Connect with us

Features

The child is a person

Published

on

Our attention has been refocussed on the LGBTQI + issue in recent times, and more so after the unambiguous and categorical statement made by the Archbishop of Colombo, Macolm Cardinal Ranjith a few days ago.

In The Sunday Island lead news item on 17 August, he is quoted as saying among other things, “A group of psychologists are issuing certificates that allow children to change their gender identity”. And then he has gone on to homosexuality – as “a danger to our younger generation”. He has further claimed that certain political parties and their leaders were involved in promoting this agenda.

As a medical academic, I have advocated that any human sexual activity is acceptable between consenting adults – with absolute emphasis on ‘consenting’, the issues of same gender sex is not at issue where I am concerned. It is a matter of private personal preference and choice between consenting adults.

But I am very much concerned about an emerging trend that to me, to say the least, is highly alarming. That is, the strong emerging trends of transsexualism pervading the West and the pharma-politico-financial backing it is receiving in recent times. There is now a backlash on men trying to be women and taking advantage of the situation in invading ‘private places’ previously dedicated to women, and legal encroachment in individual and team sports. The worst aspect of it is the encroachment of these powerful corporate social segments on the Rights of the Child.

In this narrative, what I will attempt to do is make a few random ‘brush strokes’ on the large canvas of the current scenery on the ‘Child as a Person’ that may paint an abstract picture of this subject. You may see a pattern, or you may not. It will be in the eyes of the beholder.

“The child is the father of the man.”

Wrote William Wordsworth – in his 1802 poem, “My Heart Leaps Up”.

On first reading of this old aphorism, it seems a confounding paradoxical statement. What did the poet mean when he used this confusing idea? It is said that he meant that the foundation of our adult personalities is laid during our childhood. But is it really so? As a child grows into adulthood, he/she will gradually lose the curiosity and the sense of wonder about the world. The child gradually begins to conform to the dictates of society, beginning with the dictates of parents. Then comes the restraining confines of school discipline about which Ivan Illych wrote in his path-breaking book “Deschooling Society” in 1970 – 55 years ago! Schools as mass collective education catering to the lowest common denominator. But, on the other hand, it is my view, that the basic core attitudes of an individual are first formed at home. It is from the home that one will learn the rudiments of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ or of ‘right’ and ‘wrong’. That is often why, some children who come from dysfunctional family backgrounds, whatever later attempts are made, end up in anti-social circumstances.

What we can learn from this thought from Wordsworth is that even as early as the beginning of the 19th century, the importance of childhood in the future development of the adult had been appreciated. What it certainly does is to put our topic of the day – “The child is a person” in perspective. In other words, Wordsworth’s idea, enhances our topic of the day.

The recognition that ‘the child is a person’ is a necessary precondition to accept that the child is the future.

This saying attributed to Abraham Lincoln:

“A child is a person who is going to carry on what you have started … the fate of humanity is in his hands.”

Perhaps he was the first to use the title of this article. When I chose it, I did not know that Abraham Lincoln had use the phrase before. There is another proverb that is more telling – and perhaps for that reason, remains anonymous:

“He who takes a child by the hand, takes the future by the scruff of its neck!”

This leaves us with little doubt about the importance of the child as a person. But before that, let us ask another question, rhetorically: ‘When does a child become an individual?’. ‘When does a child become a person?

Here, we get into serious controversy. The multiple issues of ‘the embryo, the foetus and the unborn child’, reproductive rights, women’s rights and their socio-religious implications fall upon us like a ton of bricks. For example, are the words ‘foetus’, ‘unborn child’ and ‘unborn baby’ interchangeable? Are there any differences between these words and their usage? Are they mere semantics that no subtle importance need be attached to them? Does it depend only on the perspective of the person who uses them? Let us leave aside such complexities for our purpose of this article. Let us be aware that there are areas that “even angels fear to tread”. But we will bear those issues in mind, nevertheless.

Capacity of children to make legal decisions.

I wouldn’t want to delve into ‘foetal rights’ at this point as it is voluminous enough for books and volumes by itself. Therefore, we plunge straight into ‘child rights’ though ‘foetal rights’ is necessarily and conceptually the basis of ‘Child Rights’.

The child’s wishes and decisions in the family courts, for example. It was long thought that a child lacked legal capacity to give valid consent in law regarding decisions such as consenting to medical procedures. Therefore, the capacity to make decisions and act in the child’s best interest was vested in their parent or guardian. These parental powers existed until the child attained legal adulthood.

The current approach views parental powers in a different way: they establish that these are effective only so long as they are needed for the protection of the person and property of the child. Therefore, it is no longer the accepted rule that children remain under parental control until they are of a certain age. At some point of the child’s life, the parental right yields to the child’s right to decide for him or herself. However, this is increasingly seen by the courts as an incremental process, in the course of which, the child’s independence and ability to make decisions grow, while the extent of the parental responsibilities and right to decision-making gradually diminish.

