Columns

Listening to that man for all seasons and minister for all portfolios, Mohamed Ali Sabry struggling to present a defence at a news conference in Geneva, zoomed to prepare a home audience for what was an obvious outcome at the UNHRC voting, one should not have been surprised at its sheer lack of acuity.

Sabry was backed up by Sri Lanka’s permanent representative in Geneva C.A. Chandraprema, who had a few digs at the media before falling back on a dubious numbers game that had already been played out at home and thrown into the trash bin over a year ago.

That was after former foreign minister Dinesh Gunawardena launched into spurious mathematics that would have stunned even SLPP ganan karayas. All this was after a clear defeat at last year’s UNHRC vote but claimed as a victory by our own Pythagorean politicians.

If the same exercise in new math is resorted to, why did the Sri Lanka government once more defeat the western-sponsored resolution with a resounding vote against it? The seven votes for Sri Lanka plus the 20 abstentions make up a healthy 27 against the 20 “yes” votes for the resolution.

Why governments continue with such tomfoolery reminds one of the words of philosopher Wittgenstein—“whereof one cannot speak, thereon one must be silent”.

The tone of last Wednesday’s so-called news conference seemed a forlorn exercise and trite instead of contrite. Arranged by the Mass Media Minister Bandula Gunawardena’s ministry–which should have had sufficient pre-warning of the manipulation to come—and the Information Department and some other propaganda peddlers, it was singularly one-sided.

Questions were asked by those obviously pre-selected so Minister Sabry could fall back on broad responses vague enough and the customary blame game. While some of those asking questions were named and their news organisation identified, one moderator named Jonathan Benedict introduced two questioners called Mark Wiley and Rikaz Imtiaz (or names that sounded like that). Who on earth the first was and what media he represented and from where was never mentioned. He was Mark the unmarked who should have been unmasked.

The second was introduced as a diplomat. But a diplomat from which country and his official status and rank also went unannounced. They were not shown on camera nor were their voices heard.

Strange that for a news conference held in Geneva at a time when there would have been hundreds of locally-based and foreign journalists present covering the UNHRC sessions and the side events held by international human rights organisations, human rights activists, NGOs and aggrieved individuals, there did not seem to be any journalists from the ‘active’ Geneva scene present at the news conference or to ask questions

That is what made this so contrived with some official spin doctors from the Media Ministry and the Information Department in an effort to fool an audience at home where the motive seemed so stark. Find a few persons who would bowl full tosses so that Sabry could hit the ball out of the park.

But Sabry is no Sanath Jayasuriya or Bhanuka Rajapaksa. He was content with stopping the ball from uprooting his stumps so he can return to the crease the next day without a run against his name. Thursday’s pre-vote follies were an attempt to cover the government’s argumentative nudity with a fig leaf.

Sabry was left fluttering the same old argument adduced by successive governments that western countries have ganged up to place a small country such as Sri Lanka in the dock and bully and harass it until it caves in and does their bidding. So they continue to confront Sri Lanka with regular resolutions that turn harsher each time.

It appears the country’s ruling elite and those who bark loudest suffer from collective amnesia. One should hark back to the joint statement issued during the then UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s visit to Colombo in May 2009, a few days after the military defeat of the LTTE, where it all began. In that statement, Mahinda Rajapaksa, the then president, makes specific promises which the government undertakes to fulfil and the Sec- Gen sets out what he expects the government to do.

Previously I had quoted that joint statement ‘in extenso’. That was the beginning of Sri Lanka’s recent promises to the United Nations. There have been a litany of promises held out to the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC).They appear to have been made merely to mislead the UNHRC and its member-states or buy time while Sri Lankan governments continued with their autocratic, corrupt, and repressive ways.

Space does not permit a recounting of those intrinsic paras from the joint statement or the successive promises made which remain unfulfilled or repeated like a chorus whenever the issues are raised by subsequent country updates by the High Commissioner for Human Rights and UN Special Rapporteurs.

Minister Sabry and the like-minded complain that the resolutions are getting harsher by the year. Who is to blame for that? Is it those who have made promises to the world at large and to the people of Sri Lanka to preserve and safeguard the constitutional rights granted to the citizenry and hold violators of international laws accountable or the international community that has been deceived by false promises never intended to be kept?

It would take too much space to list all the promises and broken pledges and the widespread corruption that eventually led Sri Lanka to virtual bankruptcy.

But it comes as no surprise that the foreign minister could address the UNHRC assembly and protest over the UN Human Rights High Commissioner’s reference to “economic crimes” in her Sri Lanka update that figured in the recent discussions. He claimed that such references are outside the high commissioner’s mandate.

Maybe Minister Sabry has forgotten or is unaware that there is a second covenant that goes along with the one on civil and political rights — that is the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights which imposes duties and obligations on signatories to the two covenants as well as mandates UN bodies such as the Office of the High Commissioner.

It is reported that during the recent staff-level discussions with the IMF, the Washington-based institution called for stricter control and curbing of corruption which has been the bane of Sri Lankan politics. For the government to argue that “economics crimes” is a new feature introduced by the High Commissioner to tighten the noose around Sri Lanka is incorrect.

If Minister Sabry and his advisers had done their homework, they would have unearthed a document in 2005 by the UN body expressing deep concerns that the enjoyment of human rights is being undermined by the “phenomenon of corruption”.

What should concern the government more is the blatant fact that its recent actions under emergency laws and the Prevention of Terrorism Act and lately under the Official Secrets Act dragged out of the ‘hamas pettiya’ by a ministerial novice and a few totally misguided officials, have only served to alienate member countries. The minister might like to call them “friendly countries”. How friendly they are is evident in the voting.

Of the 13 African states in the Council, 12 abstained from voting. More importantly of the 13 Asia-Pacific member states only three — China, Pakistan, Uzbekistan — voted for Sri Lanka while India, Nepal, Indonesia, Malaysia Japan, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, and Kazakhstan abstained, while the Republic of Korea voted for the resolution.

While countries such as India, Japan and South Korea might be ready to help overcome the current economic crisis just as some sponsors of the resolution, they have greater concerns as they watch the political developments over the last year or more and are concerned by the increasing use of obnoxious laws and physical force to deal with peaceful protests and dissenters.

Minister Sabry hardly stops talking about the constitution and the rule of law. Many of the current problems he finds overwhelming would be eliminated if the government he belongs to adheres to them and the international laws we have signed to observe.

(Neville de Silva is a veteran Sri Lankan journalist who was Assistant Editor of the Hong Kong Standard and worked for Gemini News Service in London. Later he was Deputy Chief-of-Mission in Bangkok and Deputy High Commissioner in London)