Editorial

Sri Lanka and its people have been known for welcoming foreigners and being nice to them. Some Europeans came and overstayed for centuries, but now, emboldened by the lax implementation of the law and a thriving culture of official bribery, corruption and plain indolence, a rising number of foreigners are overstaying, exploiting the country’s economic downturn, its hospitality and crazed promotion as a cheap holiday destination.

Last week’s story in this newspaper quoted the Immigration Chief giving marching orders to long-stayer Russians and Ukrainians caught up in a war in Europe and running unauthorised businesses in Sri Lanka.

The chatter on tourism-related social media groups indicates that more and more visitors are looking to set up in a similar fashion outside of the legal framework, while the tourism promoters pat themselves on the back, trotting out the growing statistics of foreign visitors.

Many of these businesses use foreign credit card machines and take payments in cash, direct clients to PayPal accounts registered abroad, or just collect their income overseas for services provided here. They benefit from local resources—including the natural beauty of Sri Lanka—but contribute a minimum in terms of revenue.

Tourism industry players, especially those who follow the rules, have been warning at least since last year, that the situation is getting worse. And they caution that criminal networks could form among some of the more longstanding, aggressive visitor groups who have also cultivated relationships in high offices.

In recent months, more information about these practices has filtered out because the affected parties, including tax-paying Sri Lankans who are forced to compete on an uneven playing field, are speaking out. Separately, some of the business practices of these foreigners have become so blatantly discriminatory against locals that they have attracted heavy criticism.

Sri Lanka needs tourism and foreign investors. There is no argument that the influx of foreign-run enterprises by genuine parties has modernised the sector, enhanced the visitor experience and created a wealth of knowledge that some locals have benefited from.

But it operates very much in a grey area. There is not even enough empirical data about how many businesses are registered or unregistered, on what basis properties are held by foreigners, the type of activities that are carried out or the status of the visas that owners hold.

This lack of information alone should make any government uncomfortable. For the most part, however, the authorities have been happy to allow the situation to spiral out of hand. The worse it gets, the more ordinary citizens will take matters into their own hands; some will create social unrest, while others will emulate the business model, leading the government to lose even more income.

Till now, the authorities have pretended the problem does not exist. Given the sentiment on the ground, however, this is unlikely to remain a viable option. The dilemma of mushrooming foreign-run illegal businesses has to be handled sooner than later. And it must be done with sensitivity, so as not to drive foreign investment out but to draw business people into the tax net to the benefit of the wider Sri Lankan community.

Human rights double standards

The UNHRC chief read out on Friday an oral update on Sri Lanka that goes well beyond the mandate that the Council was originally empowered to deal with, including areas falling within the sovereign discretion of states. He has referred to constitutional provisions on power-sharing arrangements, fiscal policy and budgetary matters, administrative reform, and even the appointment of the IGP.

Meanwhile, this is the first time the UNHRC is meeting since the unprecedented humanitarian crisis in Gaza began and continues to grow. The double standards in the conduct of international affairs—lecturing countries on human rights on the global stage while ignoring the annihilation of the Palestinian people—are on show for all the world to see. As Sri Lanka’s statement to the UNHRC asked, ‘Where are the resolutions and where are the accountability project’?

As the 55th session of the UNHRC opened, the UN Secretary-General echoed what the world at large is witnessing. He used the very words “double standards,”  a now increasingly used lexicon at international assemblies, when he referred to the need to respect all human rights and pointed out how the authority of the UN’s highest decision-making body, the Security Council, has been undermined. He called for serious reforms to its composition and working methods—clearly a reference to the use, and abuse, of the veto that is vested with the big powers.

The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), it seems, is turning out to be a one-stop-shop running Sri Lanka from Geneva, with no accountability for the outcomes on devolution, budget, finance and administration, and now even public appointments.

With regard to economic, social and cultural rights and debt raised by the OHCHR, it was the developing countries which championed these in the global human rights debate, so they received equal priority with civil and political rights, leading to the adoption of parallel Covenants.

These rights were not envisaged as an opening for further intrusion and ‘mandate creep’ from Geneva into the financial decision-making spaces of the very debt-ridden developing states. Much-needed reform is already under active discussion by competent experts in other fora.

The ‘North Star’ of the UNHRC or the OHCHR in Geneva cannot be the protection of human rights universally, surely, given the blatant double standards prevailing, vis-à-vis the ongoing annihilation of the people of Palestine.

Both of them are unable to take a single meaningful step on the televised genocide in war-torn Gaza, the shocking illustration of ‘food as a weapon of war’ including the delivery of rationed ‘blood-soaked flour’ to a people on the brink of famine.