In England and Wales, the term ‘Gillick competence’ is used in medical law to decide whether a child under the age of 16 is able to consent to their own medical treatment, without the need for parental permission or knowledge.

By the way, ‘The Gillick case’ involved a UK health departmental (NHS) circular advising doctors on the contraception of minors (for this purpose, under sixteens). The circular stated that the prescription of contraception was a matter for the doctor’s discretion and that they could be prescribed to under sixteens without parental consent. This matter was litigated because an activist, Victoria Gillick, ran an active campaign against the policy. Gillick sought a declaration that prescribing contraception was illegal because the doctor would commit an offence of encouraging sex with a minor (which in Sri Lanka, is statutory rape) and that it would be treatment without consent as consent in this aspect should be vested in the parent; she was unsuccessful before the High Court but succeeded in the Court of Appeal.)

It means that the legal authority for parents to make medical decisions on behalf of their children is revoked when the child reaches sufficient maturity to make their own decisions. There is no hard-and-fast age at which a child can be considered ‘Gillick competent’, and it is something decided on a case-by-case basis.

Gender Dysphoria

This is an area in which I want to invest some extra time during this narrative; on what I believe is an issue that is heavily laden with controversy. Serious current controversy. Here, whether the child is a person, and what decision-making role they can play, at what age, which is critical for their future personal identity, come into serious contention.

Specialist paediatricians in Sri Lanka should be very much aware of this relatively new phenomenon. Which to my mind, is a frightening development where paediatricians and child psychiatrists are at the epicentre of this global controversy. Perhaps, it is not quite correct for me to call it global. Perhaps, not yet.

It is still very much a subject of medical controversy in the West including Australia. But the fall out may not be too far in coming to our shores. And paediatricians, must be fully cognisant of all issues concerned and policy decisions taken in this regard at the level of professional bodies as well as at the Ministry of Health.

Where should I begin?

I wouldn’t want to get into the debatable area of biological sex. Whether there are six of them (as is now classified) or less. But we can simplify by making them three. Male, female and all others lumped into the category – intersex. Intersex being individuals born with any of several variations in sex characteristics including chromosomes, gonads, sex hormones or genitals that, according to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, “do not fit the typical definitions for male or female bodies“.

One of the most famous intersex personalities of recent times was Caster Semenya, the South African middle-distance runner and 2016 Olympic gold medalist in the 800 metres, who was assigned as a female at birth with naturally elevated testosterone levels due to an enzyme (5α-Reductase) deficiency. In a landmark case for athletes’ rights, Caster Semenya, the star South African runner, won her case at the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) on July 10, 2025. “Caster Semenya’s victory is a victory for all women and all athletes because the European Court found that the Court of Arbitration for Sport and Swiss Federal Tribunal had failed to uphold human rights norms despite credible claims of discrimination.” reported Human Rights Watch. But our issue here today, is not about intersex.

But I am digressing.

From biological sex, we get into “gender assignment”. Gender assignment is the discernment (subjective judgement) of an infant’s sex at birth. Assignment may be done prior to birth through prenatal sex discernment – as is commonly done now by obstetricians by ultra sound scans. In the majority of births, it is a relative, a midwife, a nurse or a physician who inspects the genitalia when the baby is delivered, and sex or gender is assigned without any expectation of ambiguity. The global number of births with ambiguous genitals is in the range of 0.02% to 0.05%.

If it was only such cases of ‘intersex’, that has aroused controversy, that would be a non-issue. As we come to understand, it goes far beyond that. For instance, a whimsical comment by a female child “I am a boy” would be enough to register her in a gender dysphoria clinic to be kept under observation for later interventions to change her ‘birth gender’.

In consequence, what was once straight forward biological sex determined on a biological construct has changed to a very fluid ‘social construct’. A child’s sex or gender is increasingly being determined by societal imperatives and not biological analysis.

Gender dysphoria has been broadly stated as ‘the sense of unease arising from one’s physical sexual characteristics which are not aligning with one’s gender identity’.

Today, increasingly, gender identity is the personal sense of one’s own gender. Gender identity can correlate with a person’s assigned sex at birth or can differ from it. ‘Gender expression’ typically reflects a person’s gender identity. New terminology is coming into this gender lexicon – for instance, “body-ownership networks”. The factors that determine gender is no longer chromosomes or genes. There are many determinants. Here is the least complex interpretation of what is now termed the ‘Sense of Gender’ – diagrammatically. (See diagram)

As can be seen, gender identity is becoming highly complex in today’s world.

Puberty Blockers

The mainstay of conservative management of, and treatment for, gender dysphoria is puberty blockers. I am not sure how many of our paediatricians are into this, as of now.

