Centre for Policy Alternatives on 13 January, 2012 
The Rural Education Assistance Programme 2009 funded by Sahaya Foundation USA, aims to promote equitable access to education for some of the poorest children of Sri Lanka, the children of estate workers in the Plantation Sectors.
Administered by its local partner, the Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) this programme will provide small scale scholarships taking into account their performance in the face of very difficult circumstances.
Download PDF with more information here.
Centre for Policy Alternatives on 7 January, 2012 When Sri Lanka vied for the 2018 Commonwealth Games, there was a telling photograph taken at one of the bashes the regime threw in the Caribbean, the culminating event of a labour intensive, extravagant self-indulgent exercise. The photograph has Hon Namal Rajapaksha MP leading a conga line followed by the Governor of the Central Bank. They both seem…well, happy. However, though a good time was had by all no doubt, that conga line led nowhere. We did not win the bid to host the 2018 Commonwealth Games; agnostics and atheists alike were put on notice about the existence of the divine. The country was saved. Yet the conga line as both a metaphor and description of the structure of power and the ruling regime remains. Into 2012, where will it head?
The old year 2011 like all others before was interesting in the sense of the Chinese curse. It saw the steady decline of governance and the Rule of Law, the steady rise of militarization and the interminable decline of the opposition; more attacks on the freedom of expression and association and the re-emergence of disappearances; grease yakkas, plastic crates and the fatal private pension plan; an unnecessary, yet revealing controversy over the national anthem; the release of a COPE report confirming losses by state enterprises running into billions of rupees and at the same time legislation deemed urgent in the national interest to take over underperforming and under utilised private sector enterprises. Sarath Fonseka continued to be harassed and is now to be written out of the history books Soviet-style, including the revamped version of the Mahavamsa; monitoring MPs and presidential advisors fought to the death and probable permanent disability, High Noon style, and in the dying days of the year, a Pradeshiya Sabha chairman alleged to have engaged in fatal political violence during the last presidential election, is now implicated in the murder and serious assault of tourists. There is of course the fiasco of the release of exam results and the sham/e of Sri Lanka Cricket.
Significantly, some 40 years on from the last pre-war election in 1977, one party was overwhelmingly returned in the south and another likewise in the north in local government elections. The regime – TNA talks are more and more reminiscent of the lines from Macbeth – tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow… it is a tale told by an idiot full of sound and fury signifying nothing.
On a positive note, the economy is supposed to be booming. Every index is up – number of tourists, remittances, exports, and foreign direct investment (FDI). Inflation, indebtedness and the cost of living too! The trade deficit remains in billions of dollars despite the increase in remittances, exports, tourists and FDI. The capital city is being beautified – a direct boon of the pairing of defence and urban development we are told and many believe, irrespective of the number of city dwellers who have paid the cost in eviction. There is a highway to the south and an aptly though controversially named Mahinda Rajapaksha Performing Arts Centre with state of the art facilities, as well as night racing to boot.
And there is the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) Report, the document, which, the regime has maintained, will answer its critics and lay to rest the charge of war crimes and the call for accountability in respect of them. This the Report does not do, thereby lending credence to the criticisms leveled at it in terms of mandate and composition and most importantly, thereby reinforcing the call for international investigation. The LLRC concludes that there was no deliberate targeting of civilians by the armed forces or use of siege tactics by the regime with regard to the provision of food and medicine to civilians in the Vanni. It acknowledges that, “…material points towards the implication of the Security Forces for the resulting death and injury to civilians, even though this may not have been with the intent to cause harm”.
This is largely based on the testimonies of the security hierarchy and suffers from the lack of witness protection, which would have facilitated a more comprehensive account of what transpired. The LLRC makes reference to the technical difficulties in reconstructing what happened and notes the near impossibility of doing so, now. On the key issue of war crimes and violation of international humanitarian law, the report is a whitewash of the regime. This is very disappointing given the urgent need for accountability at the community level in particular, as demonstrated by the number of civilians who testified before the LLRC despite the difficulties and subsequent dangers they faced in doing so.
It is a curate’s egg, however. Its conclusions on reconciliation, the atrocities of the LTTE, militarization, a political and constitutional settlement based on devolution, the politicization of governance, the erosion of the rule of law, the naming of para-militaries and the call for further action on this and on disappearances and detainees as well as the Channel Four documentary, on right to information legislation, are all to be welcomed. All of this begs the question of how any “independent’ or “proper” investigation the LLRC recommends can be done nationally. None of this is new; most of this has been championed by civil society for quite some time. That a regime appointed commission reiterates all of this, underscores both the scale and nature of the challenge the regime faces and accordingly, the scale and nature of the paradigm shift it has to undertake if it is to, as it must, implement these recommendations without delay.
