Can there be unity without reconciliation or reconciliation without accountability in Sri Lanka, asks Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu.
A year to the day, after the defeat of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), Sri Lanka faces profound ongoing challenges in terms of establishing lasting peace, reconciliation and unity. Demonstrable progress in these fields is essential in order for the country to move from the current post-war situation, where fractions and resentments remain, to one where there is a marked progress in these areas.
There must be a cultural shift, to one in which the country is able to celebrate pluralism and diversity and tolerate dissent.
This process should start with an honest and transparent attempt to address the issue of whether there can be unity without reconciliation and indeed reconciliation without accountability. It is clearly vital that the basic institutions and processes of democratic governance function. From the Rule of Law, to independent oversight institutions, and the uninhibited freedom of a vibrant independent media.
Human rights continue to be at the core of the challenges faced by the government –be they individual or collective rights. Peace, reconciliation and unity require; a political settlement of the ethnic conflict, the full restoration of IDP rights, and a reversal of the culture of impunity in respect of all human rights violations.
On the political front, a spate of elections were capped by the Presidential election in January and the General Election in April. Both national contests gave the incumbent President and his ruling coalition resounding mandates, however it should be noted that the former is being challenged in the courts, with the main challenger under arrest, and the latter was based on a historically low turn-out. Nevertheless, officially the Rajapaksha regime has a substantial mandate and with it the big responsibility of reconciling the peoples of Sri Lanka to ensure the peace is a lasting one.
Yet there are signs that the regime is intent on prioritising economic, rather than political, development as a panacea for unity and that it will look upon any emphasis on political rights, as being irrelevant at best and subversive at worst.
This focus on economic development, neglects the many problems facing Sri Lanka culturally, where there is still a long way to go. As a country which is still under emergency rule, its media is effectively suppressed by a number of repressive measures as well as self-censorship and the voluntary exile of journalists which is rife as a result of the persecution of journalists who openly criticise the government. In addition, there are no independent oversight commissions as provided for by the constitution operating freely in the country at present and the ideology of the regime continues to be populist and majoritarian, underpinned by a preoccupation with international conspiracies to effect regime change in Sri Lanka and arraign its leadership for war crimes.
The latter is especially sensitive and controversial. The extent of the regime’s concern can be measured by its swift and hostile reaction to the announcement by the UN Secretary General, that he was considering the appointment of a panel of experts to advise him on allegations of war crimes against both the LTTE and the security forces. This is an issue it clearly cannot dismiss or wish away as the international community and Tamil diaspora, including international human rights organisations such as Amnesty International, are very vocal in highlighting the necessity for holding parties to account, before the country can move on.
In the current political climate in Sri Lanka, it is abundantly clear that without these efforts, there is the danger that the sources of conflict could be sustained or reproduced.
(For updates you can share with your friends, follow TNN on Facebook and Twitter )