You know that the so-called puberty blockers, known formally as gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists, are medications that cause the body to stop producing sex hormones. They are delivered either as injections (also used in breast and prostate cancer treatment), which are administered by a healthcare worker every three months, or via an implant, which needs to be replaced annually.

For ‘transgender children’, taking these drugs will prevent breast tissue development and menstruation, or the growth of facial hair and a deepening voice. The effects of drugs are completely reversible, and if a person stops taking them their body will resume sex hormone production as it had done before they started.

Why might a child want puberty blockers? Because the child is unsure of its gender preference. The monitoring of such children has begun, in some instances, when they were as young as 4 years old. Puberty blockers are commenced sometimes soon after puberty (ages 12-14) when they have begun producing sperms and ova (when, they can be frozen for future fertility) or even before when they lose their fertility options! The controversial issue in this is who will be the decision-maker in this process? The child or the parents?

Dianna Kenny, Professor of Psychology, consulting psychologist, psychotherapist University of Sydney who has collected data on children enrolled in gender dysphoria clinics has discovered the emergence of a ‘new pandemic’. The statistics are alarming. There has been a dramatic increase in the number of children enrolled in gender dysphoria clinics since 2019.

Social Contagion

Diana Kenny in an article titled “Is gender dysphoria socially contagious?” explores the influence of ‘social contagion’ on what she calls “the disquieting upsurge in the number of children and young people whose parents are presenting to gender clinics around the world for advice regarding social transition, puberty blocking agents, cross sex hormones, and ultimately surgery in an attempt to change their gender.”

Evidence has been quoted of children prompted into what is now termed “rapid-onset gender dysphoria” by peer pressures. After the article on the subject by Dr. Lisa Littman of Brown University was first published, there was a ‘mob reaction’ by transgender activists who denounced the paper calling it hate speech and transphobic. The gender dysphoria issue has turned not only political, but disquietingly aggressive. Increasingly, younger and younger children are not just being given, but driven, to ‘radical surgical treatment’ for gender dysphoria.

In this context, let me digress a bit to relieve the monotony.

Lisa Marchiano, a Yungian psychoanalyst in Philadelphia, in her article titled “Outbreak: On Transgender Teens and Psychic Epidemics” published in ‘Psychological Perspectives’ – a Quarterly Journal of Yungian Thought in 2017 (Carl Yung) – writes this interesting historical aside:

“The earliest written record from the town of Hamelin in Lower Saxony is from 1384. It states simply, “It is 100 years since our children left.” Historical accounts indicate that sometime in the 13th century, a large number of the town’s children disappeared or perished, though the details of the event remain a mystery. “The Pied Piper of Hamelin”, as far I as have been able to determine, is the only Grimm’s fairy tale that is based substantially on a historical event. Both the actual event and the Grimm’s tale suggest an archetypal situation in which adults have allowed children to be seduced away into peril. This tale is a disconcertingly apt metaphor for various social contagions that have overtaken collective life throughout the centuries.”

William Manchester’s ‘A World Lit Only by Fire’ places the events in 1484, 100 years after the written mention in the town chronicles that “It is 100 years since our children left”, and further proposes that the Pied Piper was a psychopathic paedophile.

Now that is an interesting perspective on the children who followed the pied piper into oblivion. Is this what today’s adults are doing to our children. Taking decisions for them and taking them away into a “gender land of no return”? Decisions that could often irreversibly disturb their lives – psychologically? As some have said – ‘Seduce them into peril’??

The case against Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust

A UK News report dated Oct 7, 2020, describes a landmark case that will be heard in High Court about whether children who wish to undergo gender reassignment should be prescribed “experimental” puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones.

Kiera Bell, a 23-year-old woman who began taking puberty blockers when she was 16 before “detransitioning” last year – i.e., going back to being a girl, is suing the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust, which runs the UK’s only gender identity development service (GIDS) for children.

The legal challenge is also being brought by Mrs A, the mother of a 16-year-old autistic girl who is currently on the waiting list for treatment.

In January 2021, the pair were given the go-ahead to bring the action against the trust after claiming that the way informed consent is obtained from children is “materially misleading”.

At the hearing in London, Ms Bell and Mrs A’s lawyers will argue that children under the age of 18 cannot give “informed consent” to treatment which has “irreversible, lifelong consequences”.

Professor Carl James Heneghan, a clinical epidemiologist and a Fellow of Kellogg College, Oxford and the Director of the University of Oxford’s Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine and Editor-in-Chief of BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine has called the use of puberty blockers to treat transgender children an “unregulated live experiment on children.”

It was reported that in 2019 five clinicians working at the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust in London in the United Kingdom (UK) resigned, and one of the governors of the Trust also resigned. Among other reasons, they adduced that puberty ‘blockers’ are prescribed experimentally to gender diverse youth, without sufficiently robust evidence around efficacy and safety, and without sufficiently robust diagnosis.