Quo Vadis, the Conga line in 2012? Can the tiger change it stripes; the leopard its spots?
Can pigs fly?
Centre for Policy Alternatives on 4 January, 2012 We apologise for the earlier version of this Press Release which inadvertently contained content in draft form.
4 January 2011, Colombo, Sri Lanka: The Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) welcomes the release of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) Report, its analysis of the root cause of the conflict, the cataloguing of the atrocities of the LTTE, recommendations in respect of governance – especially the de-politicization of existing institutions, the introduction of Right to Information legislation, militarization, attacks on the freedom of expression, language rights, reconciliation and the investigation of the allegations contained in the Channel Four documentary as well as the investigation and prosecution of those responsible for disappearances and civilian deaths. We also welcome the LLRC recommendation that named individuals and organizations associated with the government be investigated for human rights violations and para-military activity, and its recommendations in respect of the Northern Muslims evicted by the LTTE and the Up Country Tamil population. The attention accorded by the LLRC to the situation of these two communities strengthens the coherence of this report on the pivotal issue of reconciliation for the peoples of Sri Lanka. We strongly urge that the testimonies and record of the proceedings of the LLRC be preserved for posterity.
CPA did not go before the LLRC because of reservations about the mandate and composition of the commission, the past record of presidential commissions, specifically the non- release and non-implementation of their recommendations –a point also made in the LLRC Report. We note however that a number of the observations and recommendations made by the LLRC reiterate those made by CPA and other civil society actors regarding the state of governance, the culture of impunity and human rights protection in Sri Lanka, in particular. The endorsement of these views by a presidential commission reinforces this civil society critique and underscores the importance of the credible and effective implementation of the LLRC recommendations in the areas mentioned above as a matter of the utmost national priority. This in turn, as also highlighted by the LLRC, is underscored by the failure of the Government of Sri Lanka (GOSL) to implement in full the interim recommendations of the LLRC.
Following the release of the UN Secretary General’s Advisory Panel Report and the calls for international investigation of the allegations of war crimes and violations of international humanitarian law (IHL) made against the LTTE and the GOSL, the GOSL has maintained that the LLRC Report would answer its critics. Central to this is establishing what happened in the last phase of the conflict and the issue of accountability. The LLRC has concluded that in certain cases the truth is near impossible to ascertain given the information presented to the commission and more importantly, the information that at this point can be obtained. Notwithstanding the issue of the limitations of the information available to it, the LLRC categorically states that it was not the intention of the GOSL to target civilians at any point. The LLRC also concludes that in certain cases further investigations are warranted to establish the responsibility of members of the armed forces for civilian deaths, war crimes and violations of IHL, though it maintains, “this may not have been with an intent to cause harm”.
This is a conclusion that echoes the testimonies of senior officers and officials in the political and security establishment. It has been arrived at through a process in which there was no witness and victim protection mechanism to facilitate further civilian testimony and thereby, a comprehensive account of what happened in the last phase of the war. In this connection it is pertinent to note the hardship and subsequent harassment faced by civilians who testified before the commission and the insufficient time allocated to civilians to make oral submissions before it. Most importantly, that so many family members of the disappeared and killed came before the commission, regardless of the difficulties and dangers they faced, attests to the dire need for affected communities to be heard as well as to the urgent need for justice and accountability at the community level. CPA finds the conclusion about the intentions of the armed forces disappointing. We firmly believe that it reinforces the demands for an international investigation rather than addresses and lays them to rest. These demands are further augmented by the critique of the LLRC of the current state of governance and the rule of law, the need to delink the police force from the defence establishment and the need in effect to restore the Seventeenth Amendment and independent commissions for the police and public service amongst others. The state of governance and the rule of law described by the LLRC, begs the question as to how the investigations it recommends can be conducted nationally, given the erosion of the integrity of the institutions that will be involved in such investigations. Explicit guidelines from the LLRC for the “independent” and “proper” “investigations” it recommends, would have made these recommendations more robust and meaningful.
