to show us proudly what he had to offer. Other young men started encircling us. The scene was becoming somewhat threatening.

John, the XXXL American, grabbed each of us by our elbows. We fled. We found a Starbucks at a safe distance. Where we sat and laughed our sides out over a world-renowned cup of American coffee. The first I had tasted of that brand. And have never drunk since. Nothing but prejudice of course.

Japan Overseas Volunteer Corps

Sri Lanka has been a close friend and a programme country of Japan for many decades. For the last forty years or more, we have being helped by the Japan Overseas Volunteer Corps or JOCV. Sri Lanka has had volunteers from Japan in the field of agriculture, forestry, education and health amongst other technical fields. They come to Sri Lanka quite conversant in our local languages and work closely with our people. We have had them help us in CBR too. Every year, about half a dozen find accommodation in the villages to work with local groups and with the area Social Service Officers.

Naoko Kato, the JOCV coordinator based in the embassy, made it a habit to bring to me for an unofficial briefing those that would work in disability before they went to their respective posts. Soon I was appointed as an official Adviser on Disability to the JOCV, Colombo. I continued as one for a few years. I must say the fluency volunteers showed in my mother tongue exceeded my own.

One day I was in discussion with the Director of Inclusive Education at the National Institute of Education in his office at Maharagama. I was with my back to the door. While we were talking, there was a tap on the door. It opened, and a female voice conversed with him in Sinhala for a few short minutes. I looked over my shoulder and saw it was a pretty young lady in Kandyan saree. When she had gone, I asked the director who it was. He replied, “Oh that is our Japanese volunteer.”

I had truly believed she was from the Kandyan areas for the fluency with which she used Sinhala. Moreover, she carried off that saree so gracefully – as though she had been born for it.



Features

UN’s challenge of selective accountability without international equity

Published

on

Volker Türk

Despite the prevalence of double standards in international practice, it remains in Sri Lanka’s national interest to support the principles and implementation of international law. The existence of international law, however weak, offers some level of protection that smaller countries have when faced with the predatory behaviour of more powerful states. For this reason, the Sri Lankan government must do all it can to uphold its prior commitments to the UN Human Rights Council and implement the promises it has made to the fullest extent possible.

The visit of UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk, later this month may possibly be overshadowed by the eruption of hostilities in the Middle East following Israel’s attack on Iran. The High Commissioner’s visit to Sri Lanka relates to the series of resolutions passed by the UN Human Rights Council over the past sixteen years since the end of the war. It will highlight the contradiction in the rules-based international order when geopolitical interests override legal commitments. These resolutions highlight the importance of protecting human rights during times of conflict and ensuring accountability for war crimes. They are part of the enduring legacy of international human rights and humanitarian law, as exemplified by the Geneva Conventions and the global post-war consensus that atrocity crimes should not go unpunished.

The High Commissioner’s visit is likely to provoke criticism that the United Nations is pursuing Sri Lanka’s adherence to international norms with greater zeal than it shows toward violations by more powerful countries. There appears to be acquiescence, indeed even tacit approval, by influential states in response to Israel’s military actions in both Iran and Gaza on the grounds of existential threats to Israel. Similar military actions were taken in 2003 by the US and the UK governments, among other international powers, to destroy weapons of mass destruction alleged to be in Iraq. One of the central arguments made by critics of the UN’s engagement in Sri Lanka is that double standards are at play. These critics contend that the United Nations disproportionately targets weaker countries, thereby reinforcing an international system that turns a blind eye to powerful countries and, in doing so, undermines the credibility and coherence of global human rights standards.

The arrival of the High Commissioner is also likely to reignite internal debate in Sri Lanka about the purpose and legitimacy of UN involvement in the country. The question is whether international standards effectively contribute to national transformation, or do they risk being reduced to symbolic gestures that satisfy external scrutiny without generating substantive change. There will be those who regard international engagement as a necessary corrective to domestic failings, and others who see it as an infringement on national sovereignty. The question of accountability for war crimes committed during the three-decade-long civil war remains a deeply divisive and sensitive issue. Sri Lanka, with its own complex and painful history, has the opportunity to lead by example by reckoning with the past unlike many other countries who justify their atrocities under the veil of national security.

International Breakdown

The modern international system emerged in the wake of two catastrophic world wars and the recognised failure of early twentieth-century diplomacy to prevent mass violence. At its core was a collective pledge to establish a rules-based international order that could maintain peace through law, institutional cooperation, and multilateral governance. The development of international human rights and humanitarian law was most pronounced in the aftermath of the mass atrocities and immense human suffering of World War II. The powerful nations of the time resolved to lead a new global order in which such horrors would never be repeated.