Other countries….

Under some of the proposed new laws across the United States, doctors could be barred from prescribing puberty-blocking drugs to children. A measure introduced in South Carolina last year would revoke the licenses of doctors who treat transgender children.

Meanwhile, the South Dakota legislature voted down a bill that will see doctors charged with a misdemeanour if they prescribe puberty blockers. The Republican state representative Fred Deutsch, who sponsored the bill, said on Twitter ahead of the vote on Feb. 10, 2020: “The world is upside-down; protecting children from sterilization and mutilation is causing a firestorm,”

The issue has spilled beyond the borders of the United States, with many countries mulling new laws preventing poorly discriminated decisions on prescribing puberty blockers for children.

On the other hand, Brazil lowered the age at which young people can access gender reassignment surgery from 21 to 18 and dropped the age requirement for hormone therapy from 18 to 16 – although those under 18 must have the consent of a parent or guardian.

There are other connected and important issues. One is:

The gender dysphoria epidemic and the vested interests of the medico-pharma-insurance industry is quite similar to the ADHD medication controversy, of the recent past.

The debates and controversies go on. The paediatric endocrinologists, child psychologists and transgender surgeons are teeming on either side of the barricades – where, and on what side would you stand? The ‘child as a person’ seems to have been lost in this medical / legal battle ground.

I hope with these ‘brush strokes’ of information, I have adequately covered the topic that I ventured to write on, mainly due to the emergence of discussions on transgenderism and gender dysphoria that seems to be slowly, but surreptitiously, creeping into our legal system under the coercive influence of multiple Western agencies such as the UNHRC and the IMF. The complexities of this developing socio-political-legalistic phenomenon is both bewildering and frightening.

Are there conditions and constraints to ‘The child being a person’? Here are some concluding thoughts, not as conclusions, but as questions.

· When would a child be considered ‘Gillick competent’ in Sri Lanka?

· Will adults allow a child to decide on its own gender identity?

· Should adults decide that their child is a male or female before the child can decide for itself?

· Is it ethical to offer a child the option of gender surgery against the will of their parents as is being done in some centres in the West now?

· Where does society draw the line on when a child becomes a person?

· When does a child become a person?

· When will adults allow a child to be a person?

· When should adults allow a child to be a person?

I am not sure what kind of reaction I will have from Paediatricians and Child Psychiatrists in Sri Lanka to this narrative as there are strongly contrary positions taken by them the world over. Will the outcome of these controversies determine the future of humans as a thriving species?

Questions and more questions for both the legal and medical professionals. In the final analysis, I am leaving you with more questions than answers. In a world that has, in many ways, turned itself upside down, that would not be too surprising, would it?

(I have taken extensive extracts for this article from my presentation for the Dr. BJC Perera Research Prize Oration 2020, Sri Lanka College of Paediatricians.)

by Dr. Susirith Mendis ✍️
Emeritus Professor
University of Ruhuna
(susmend2610@gmail.com)



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Features

Lunatics of genius

Published

on

Brahms and Simon

Tales of Mystery and Suspense 2

A very different sort of murder mystery today, one of the few intended to provide laughter too. Written in the thirties, it deals with a murder during a ballet, its title being A Bullet at the Ballet. It was a collaborative effort by Caryl Brahms and S J Simon, to whom I was introduced nearly half a century ago by Robert Scoble, the friend with whom I have discussed and shared books more than with anyone else.

Brahms was a ballet critic whose parents were Jews who had emigrated to Britain from Turkey while Simon was born in Manchuria in 1904 to a White Russian Jewish family, and then ended up in England, where he was renowned as an expert on bridge.

Having been fellow lodgers in London, they wrote together for newspapers and then tried out a novel. A Bullet in the Ballet, published in 1937, was an instant success, and over the next few years they published a couple of sequels, involving the Ballet Stroganoff, and the detective Adam Quill, who was tasked with investigating the first murder.

Brahms and Simon

In Robert’s Books and other reading around the world, published by Godage & Bros a few years back, I mentioned the first of these and also what then entertained me most, when I read these books in his luxurious flat in Chidlom Place in Bangkok, No Bed for Bacon, a romp through the days of Queen Elizabeth. Historical absurdities were their other forte, but in this series, I will confine myself to the three books that feature Quill, and the gloriously dotty Ballet Stroganoff.

It is owned by the impresario Vladimir Stroganoff, whose motley crew includes the once renowned ballerina Arenskaya, who is now his trainer, and the avant garde composer Nicolas Nevajno, who wants anyone, as he meets them, ‘to schange me small scheque’. The dancers are less memorable, except that two of them are the murder victims, both when dancing the title role in ‘Petroushka’. Neither Anton Palook nor Pavel Bunia was especially popular, and Quill was on the point of arresting the latter for the murder of the former when, having put it off at Stroganoff’s request so that he could dance the title role, the suspect was killed in the course of the ballet.

