CPA at 25: Reform and Reconciliation

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Twenty-Five Years!

 
It has been a long journey of patient plodding and frequent frustration and then, in the memory, a shorter and exciting one too, of upholding principles in public interest litigation, electoral violence and malpractice, the ravages of war, a constitutional coup, death threats and public vilification, amongst other excesses of executive power and authority.

 The Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) was founded in the belief that civil society has an important role to play in the making of public policy. Civil society in this respect is not about capturing state power, but rather about setting an agenda for public policy for the government of the day to adopt and implement and of ensuring a context of rights enjoyment, protection and enhancement, which underpins this. As the title of this volume indicates this is a story of the protection and strengthening of the rights of citizens against violation by the state, of resistance to illiberal and unconstitutional encroachments on basic rights and freedoms, of reform of the public policy agenda to acknowledge and institutionalize the Rule of Law and Equality before the Law without fear or favour in the architecture and practice of governance and government and to reconcile all the peoples of this island in the celebration of Unity in Diversity. In this respect and twenty-five years notwithstanding, the work of CPA will always be a work in the state of becoming. Not of being.
 

Criticism

I would like, at the onset, to address some of the criticisms made against us. The first of these is that we are and continue to be an elitist and Colombo based organisation unconcerned with what affects the average citizen.

It is true that we have prioritized fundamental rights. We totally disagree that this is not of concern to the average citizen for, it is her rights that we are fighting for and without a sound constitutional framework of fundamental rights the average citizen will not attain the unity, peace and prosperity she desires and deserves. Admittedly, perhaps we have not made this point sufficiently or adequately to the population at large. However, we have tried and will continue to ensure that all our work is carried out in all the three languages of Sinhala, Tamil and English and in this regard we would like to remind our critics that the work of the Outreach Unit and the Centre for Monitoring Election Violence (CMEV) with an island-wide network, is done mainly in the official languages. Moreover, we have Vikalpa and Maatram, our two websites in Sinhala and Tamil, respectively.

A second criticism is that we work according to the agenda of foreign governments, since they are our main funders. Yes, they are our main funders because there is no funding in Sri Lanka for civil society work in the fields of human rights and governance. if only there were! Furthermore, the allegation that we take their money to implement their projects is completely untrue in that we identify our priorities and go out and seek funds to implement them. That there is a congruence, between Western donor priorities and ours, is not a coincidence, because they too are formally committed to a world of human rights protection, the Rule of Law and constitutionalism.

And yet another criticism is that we are too confrontational with governments and a cat’s paw for the opposition. It should be noted that for the twenty-five years of our existence, some twenty have been under a UPFA government headed by President Kumaratunga and the Rajapaksa brothers, Mahinda and Gotabaya. Throughout this period the UNP has been the Opposition for over twelve years with another eight years in government. The mission and mandate of CPA is policy research and advocacy on governance and conflict transformation from a human rights perspective and in these turbulent times, the Opposition was more in accord with our views than the government of the day. Moreover, the policy platform on which the government was formed in 2015, was defined and designed by liberal civil society research and advocacy over two decades at least and liberal civil society had a duty to ensure that it would not be jettisoned. Accordingly, the distinction between working with government as opposed to working for them and losing one’s independence and credibility was a position we upheld during the tenure of that government.

Earlier on, the call for the annulment of the Wayamba election in 1999 blotted our copybook with the Kumaratunga government, which set up a rival organisation to contest every media communiqué CMEV put out; advocacy for human rights protection and accountability did not sit well and perhaps still does not sit well, with either Rajapaksa regime. That we are partisan towards the UNP, stands in stark contrast to our public interest litigation when they were in office and our continued human rights advocacy.