This vision of a rules-based international order as a safeguard against a return to the law of the jungle, where power alone determined justice was institutionalised through the United Nations, the Geneva Conventions, and the establishment of international courts such as the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court. However, this international system has come under increasing strain in recent decades. Recent events show that it no longer functions as originally envisioned. In practice, the consistent application of international law, regardless of the status or power of a state, is frequently compromised. The selective enforcement of legal norms, particularly by powerful countries, has eroded the legitimacy of the system and calls into question the universalism at the heart of international law.

At present, at least three major international conflicts taking place in Ukraine, Gaza, and now the confrontation between Israel and Iran, illustrate a sustained breakdown in the enforcement of international legal norms. These conflicts involve powerful states that openly defy legal obligations, with the international community, especially its more influential members, often remaining conspicuously silent. Only a handful of countries, such as South Africa, have chosen to raise issues of international law violations in these conflicts. The broader silence or selective rationalisation by powerful countries has only reinforced the perception that international law is subject to political convenience, and that its authority can be subordinated to geopolitical calculation. Earlier examples would include the ruination of prosperous countries such as Iraq, Libya and Syria.

Uphold Consistency

The Sri Lankan situation illustrates the importance of preserving an international legal system with mechanisms for credible and impartial accountability. Sri Lanka, so far, has been unable to address the issues of accountability for serious war-time human rights violations through internal mechanisms. However, the broader lesson from Sri Lanka’s experience is that international norms ought not to be applied selectively. If global institutions aspire to uphold justice by holding smaller or less powerful countries accountable, they must apply the same standards to powerful states, including Israel, Russia, and the United States. Failing to do so risks creating the perception that the international legal system is an instrument of coercion and selective punishment rather than a foundation for equitable global justice.

Despite the prevalence of double standards in international practice, it remains in Sri Lanka’s national interest to support the principles and implementation of international law. The existence of international law, however weak, offers some level of protection that smaller countries have when faced with the predatory behaviour of more powerful states. For this reason, the Sri Lankan government must do all it can to uphold its prior commitments to the UN Human Rights Council and implement the promises it has made to the fullest extent possible. In multilateral forums, including the UN, Sri Lanka must reassert these commitments as strategic assets that help to defend its sovereignty and legitimacy. At the same time, Sri Lanka needs to take up the challenge of using these international platforms to highlight the problem of selective enforcement. Sri Lanka can contribute to the broader call for a more principled and consistent application of international law by demonstrating its seriousness in protecting vulnerable populations and position itself as a responsible and principled actor in the international community.

Engaging with the past in accordance with international standards is also essential for Sri Lanka’s internal reconciliation and social cohesion. The principles of transitional justice—truth, accountability, reparations, and institutional reform—are not only universally applicable but also critical to the long-term development of any post-conflict society. These principles apply across all contexts and periods. If Sri Lanka is to evolve into a united, stable, and prosperous country, it must undertake this process, regardless of what other countries do or fail to do. Only by acknowledging and addressing its own past can Sri Lanka build a future in which its multi-ethnic and multi-religious character becomes a source of strength rather than weakness.

 

by Jehan Perera

Continue Reading

Features

A model for reconciliation

Published

on

Volker Türk

Conciliation between parties to a conflict involves two basic processes. The common factor to both is identifying the perpetrators associated with the conflict and holding them accountable for their actions, because of the belief that atonement for the violations committed help the aggrieved survivors to ease their pain without which reconciliation is not possible. One process involves Voluntary Admission of the TRUTH to the point of admitting guilt on the part of the perpetrators for the violations committed and Forgiveness on the part of the victims. Another process is to establish the TRUTH through mechanisms set up to investigate the scope and extent of the violations committed and identification of the perpetrators responsible, so that they could be punished to the extent of the law, thus assuaging the pain of the aggrieved. This is Retributive Justice.

The features common to both processes are that violations committed are in the PAST, which, in the case of Sri Lanka span, over a period of 16 to 30 years. Under such circumstances, ONLY Voluntary Admission would identify the perpetrators, while in the case of Retributive Justice, the credibility of the investigations to establish the TRUTH, based on which perpetrators are identified, would vary from questionable to inadmissible after the lapse of 16 to 30 years.

The first process cited above, namely Voluntary Admission followed by Forgiveness, was adopted by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa. This attempt failed to meet expectations because one of the parties, who was to participate and make Reconciliation meaningful, refused to participate in the exercise. Furthermore, others see such processes as too idealistic because outcomes of the Reconciliation process require the full participation and genuine commitment of the parties to the conflict. Consequently, most countries opt for the second process, which is Reconciliation through Retributive Justice despite the fact that it is dependent on the credibility of the evidence gathered over decades and, therefore, has the potential to be flawed.

ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES

TO RECONCILIATION

If admission of Guilt and Forgiveness is realistically not an option, or the limitations of mechanisms to establish credible evidence is also not a dependable option, the only alternative most countries adopt is for time to heal the grievances between parties to the conflict in a manner that best suits their respective social and civilisational values Since such an alternative leaves grievances that initiated the conflict to resolve itself on its own accord, the inevitable outcome is for societies to stay divided and frustrated thus making them fertile grounds for conflicts to recur.

The primary reason for the failure of the options hitherto pursued is that it limits the process of Reconciliation ONLY to violations associated with the Conflict. It does not factor in the grievances that initiated the conflict. This aspect is completely overlooked in the processes that involve admission of guilt followed by forgiveness or in Retributive Justice. Consequently, accountability based on Retributive Justice, advocated by the UNHRC and recommended by some in Sri Lanka, remains far from what is needed for meaningful Reconciliation.

It is, therefore, imperative that Sri Lanka presents a viable alternative that is NOT rooted in PAST actions but in the PRESENT because it is in the PRESENT that the livelihoods of those affected by the conflict have to be restored and their sense of hopelessness healed. Furthermore, Reconciliation, based on the PRESENT is recognized as the principal pillar in meditation as being the most rewarding to contribute to overall human wellbeing.

THE ALTERNATIVE

The approaches pursued by Sri Lanka were to appoint Presidential Commissions of Inquiry, Presidential Truth and Reconciliation Commissions, Task Forces to investigate and gather evidence with Foreign participation and the ongoing Evidence Gathering Mechanisms of the UNHRC, to name a few. In the midst of these attempts, Sri Lanka also set up the “Office for Reparations” (OR) under Act, No. 34 of 2018 and the Office on Missing Persons (OMP).

The stated Objective of OR was the recognition given by the Act to “a comprehensive reparations scheme anchored in the rights of all Sri Lankans to an effective remedy will contribute to the promotion of reconciliation for the wellbeing and security of all Lankans, including future generations”. Whether these Offices were set up with the conscious intention of focusing on the PRESENT while continuing to engage with Retributive Justice mechanisms that focus on the PAST, is not known.

The title of the 2018 Act states:

“AN ACT TO PROVIDE FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE OFFICE FOR

REPARATIONS; TO IDENTIFY AGGRIEVED PERSONS ELIGIBLE FOR

REPARATIONS, AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE PROVISION OF INDIVIDUAL

AND COLLECTIVE REPARATIONS TO SUCH PERSONS…”;

Its Vision is: “To create Reconciliation among Nationalities and ensure Human Rights through Economic and Social Prosperity”.

Its Objectives are:

1. To formulate and recommend to the Cabinet of Ministers, policies on reparations to grant individual and collective reparations to aggrieved persons.

2. To facilitate and implement such policies on reparations as approved by the Cabinet of Ministers, by the office for Reparations, including specialised policies on public education, memorialisation and on children, youths, women and victims of sexual violence and persons with disabilities.

3. To establish links to ensure the compatibility of the office for reparations with other mechanisms aimed at reconciliation.

4. To monitor and evaluate the progress of delivery of reparations to eligible aggrieved persons

GRANTS TO FAMILIES OF MISSING PERSONS

“The (OR) makes monetary grants to victims of conflict as a form of reparations. The focus of the OR is to assist aggrieved persons (victims) in ways that will provide meaningful assistance that is sustainable. Hence, the grant is not intended to serve as compensation but is given as a form of monetary relief. Families of missing persons are included in Livelihood development programmes, with particular focus on women who are heads of households”.

“Families of missing persons are among those to whom monetary grants are made by the OR on receipt of confirmation from the Office on Missing Persons (OMP) that the person is in fact missing. In terms of section 11(a) of the OR Act No. 34 of 2018, the OR is empowered to “receive recommendations with regard to reparations to be made to aggrieved persons, from the Office on Missing Persons.”

“Since the year 2022, the OR has received recommendations from the OMP to make payments to claimants in respect of a family member who they confirm are missing, after the conduct of an inquiry by the OMP into complaints made to the OMP by the family member (a claimant). The sum granted is Rs. 200,000/= per missing person, and is the same as the sum granted to applicants who make direct requests to the OR for monetary relief on the basis of the death of a family member”.

The three-step procedure followed by the OR on receiving the recommendation from the OMP is as follows-

STEP 1- OBTAINING INFORMATION FROM FAMILY:

“The letter received from the OMP confirms that the person named therein is reported missing, based on documents produced to the OMP, and recommends that a payment be made to the complainant named therein.