Both before and after the second murder, Quill is confronted with multiple motives, multiple means and multiple opportunities, to cite the formula in the Detective’s Handbook he has studied. Palook for instance had affairs with lots of girls but had recently taken up with the homosexual Pavel, whose lover, his dresser Serge Appelsinne, was profoundly jealous. The young dancers who performed brilliantly in the final performance of Petroushka, with which the novel ends, were also involved, in that Palook had been friendly towards Kasha Ranevsky, making Pavel jealous; and the ballerina Rubinska, involved with Palook, had tried to wean him away from Pavel, an appeal Pavel may have heard, after which she met Palook again just before he died, and he had said he was sick of being chased since his affairs were never lasting.

Preposterous intricacies one might have thought, had I not come across similar exchanges when we hosted the London City Ballet in Sri Lanka in 1985 on a British Council tour. Brahms and Simon simply push everything well over the top, with the characters pursuing their own obsessions without reference to the predilections, let alone the obsessions, of the others, all of which makes for high drama at a cracking pace.

But in dwelling at length on the plot of this first Brahms and Simon novel, I have omitted what perhaps provides the most zest to the plot, the constant bickering between Stroganoff and his orchestra, his efforts to avoid his relentlessly talkative Secretary, the endless stream of catch phrases, such as the Wiskyansoda Stroganoff offers his visitors, only to find there is none, just Russian tea, or the vigilant mothers determined to bag the best roles for their daughters.

Then there is Arenskaya, who flirts with the incredibly handsome Quill, and turns out to have had an affair years back with his boss, the usually grumpy Snarl, who softens surprisingly when he comes to a performance. And her husband, Puthyk, who was not at all jealous it seemed of her having had an affair with Palook, reminisces endlessly of his own wonderful performances in the past, though now at most he can only be used in crowd scenes.

Quill – and the ubiquitous press – meanwhile discover that a third Petroushka had died while playing the role, in Paris, before the two deaths in London. He had been found dead in his dressing room, and suicide had been the verdict, but now it was assumed that he too had been murdered, and there was thought to be a jinx on anyone dancing the title role. But Stroganoff was determined to go ahead with the gala performance he had planned, for which he hoped Benois, who had been involved in the original production with Njinsky, would come.

Though it was increasingly clear Benois would not appear, with tickets selling like hot cakes, in anticipation of a death, there was no way Stroganoff would cancel the performance. And his great rival Lord Buttonhooke, the newspaper proprietor, who it was rumoured wanted to start a ballet and had persuaded Palook to come over to him, had headlines about another murder all ready as the curtain rose.

Rubinskaya had earlier begged Quill to arrest Ranevsky, who was to dance the roll, as the only way of saving him, but there is no reason to do this, and so the performance does happen, with inspired performances by both of them. And, so, the murderer, who could not bear to have the role traduced, refrains from killing Ranevsky, and confesses to the earlier crimes. ‘Lord Buttonhooke strode from the theatre, a disappointed man’.

But that is not the end, for there is an epilogue in which Stroganoff writes to Quill to plead for kindness to ‘not an assassin, but an artist, that you have put in that pretty home in Sussex’. The letter has other elements that take up themes from the book, such as a new ballet by Nevajno, with ‘a scene where the corps de ballet is shot with a machine-gun. London will be shaken.’ And he will not tell Kasha and Rubinska that they dance better every day ‘lest their mother ask for bigger contracts’.

It was no wonder that the book was a triumph. The ballet scenes, if brilliantly exaggerated, did create a sense of how such spectacles were created, the murder mystery was full of suspense with the two deaths – and the discovery of another, treated earlier as suicide – well paced, and the climax when the ballet ends without another murder was gripping.

Continue Reading

Features

Mysterious Death of United Nations Secretary General Hammarskjöld

Published

on

Wrekage

LEST WE FORGET – IV

Dag Hjalmar Agne Carl Hammarskjöld

(‘DH’ for short) was appointed Secretary-General of the United Nations in April 1953, when he was 47 years old. He was a member of an aristocratic Swedish family, a diplomat and reformer, in whom the Western world and United States of America had faith to do the ‘right’ thing. His mission was to prevent minor skirmishes among countries from escalating into a third World War. In short, his role was to implement the UN Charter (Peace, Security, Development and Human Rights).

The Korean War was just ending, and the Cuban situation (1956 to 1958) occurred during his watch. The Vietnam North/South conflict had also commenced in 1955. So did the Suez crisis in 1956. By 1960 another crisis had occurred in the Congo. He applied himself with religious zeal, sometimes trusting his conscience, judgement and personal commitment to maintain the UN’s integrity during the Cold War. As a result, he was not too popular with the US, the UK and Russia, which at one point wanted him to resign. By now DH was serving a second term as Secretary-General.