 

Achievements

Over the twenty-five years we have pioneered civic media in Sri Lanka with our award winning Groundviews website, which serves as a platform for the counter-narrative of the day and for news and opinions insufficiently covered in the mainstream media or not covered by the latter at all. Social Indicator is the only civil society polling unit which polls public opinion on contemporary social and political issues, island wide. It also has seven years of data on the public’s views with regard to war and peace in the country. CMEV which arose out of the very first activity of the organisation – monitoring of election violence – and which encountered censure and sanction from the government when it called for the annulment of the infamous Wayamba election, is now one of two nationally recognised election monitoring organisations in the country.

We have a rich reserve of data on constitutional issues including strengthening of parliament, federalism and devolution and our public interest litigation programme, has as much highlighted issues of current importance and raised awareness of rights violations, as it has succeeded in winning cases. Of particular importance is the spearheading of advocacy for human rights protection and accountability, bringing together civil society organisations from around the country.

 

Origins and Acknowledgements

CPA grew out of the Centre for Policy Research and Analysis (CEPRA), set up by the Vice Chancellor of the University of Colombo, Professor G.L. Peiris. CEPRA held the first public meeting on the 1995 proposals of the government for a new constitution. When CEPRA wanted to hold a similar meeting in Sinhala, we were told by the student body that we would not be allowed to do so. In any event the ethic on campus and the bureaucracy stood in the way of CEPRA achieving the objectives of its founders as an innovative research institute. Jayadeva Uyangoda, Rohan Edrisinha and I, all working at CEPRA, decided to move out and set up an organisation that would not encounter such impediments. We decided that our board would reflect the political opinions of the day and that I would be the Executive Director. CPA owes its name and initial articles of association to Uyan. Our founding grant was from the Asia Foundation and a loan from INFORM facilitated by Charlie Abeysekere, a founder Director. I must acknowledge the support and solidarity from Ed Anderson, the Representative of the Asia Foundation.

I must place on record my appreciation for two founder Directors – Charlie Abeysekere and Bradman Weerakoon. Their wealth of experience, their enthusiasm and encouragement for the aims and work of CPA and their commitment to the organisation, was invaluable. CPA will always be indebted to them. Likewise, Shelton Wannasinghe who was also a particular pleasure to work with as a senior member of the Board, especially when the organisation came under attack

in the years after the war. Another former Director who I must acknowledge is Dr Arjuna Parakrama who designed the methodology of CMEV, which CMEV follows to the present day and who also set up a translation programme Vibasha and the first Media Monitors –both of which are still spoken about. Finally, amongst former members of the Board I must acknowledge CPA’s debt to Kethesh Loganathan who headed the Peace and Conflict Unit. Kethesh brought to CPA his years of experience of the Tamil struggle for self-determination and his personal knowledge of the key LTTE and other guerilla leaders of the time. Accordingly, in his years at CPA he deepened our knowledge of peace and conflict and sometimes, not easily.

A special mention must be made of founder Director Rohan Edrisinha, who was the founder of the Legal Unit, now the Research and Advocacy Unit and the programme of Public Interest Litigation. Rohan’s vast knowledge of constitutional and public law attracted many a young researcher to CPA and laid the foundations for the work on federalism and devolution as well as the now well -established programme of Public Interest Litigation.

Many of the older members of CPA will remember Jean Godlieb head of Administration and a veritable mother to the staff. Her patience, efficiency and warmth made the organisation, from the outset, a happier workplace.

Over the twenty- five years, CPA has had many friends amongst the international human rights organisations, international NGOs and universities. To them we offer our thanks for their support and solidarity, in good times and bad and express the hope that when the need arises, we can work together again.

I must thank all the staff of CPA and our interns both foreign and national, for their dedication to our values and excellent work. For many of them, working for CPA was their first and only job. In particular I must thank Lionel, Asanga, Bhavani, Sanjana, Pradeep, Dev, Mirak, Sriyanie and Renuka for their brilliant work, which, in some cases, was unprecedented and for their commitment and sustained dedication to the work and values of CPA.

Many of them have gone on to excel themselves in work for the United Nations as Resident Representatives and in election monitoring, for their own governments as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defence, for our own national institutions like the first Office for Missing Persons and in academia abroad. The staff of CPA makes CPA and CPA in turn has changed their lives, I hope they will agree, for the better.