Our disappointment extends to the commission’s treatment of the issue of the number of civilians in the Vanni during the last phase of the war and the provision of food and medical supplies to them. In this regard we are concerned that information from actors in direct contact with civilians on the ground, may not have been sufficiently sourced. This concern includes the population data available from the civilian administration in the region. The “White Flag incident” involving the killing of surrendering LTTE officials, the legality of High Security Zones, the incarceration of almost 300,000 civilians in the Menik Farm and other sites in violation of their fundamental rights should have been dealt with, given their impact on reconciliation and the allegations of war crimes.
These reservations apart, we call on the GOSL to implement the LLRC recommendations without delay and with sincerity and commitment to the cherished goal of a truly plural and united Sri Lanka. We note that the LLLRC report is the initiation of a process of reconciliation; not the end of it. Furthermore, the LLRC clearly states that it is the GOSL that has to take the lead in the process and in particular, in arriving at a political and constitutional settlement based on devolution of “the ethnic problem as well as other serious problems that threaten democratic institutions”. In this regard as in all others, we also note that the implementation of the LLRC recommendations necessitate a major paradigm shift by the GOSL. We strongly urge that this be undertaken as a matter of national priority, and look forward to solid, demonstrable progress in reconciliation, accountability and human rights protection in 2012 and beyond. This is vital to the necessary transition from a post-war to post conflict situation and the enduring peace and unity the latter entails.
Centre for Policy Alternatives on 3 January, 2012 4 January 2011, Colombo, Sri Lanka: The Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) welcomes the release of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) Report, its analysis of the root cause of the conflict, the cataloguing of the atrocities of the LTTE, recommendations in respect of governance – especially the de-politicization of existing institutions, the introduction of Right to Information legislation, militarization, attacks on the freedom of expression, language rights, reconciliation and the investigation of the allegations contained in the Channel Four documentary as well as the investigation and prosecution of those responsible for disappearances and civilian deaths. We also welcome the LLRC recommendation that named individuals and organizations associated with the government be investigated for human rights violations and para-military activity, and its recommendations in respect of the Northern Muslims evicted by the LTTE and the Up Country Tamil population. The attention accorded by the LLRC to the situation of these two communities strengthens the coherence of this report on the pivotal issue of reconciliation for the peoples of Sri Lanka. We strongly urge that the testimonies and record of the proceedings of the LLRC be preserved for posterity.
CPA did not go before the LLRC because of reservations about the mandate and composition of the commission, the past record of presidential commissions, specifically the non- release and non-implementation of their recommendations –a point also made in the LLRC Report. We note however that a number of the observations and recommendations made by the LLRC reiterate those made by CPA and other civil society actors regarding the state of governance, the culture of impunity and human rights protection in Sri Lanka, in particular. The endorsement of these views by a presidential commission reinforces this civil society critique and underscores the importance of the credible and effective implementation of the LLRC recommendations in the areas mentioned above as a matter of the utmost national priority. This in turn, as also highlighted by the LLRC, is underscored by the failure of the Government of Sri Lanka (GOSL) to implement in full the interim recommendations of the LLRC.
Following the release of the UN Secretary General’s Advisory Panel Report and the calls for international investigation of the allegations of war crimes and violations of international humanitarian law (IHL) made against the LTTE and the GOSL, the GOSL has maintained that the LLRC Report would answer its critics. Central to this is establishing what happened in the last phase of the conflict and the issue of accountability. The LLRC has concluded that in certain cases the truth is near impossible to ascertain given the information presented to the commission and more importantly, the information that at this point can be obtained. Notwithstanding the issue of the limitations of the information available to it, the LLRC categorically states that it was not the intention of the GOSL to target civilians at any point. The LLRC also concludes that in certain cases further investigations are warranted to establish the responsibility of members of the armed forces for civilian deaths, war crimes and violations of IHL, though it maintains, “this may not have been with an intent to cause harm”.
This is a conclusion that echoes the testimonies of senior officers and officials in the political and security establishment. It has been arrived at through a process in which there was no witness and victim protection mechanism to facilitate further civilian testimony and thereby, a comprehensive account of what happened in the last phase of the war. In this connection it is pertinent to note the hardship and subsequent harassment faced by civilians who testified before the commission and the insufficient time allocated to civilians to make oral submissions before it. Most importantly, that so many family members of the disappeared and killed came before the commission, regardless of the difficulties and dangers they faced, attests to the dire need for affected communities to be heard as well as to the urgent need for justice and accountability at the community level. CPA finds the conclusion about the intentions of the armed forces disappointing. We firmly believe that it reinforces the demands for an international investigation rather than addresses and lays them to rest. These demands are further augmented by the critique of the LLRC of the current state of governance and the rule of law, the need to delink the police force from the defence establishment and the need in effect to restore the Seventeenth Amendment and independent commissions for the police and public service amongst others. The state of governance and the rule of law described by the LLRC, begs the question as to how the investigations it recommends can be conducted nationally, given the erosion of the integrity of the institutions that will be involved in such investigations. Explicit guidelines from the LLRC for the “independent” and “proper” “investigations” it recommends, would have made these recommendations more robust and meaningful.