In the Congo, mineral-rich Katanga province wanted self-rule with Moïse Tshombe as its head, while highly paid white mercenaries (dogs of war?) ran his military. Thus, with this situation creating a civil war, things were going from bad to worse. By now UN troops were fully involved in ‘peace keeping’ in the Congo. DH had made three trips to Congo before, and his fourth trip, on September 13, 1961, was to include a visit to Katanga for a meeting with Tshombe in the hope of negotiating for peace. His first destination was Leopoldville, now known as Kinshasa, the capital of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). There, he spent about four days before flying to Ndola in Northern Rhodesia, the country now known as Zambia. Ndola was situated at the Katanga border.

The flight took off from Leopoldville shortly after 3 pm on September 17. For security reasons, the flight was initially planned for another destination, then diverted to Ndola. The aircraft was a four-engine Douglas DC-6B, with ‘Aramco’ markings, Swedish registration SE-BDY, and named Albertina. With DH there were 15 other passengers and crew on board.

It was midnight when the aircraft overflew the Ndola airport, tracking towards a ground-based Non-Directional radio beacon (NDB) in the vicinity. To observers on the ground, everything about the aircraft looked ‘normal’. This was 1961, and it was still not mandatory to have a Flight Data Recorder (FDR) and Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) – collectively known as the ‘Black Box’ – installed onboard. The air traffic control tower had neither radar nor voice-recording facilities.

The navigational equipment on the DC-6 was primitive by today’s standards. A needle over a compass dial in the Automatic Direction Finder (ADF) pointed to the beacon which was located close to the final approach. The ‘modus operandi’ was to fly past the beacon (which is at a known position relative to the airport). Pilots know they have flown past the beacon when the ADF needle swings around from pointing toward the nose of the aircraft to the tail. From overhead that Ndola NDB the aircraft is expected to fly on a heading of 280 degrees for 30 seconds, then carry out a course reversal, known as a ‘procedure turn’, offset to the right at 45 degrees (heading of 325 degrees) and flown for precisely 60 seconds, after which another turn is made to the reciprocal direction, in this case 145 degrees, back to intercept the extended centreline of the runway, with a bearing of 100 degrees to the NDB and the runway beyond. All this while descending to a minimum altitude of 5,000ft, as dictated by a landing chart for the airfield approved by the operating airline and local civil aviation authority. (See Chart 1 and 2)

In Chart 1, the significant high ground is only indicated to the north and south of the runway. There is no significant high ground to the west. Because pilots don’t know the exact distance from the airport, an acceptable technique used was ‘dive and drive’. Consequently, Albertina flew over Ndola at 6,000 ft or lower, and when turning ‘beacon inbound’ the pilots asked for a lower altitude of 5,000 ft to descend and maintain. While on descent, the DC-6 impacted unmarked high ground at 13 minutes past midnight, when only 9 miles from the airport.

Meanwhile in Ndola, a welcoming party awaited, consisting of Lord Alport, British High Commissioner to the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland, Moïse Tshombe, the Katangese separatist leader, who had been brought in from Congo for talks with DH, and many others. They waited at the airport until shortly after 3 am, when the runway was closed and landing lights were turned off. Strangely, the air traffic control staff in the tower did not observe fire or noise of the crash and assumed that the aircraft had diverted to another airport. (See Image Wreckage)

The impact with trees occurred at a height of 4,357 ft above sea level, slightly left of the extended centreline of the runway. The aircraft should have been at least at 5,000 ft above sea level, as required by the approved landing chart. Significant high ground west of the airfield was not indicated in that chart.

The wreckage was found later in the afternoon of September 18, in the jungle, with over 80% of the airplane destroyed by fire. Although 14 passengers and crew were burnt beyond recognition, one bodyguard, Sergeant Harold Julien, survived for six days before dying in hospital. DH’s unburnt dead body was discovered with grass on his hands, propped up by an anthill and a playing card, the Ace of Spades, under his collar! The first UN officer to arrive at the crash site, Major General Bjørn Egge, a Norwegian, observed that there was a clean bullet hole in DH’s head that was covered up during the postmortem. So, did DH survive the crash to be killed afterward?

In the 24 hours preceding the crash, two of the three crew members had been on duty continuously for 17 hours, while the handling pilot’s duty time was within limits. The Rhodesian accident investigation team that conducted the inquiry declared it was ‘pilot error’. The following day, former US President Harry Truman, who was a confidant of incumbent President John F. Kennedy said that “Hammarskjöld had been killed”. Of course, pilot error was the most convenient explanation, because dead men cannot defend themselves. Therefore, those findings were disputed as there can be reasons why the pilots were forced to fly low. In other words, the cause behind the cause needed to be found.