I hope and trust that CPA will continue its work into the future. And that it will keep working better.

In conclusion, I would like to quote the poet Robert Browning as I did when I delivered the Gandhi Memorial Oration:

“Ah but a man’s reach should exceed his grasp; Or what’s a heaven for?”

So be it for the Centre for Policy Alternatives for the next twenty -five years and more!
 

Dr Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu

Founding Executive Director
 

To read and download the full publication in English, click here.
To read and download the full publication in Sinhala, click here.
To read and download the full publication in Tamil, click here.

 

Comment: Legality of the State Response to the Right to Protest in the light of the Covid-19 Pandemic

November 29th, 2021: The right to protest, as manifested in the freedom of assembly, association, and expression, is an important feature of a democratic society that facilitates civic engagement in political processes beyond just voting at elections. This right is vital for the healthy functioning of a democracy, and while it is recognized that the right to protest can be subjected to certain limitations, it is equally important to ensure that these limitations are not the results of ad-hoc and arbitrary measures contrary to the rule of law and the equal protection of the law as guaranteed by Article 12 of the Constitution.

Sri Lanka has a rich history of protests as means of airing grievances, and for demanding accountability and recognition for rights and freedoms. In the recent months, a large number of protests have taken place across the island, including but not limited to the many protests over the controversial Kotelawala National Defence University (KNDU) Bill, the fertilizer ban, and the ‘Pottuvil to Polikandy’ (P2P) march.

However, on 6th July 2021, the police announced that protests and public meetings were banned until further notice to contain the spread of COVID-19. The police further stated that transgressors will be dealt with according to quarantine regulations. Since then, there has been a host of arrests of persons for engaging in public protests, which stood in contrast with the relaxation of several regulations put in place to prevent the spread of Covid-19 in July.

On 9th November 2021, new regulations were introduced by way of Gazette (Extraordinary) No. 2253/10 to limit the size of public gatherings and make it mandatory to obtain prior approval of Director General of Health Services to hold gatherings, activities, events or similar places of meetings. Incidentally, the regulations were introduced days before the Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) planned to hold a mass demonstration in Colombo. On 15th November, updated health guidelines applicable from the 16th to the 30th of November were also issued. It is notable that while indoor gatherings were among the permitted events mentioned in the schedule of the guidelines, “outdoor private gatherings” were not allowed to be held.

In his address to the nation on 20th August 2021, President Gotabaya Rajapaksa said that “[I]t is clear that this is not a time for strike actions and protests. Do not attempt to destabilize the country.” Similarly, insinuations were made by several others assigning blame to protesters for the recent surge in Covid-19 cases across the island. However, Professor Tissa Vitharana, a prominent virologist and Member of Parliament for the SLPP reportedly stated that there is no evidence to show that the recent protests contributed to the rapid spread of Covid-19.

The press release announcing the ban in July failed to establish the legal basis for the ban on protests and demonstrations, raising concerns about the legality of this measure.

Restriction of fundamental rights by way of issuing regulations has also raised similar concerns. Arrests and forcible quarantine of protesters, discussed later in the document, highlight instances of the misuse of quarantine regulations to quell dissent and enable arbitrary and selective action on the part of law enforcement authorities, with significant implications for rights and freedoms relating to assembly, association, and speech.

The Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) has consistently raised concerns regarding the legality of COVID-19 related restrictions, and despite this questionable legality, a considerable number of arrests have been made due to alleged violations.

Several guides, comments, and other documents were issued previously by CPA on a range of legal and policy issues linked to COVID-19. The present comment will briefly examine the limitations imposed on the right to peaceful protest under the guise of managing the health crisis, with a particular focus on the current ban on protests and public gatherings. The comment will first provide an overview of the constitutional and legal basis for the right to protest in Sri Lanka, followed by an outline of the state response to several protests that were held during the Covid-19 pandemic. The comment will then identify areas of concern by assessing the ban on protests based on three criteria relating to legality, proportionality, and purpose, to demonstrate that the state response to the recent protests has adverse implications for the rule of law, independence of the judiciary, and the fundamental rights of citizens.