The information in the letter is sometimes inadequate to affirm the identity of the missing person and ascertain whether any previous grants have already been made to the family of that person on a direct application made to the OR. Hence the OR proceeds to obtain necessary information from the OMP and/or the complainant regarding – (1) the identity of the claimant and the missing person (Name, address, NIC number if available), to check from the OR information system whether a payment has been made previously and (2) the Bank Account to which the grant money should be remitted.

Where appropriate, the OR requests an affidavit from the claimant to state that no member of the family has previously received any payment on account of the death of that family member. A template of the Affidavit is provided by the OR”.

STEP 2 –

Processing the claim on receiving information.

STEP 3 –

Remittance of grant money to claimant.

CONCLUSION

With the conclusion of the Armed Conflict in Sri Lanka in May 2009, the approach to Reconciliation recommended Internationally, by the UNHRC, and by some Sri Lankans, was to address accountability for violations committed during and after the conflict through mechanisms of Retributive Justice that involve investigations, evidence gathering followed by prosecution. Over the years, Sri Lanka has laboured under these pressures without any meaningful outcomes as far as Reconciliation is concerned. This has been the experience with other countries as well.

The primary reason for this being the inability to gather credible evidence associated with violations committed over the PAST 16 to 30 years for Reconciliation to be meaningful. Furthermore, since the process is time consuming, the impression created is that no Government is serious about Reconciliation. This has left the survivors of all communities frustrated and disappointed in respect of their emotional and physical aspects of living in the PRESENT.

In the meantime, Sri Lanka set up the Office for Reparations (OR) and Office on Missing Persons (OMP) in 2018. Over the last seven years, these Offices have been working in the shadows, focusing on the physical needs and priorities of the survivors with a focus on the PRESENT and not on the PAST. This enables visible and tangible benefits to the survivors which is far more meaningful to their daily physical living with feedbacks to their emotional wellbeing, as well, than attempting to uncover the TRUTH of what took place decades ago. However, the need to expand the mandate of the OR to cover the development of Policies that address the causes that initiated the conflict is imperative.

Hence, the present Government should make the expanded Objectives of the OR the theme of their model for Reconciliation because the relevance of the PRESENT has its roots in meditation that promotes living in the PRESENT as being the most rewarding for human wellbeing. This model should first be discussed with a representative group of communities in Sri Lanka followed by first presenting it to the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk, during his visit to Sri Lanka, and then to the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva as a Resolution for acceptance.

by Neville Ladduwahetty

Continue Reading

Features

Unique mashup cover…

Published

on

Mayuka Aparnatha may not be seen and heard in all parts of the country, performing live on stage, but he is certainly a star on social media, and has done modelling, as well – both ramp and photographic.

His preference, at the moment, he says, is to work on cover songs, adding that he does his covers with a touch of his own.

His latest song is titled ‘Asai Mannam’ and it has just been released. It is his fourth cover and also marks his first-ever mashup.

According to Mayuka, ‘Asai Mannam’ is a unique Sinhalese interpretation of the South Indian hit ‘Asa Kooda’ by Sai Abhyankkar and Sai Smriti.

“I consider this cover special because it’s a mashup with the song ‘Ma Diha’ by Dilu Beats. To my knowledge, this is the first-ever Sinhala cover of ‘Asa Kooda.’”

Mayuka’s musical journey began when he was very young.

Mayuka in action in the ‘Asai Mannam’ video

“Coming from a musical family, where my grandparents were involved in stage and drama, I naturally gravitated toward singing. I took part in inter-school competitions, as a child, and was fortunate to win a few. It has always been my dream to become a singer.”

Mayuka says he received formal training at KK Music, adding that he began making his music by starting with cover songs on YouTube.

Prior to ‘Asai Mannam,’ he has released three other covers, which are also available on his YouTube channel – MAYUKA.

Of course, one would say that the turning point in his musical career was when he participated in The Voice Sri Lanka, aired on Sirasa TV, and competed under Coach Raini’s team. He progressed until the battle rounds.

“Being a part of that show was a dream come true and something I can proudly tick off my bucket list.”

Mayuka went on to say that creating this official cover and music video of ‘Asai Mannam’ has been a rewarding experience.

“Music has always helped me through emotional and mental challenges, and I sincerely hope my songs can do the same for others, whether by healing, comforting, or simply bringing joy.”

Says Mayuka: “I’m deeply grateful to everyone who has supported me so far. I hope those who resonate with my style will continue to listen, and I look forward to sharing more music with you in the future.

“I’m also incredibly grateful to be featured in The Island newspaper. Thank you so much for the support.”

Continue Reading

Trending