In one of two UN-authorised inquiries, the UN’s Deputy Spokesperson, Farhan Haq, said that “significant new information” had been submitted to the inquiry for this latest update. This included probable intercepts by the UN member states, of communications related to the crash; the capacity of Katanga’s armed forces, or others, to mount an attack on the DC-6, SE-BDY; and the involvement of foreign paramilitary or intelligence personnel in the area at the time. It also included additional new information relevant to the context and surrounding events of 1961.

Additionally, in 1998 Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Chairman of South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), stated that with regards to DH’s death in 1961, Britain’s MI5 (Military Intelligence, Section 5), the USA’s Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and South African Intelligence were implicated in letters where information was withheld before by member nations of the UN.

One possibility was the planting of plastic explosives in the wheel bay of the DC-6 when it was on the ground in Leopoldville. Pieces of wreckage were not spread out over the jungle. The aircraft crashed in one piece, creating a swathe in the treeline. So, it could not have been an explosion.

Many Congolese natives, including ‘charcoal burners’ in the jungle, said that there was more than one aircraft in the sky that night. These reports were dismissed as unreliable by the original accident inquiry. It was possibly because in 1961 the Rhodesian authorities only accepted ‘white’ witnesses’ evidence. So, was the DC-6 shot down, and if so by whom?

A High Frequency (HF) radio listening station in Cyprus monitored a transmission of a highly decorated, ex-Royal Air Force World War II pilot, operating in the Congo as a mercenary with the nickname ‘Lone Ranger’, giving a running commentary while shooting a large passenger aircraft from his modified Fouga CM.170 Magister two-seat jet trainer airplane. The pilot, Jan Van Risseghem (from a Belgian father and English mother), may not have known whose aircraft he was shooting at. He was only told of the mission he needed to accomplish. Besides, he had a strong alibi set up by the Belgian State Security Service (VSSE), saying that he was nowhere in the vicinity. Documents released later confirmed that the alibi was pure fabrication. It is also said that the American Ambassador to the Congo sent a secret cable saying that Van Risseghem was the possible ‘attacker’! (See Images Jan Van and KAT 93)

Harold Julien, the sole survivor of the crash, stated from his hospital bed that the aircraft caught fire before it crashed. But his evidence was disregarded on the grounds that he was seriously ill and delirious before he succumbed to his injuries.

Then, Land Rovers being driven to and fro were observed by natives in the early morning of September 18. This led to speculation that the occupants were suspected French mercenaries attempting to reach the crash site and destroy any evidence of foul play before the official party arrived. Questions were also asked as to how the Ace of Spades (or Six of Spades) playing card ended up under DH’s collar?

Further reports mentioned a de Havilland Dove aircraft flying in the vicinity of the crash. Was it part of an attempt to bomb the DC-6 from a high altitude?

On the other hand, the DC-6 was making a very difficult approach and landing at night, with the possibility for pilots to be distracted by optical illusions. These have been identified and labeled as potential killers by scientists and aviation accident investigators in subsequent crashes. With no lights in the foreground, they would have lost sight of the natural horizon in the dark. Years later, this phenomenon was called a ‘Black Hole’. Did the captain attempt to do a visual approach into uncharted territory, while disregarding the radio navigational beacon landing aid, and collide into high ground, a type of accident described as a Controlled Flight into Terrain (CFIT)?

The verdict is still open

Today’s airliners, equipped with Inertial Navigation Systems (INS) and satellite-aided Global Positioning Systems (GPS), can be set up by the pilots to fly an Artificial Intelligence (AI) generated approach angle, independent of ground navigational facilities, to prevent this type of CFIT accident. Besides that, all turbine-powered aircraft carrying more than nine passengers must be equipped with a Ground Proximity Warning System (GPWS) as mandated by law.

Going even one better, there are enhanced radar displays to show the presence of high ground. Unfortunately, the DC-6 that the Secretary-General of the UN travelled in was powered by four piston engines.

It was said of Dag Hammarskjöld that he served as Secretary-General of the UN with the utmost courage and integrity from 1953 until his death in 1961, setting standards against which his successors continue to be measured.

He is the only Nobel Peace Prize Laureate to have been awarded the distinction posthumously.

God bless all secret service agencies of the world and no one else!

by GUWAN SEEYA

Continue Reading

Features

Putting people back into ‘development’ – a challenge for South

Published

on

In need of swift empowerment; working people of Sri Lanka.

Should Sri Lanka consider an 18th IMF programme? Some academicians exploring Sri Lanka’s development prospects in depth are raising this issue. It is yet to emerge as a hot topic among policy and decision-making circles in this country but common sense would sooner rather than later dictate that it be taken up for discussion by the wider public and a decision arrived at.