Our disappointment extends to the commission’s treatment of the issue of the number of civilians in the Vanni during the last phase of the war and the provision of food and medical supplies to them. In this regard we are concerned that information from actors in direct contact with civilians on the ground, may not have been sufficiently sourced. This concern includes the population data available from the civilian administration in the region. The “White Flag incident” involving the killing of surrendering LTTE officials, the legality of High Security Zones, the incarceration of almost 300,000 civilians in the Menik Farm and other sites in violation of their fundamental rights should have been dealt with, given their impact on reconciliation and the allegations of war crimes.
These reservations apart, we call on the GOSL to implement the LLRC recommendations without delay and with sincerity and commitment to the cherished goal of a truly plural and united Sri Lanka. We note that the LLLRC report is the initiation of a process of reconciliation; not the end of it. Furthermore, the LLRC clearly states that it is the GOSL that has to take the lead in the process and in particular, in arriving at a political and constitutional settlement based on devolution of “the ethnic problem as well as other serious problems that threaten democratic institutions”. In this regard as in all others, we also note that the implementation of the LLRC recommendations necessitate a major paradigm shift by the GOSL. We strongly urge that this be undertaken as a matter of national priority, and look forward to solid, demonstrable progress in reconciliation, accountability and human rights protection in 2012 and beyond. This is vital to the necessary transition from a post-war to post conflict situation and the enduring peace and unity the latter entails.
###
Download PDF of this press release here. Download in Sinhala here. Download in Tamil here.
Centre for Policy Alternatives on 6 December, 2011 
6 December 2011: Land Issues in the Northern Province: Post-War Politics, Policy and Practices by Senior Researchers Bhavani Fonseka and Mirak Raheem at the Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) is the most recent endeavour by CPA to critique and provide alternatives to land and related issues in the post-war Northern Province in Sri Lanka.
Download the report as a PDF here.
The report examines the dynamic nature of land in the North, exploring issues such as governance, development and the role of marginal groups and their relevance to land in the area. The report also documents key trends such as militarisation, centralisation, politicisation and the ethnic dimension in relation to land. Beyond the war-affected areas, issues such as landlessness, competing claims and acquisition of land for development and public purposes all make clear that there is a need for policy reform which can define the post-conflict context in Sri Lanka.
The context in the North has dramatically changed over the last two and a half years since the war ended and the report attempts to capture some of these key changes. With the end of war, large areas are being demined and significant numbers of people have returned to their places of origin amidst high levels of militarisation, increased assistance and development programmes and significant political developments. As returnees and other war-affected communities attempt to rebuild, they have attempted to regain control over and claim ownership to their land. The Government has also made clear its interest in acquiring land for national security, development and other public purposes. The report highlights that land has re-surfaced as a central problem on the post-war agenda, especially given the situation regarding land ownership and control in the North, the high instances of lost documentation, mass displacement and secondary occupation, landless populations, and military occupation of land and involvement in land administration.
The report sets out key areas that need further attention and highlights ongoing processes for policy change. After a three-decade-old war, many changes have taken place where reform is needed to address present needs and grievances and avoid future disputes. The Government is engaged in an-ongoing initiative to address some of the key issues with respect to land in the North, the content and implications of which are discussed in this report. While welcoming moves for reform, CPA hopes such moves are done in a transparent and participatory manner, with the involvement of communities and local actors, and in keeping with principles such as equity and conflict sensitivity.
The report makes a strong case for reform, but the process through which such reform is introduced and implemented also needs consideration. CPA hopes the findings in the present report will inform stakeholders and the public of the issues in the area and create a constructive dialogue on resolving land and related issues in the North.
To obtain further information regarding the report and other initiatives related to the topic, the following persons can be contacted-
Bhavani Fonseka- [email protected]
Mirak Raheem- [email protected]
Centre for Policy Alternatives on 6 December, 2011 Public Servants, Tax Payers and the Pradeshiya Sabha can be downloaded as a PDF in Sinhala here.
Centre for Policy Alternatives on 6 December, 2011 
Download the catalogue here as a PDF.