To read the full comment, click here.

Two Years

18th November, 2021, Colombo, Sri Lanka: Two years ago, after campaigning on a pro-nationalist platform promising a wide mandate, Gotabaya Rajapaksa took oath as Sri Lanka’s 8th Executive President.

 

To mark two years of his term in office, the Centre for Policy Alternatives looks back on some of the defining moments of his presidency so far.
To view the video in Tamil, click here.
To view the video in Sinhala, click here.

 

 

A Constitutional Performance Assessment: National Poll

15th November, 2021: The 20th amendment to the Constitution that was passed into law on the 22nd of October 2020 provided wide sweeping powers to the executive that further endangered the crippling democratic space prevalent in the country. Furthermore, the pandemic and its limitations have enabled the government to continue with its autocratic rule and sustain it with intense militarization of civilian spaces. 

Amidst this backdrop, this national survey was conducted in light of the government’s proposed plans for constitutional change. The knowledge, attitudes and perceptions of the public towards the current Constitution, the presidency, the judiciary, the nature of political order and human rights are some of the main areas that have been quantitatively assessed in this study. Data gathered from this national poll aims to enrich public debate on the broad needs and principles of constitutional reform in Sri Lanka.

  • Click here to read the full report.
  • To read a summary of the report in Sinhala, click here.
  • To read a summary of the report in Tamil, click here.

 

 

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

CPA calls on Government to rescind Presidential Task Force on ‘One Country, One Law’

28th October 2021, Colombo, Sri Lanka: The Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) is deeply shocked and disturbed by the appointment of the latest Presidential Task Force mandated to implement the ‘One Country, One Law’ concept, including the drafting of a law to give effect to it, headed by Galagodaaththe Gnanasara Thero.  The appointment of the Task Force at a time of unprecedented economic hardships and unravelling of government policies raises a plethora of questions including the compounding of a culture of governance by task forces, the promotion of divisive Buddhist clergy linked to incitement of violence and attacks against religious minorities; all of which entrench impunity.

CPA further notes that the phrase ‘One Country, One Law’ – widely deployed in the run up to and during the 2019 Presidential election, has a very specific majoritarian connotation, and is by no means an expression of a desire for equality or the equal protection under the law. Rather, the advocates of the phrase deliberately distort Sri Lanka’s legal history and legal system, and promote a false narrative of a legal system which benefits minorities and hark to a mythical time where Sri Lanka was governed by “one legal system”.

CPA notes that there are many aspects of the Sri Lankan legal system including aspects of personal laws, which do not meet the human rights standards guaranteed in Sri Lanka’s constitution or Sri Lanka’s international obligations. A serious attempt to bring these laws in line with these human rights obligations would require a genuinely representative and consultative process led by persons with the integrity and capacity to do so. This task force is the antithesis of such a genuine and inclusive approach and CPA calls on the government to immediately rescind the relevant Gazette notification.

CPA has previously raised concerns over the government’s reliance on multiple ad hoc structures, established since 2020, that supersede existing institutions and mechanisms.  The vaguely termed mandate of this Task Force compounds fears regarding transparency and accountability, and raises further worrying questions about its implications for the ongoing legal reform processes in Sri Lanka.

Further, CPA notes that Galagodaaththe Gnanasara Thero is an unapologetic champion of ethno-nationalist rhetoric and hate speech against the Muslim community in particular, with no known action taken to independently investigate or hold him to account.

Moreover, the Thero was convicted for contempt court for his unruly behaviour in the Homagama Magistrate Court when he intimidated the Magistrate and insulted a State Counsel, a sign of his complete disregard for the rule of law in Sri Lanka. In another blow to the rule of law, the Thero was granted a Presidential Pardon in 2019, a move challenged by CPA in the Supreme Court.