The issue of an 18th IMF programme was raised with some urgency locally by none other than Dr. Ganeshan Wignaraja,Visiting Senior Fellow, ODI Global London, one of whose presentations, made at the Regional Centre for Strategic Studies (RCSS), Colombo, was highlighted in this column last week, May 7th. An IMF programme is far from the ideal way out for a bankrupt country such as Sri Lanka but a policy of economic pragmatism would indicate that there is no other way out for Sri Lanka. Such a programme is the proverbial ‘Bird in the hand’ for Sri Lanka and it may be compelled to avail of it to get itself out of the morass of economic failures it is bogged down in currently.

While local economic growth possibilities are far from encouraging at present, such prospects globally are far from bright as well. Some of the more thought-provoking data in the latter regard were disclosed by Dr. Wignaraja. For example, ‘The IMF’s April 2026 World Economic Outlook projects global growth slowing to 3.1 percent in 2026; with downside risks dominating: prolonged conflict, geopolitical fragmentation, renewed trade tensions, bearing down hardest on emergent and developing economies.’

However, as is known, an ‘IMF bailout’ is fraught with huge risks for the people of a developing country. ‘The Silver Bullet’ brings hardships for the people usually and they would be required by their governments to increasingly ‘tighten their belts’ and brace for perhaps indefinite material hardships and discontent. For Sri Lanka, the cost of living is unsettlingly high and 20 percent of the population is languishing below the poverty line of $ 3.65 per day.

These statistics should help put the spotlight on the people of a country, who are theoretically the subjects and beneficiaries of development, and one of the main reasons, in so far as democracies are concerned, for the existence of governments. Placing people at the centre of the development process is urgently needed in the global South and shifting the focus to other considerations would be tantamount to governments dabbling in misplaced priorities.

Technocrats are needed for the propelling of economic growth but a Southern country’s main approach to development cannot be entirely technocratic in nature. The well being of the people and how it is affected by such growth strategies need to be prime focuses in discussions on development. Accordingly, discourses on how poverty alleviation could be facilitated need urgent initiation and perpetuation. There is no getting away from people’s empowerment.

In the South over the decades, the above themes have been, more or less, allowed to lapse in discussions on development. With economic liberalization and ‘market economics’ being allowed to eclipse development, correctly understood, people’s well being could be said to have been downplayed by Southern governments.

The development issues of Southern publics could be also said to have been compounded over the years as a result of the hemisphere lacking a single and effective ‘voice’ that could consistently and forcefully take up its questions with the global powers and institutions that matter. That is, the South lacks an all-embracing, umbrella organization that could bring together and muster the collective will of the South and work towards the realization of its best interests.

This columnist has time and again brought up the need for concerned Southern sections to explore the potential within the now virtually moribund Non-Aligned Movement to reactivate itself and fill the above lacuna in the South’s organizational and mobilization capability. In its heyday NAM not only possessed this institutional capability but had ample ‘voice power’ in the form of its founding fathers, with Jawaharlal Nehru of India, for example, proving a power to reckon with in this regard. The lack of such leaders at present needs to be factored in as well as accounting for the South’s lack of power and presence in the deliberative forums of the world that have a bearing on the hemisphere’s well being.

The Executive Director of the RCSS, Ambassador (Retd) Ravinatha Aryasinha, articulated some interesting thoughts on the above and related questions at a forum a couple of months back. Speaking at the launching of the book authored by Prof. Gamini Keerewella titled, ‘Reimagining International Relations from a Global South Perspective’, at the Bandaranaike Centre for International Studies, Colombo, Amb. Aryasinha said, among other things: ‘Historically, there is a precedent that has been realized by the Non-Aligned group of countries – unfortunately, rather than being reformed and modified at the end of the Cold War, it has been tossed away.’

The inability of the nominally existent NAM to come out of its state of veritable paralysis and voice and act in the name of the South in the current international crises lends credence to the view that the organization has allowed itself to be ‘tossed away.’ The challenge before NAM is to prove that it is by no means a spent force.

As indicated, NAM needs vibrant voices that could advocate value-based advancement for the global South. Moral principles need to triumph over Realpolitik. Such transformative changes could come to pass if there is a fresh meeting of enlightened minds within the South. Pakistan by offering to mediate in the ongoing conflict between the US and Iran, for instance, proved that there are still states within the South that could look beyond narrow self-interest and work towards some collective goals. Hopefully, Pakistan’s example will be emulated.

Along with Pakistan some Gulf states have shown willingness to work towards a de-escalation of the present hostilities in West Asia. This could be a beginning for the undertaking of more ambitious, collective projects by the South that have as their goals political solutions to current international crises. These developments prove that the South is not bereft of visionary thinking that could lay the basis for a measure of world peace. That is, there are grounds to be hopeful.

NAM needs to see it as its responsibility to make good use of these hopeful signs to bring the South together once again and work towards the realization of its founding principles, such as initiating value-based international politics and laying the basis for the collective economic betterment of Southern people.

Continue Reading

Trending