We reiterate our belief that providing any space for such a figure is a blatant mockery of basic decency in governance and a clear indicator of a very divisive public policy agenda. He is totally unsuited to perform any role in governance, let alone law reform in Sri Lanka. Thus, the present move must be democratically countered.

Inability or unwillingness to immediately stop such action will only fast track Sri Lanka’s slide towards majoritarian authoritarianism backstopped by militarization of government and governance, with deeply alarming consequences for Sri Lanka and Sri Lankans.

The above statement can be downloaded in English, Tamil and Sinhala.

 

CPA Statement on the Proposed Amendments to the Code of Criminal Procedure Act

14th October, 2021, Colombo, Sri Lanka: The Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) is deeply concerned about the proposed Bill to amend the Code of Criminal Procedure Act, published in the Gazette on the 8th of October 2021. The proposed amendments seek to dispense with the requirement of producing a suspect or accused before the Magistrate or Judge of the High Court in certain instances where they would otherwise normally be produced in Court. The Bill, proposed as a permanent amendment, must be evaluated in light of existing problems of Sri Lanka’s criminal justice system where custodial torture and abuse have become almost a norm. Despite the constitutional guarantee providing for the freedom from torture, decades of precedent demonstrate the continuous failures by the State to take tangible measures to protect this fundamental right, resulting in a culture of impunity. In such a context, CPA is disturbed that the proposed amendments are likely to further exacerbate existing problems and therefore urges the government to not proceed with the Bill.

In addition to the culture of abuse and torture, detainees are repeatedly prevented from having meaningful access to lawyers, despite the existence of legal protections guaranteeing such access. Against such a backdrop, compounded by reports of abuse and torture, the production of suspects or accused persons in Court is one manner in which the judiciary is able to act as a check on their safety and wellbeing. Permanently removing such an essential safeguard is unacceptable and deeply troubling.

Furthermore, the grounds on which personal attendance can be dispensed with as provided in the Bill are broad, vague and may be subject to abuse by authorities. For instance, among the reasons for which a suspect may not be produced are ‘where there is a likelihood of the suspect or accused obstructing the proceedings of court’. It is unclear how the Attorney General, officer in charge of the relevant police station or the superintendent of prisons as per the Bill will determine when such an obstruction is ‘likely’, or what amounts to an obstruction.

Finally, CPA is also concerned with the purpose and timing of the Bill in a context when Sri Lanka’s criminal justice system faces a plethora of challenges requiring urgent attention, with no information publicly available as to why the present Bill has received prioritization over other more pressing matters. The apparent rush to move with this Bill must also be contrasted with other initiatives entailing the establishment of committees and consultations, with no such interest shown with the present Bill.  This Bill, if implemented, carries significant implications for the safety of detainees and further entrenches custodial torture in Sri Lanka.

This statement is available in English, Sinhala and Tamil.

Vacancy: Field Assistant cum Research Assistant – Social Indicator Team

Centre for Policy Alternatives has a vacancy for an experienced individual to work as:

FIELD ASSISTANT cum RESEARCH ASSISTANT – SOCIAL INDICATOR TEAM 

QUALIFICATIONS/EXPERIENCE

  • Enrolled student or graduate in Political Science, International Relations or Social Sciences or in any related field of study 

                 or

  • Research experience or relevant professional qualifications

OTHER SKILLS/ATTRIBUTES

  • Strong research and analytical skills and the ability to assist the research team in survey implementation
  • A team player who can also work independently 
  • Willingness to travel out of Colombo on field work
  • Language proficiency in both English and Sinhala OR English and Tamil 
  • Competency in Microsoft Office applications 
  • Good coordinating skills  
  • Excellent interpersonal skills 
  • Dynamic and able to multi-task in a confidential, challenging environment 

APPLICATIONS: Please forward your application together with a resume with contact details of two non-related referees, within ten days of this advertisement. 

The position applied for should be indicated on the subject line of email.

Centre for Policy Alternatives, 6/5, Layards Road, Colombo 5 OR email to [email protected] 

07th October 2021