Font size: 
But throughout the country security forces remain, with security measures in place as they were during the war with the LTTE. This week the opposition demanded an end to “wartime” measures and that government security be brought to the level of peacetime security.
The opposition complained that roadblocks in Colombo, the capital city, are still in place as during the conflict with the LTTE. In fact, one opposition leader claimed that things have become worse.
The opposition also said that large numbers of security forces are still provided to the president and his close aides and, although their security is important, protection formerly justified by the threat of LTTE suicide bombers is no longer justified. One secretary to a ministry has 200 security officers, not for security reasons but to boost his image, the opposition claimed.
There are complaints everywhere that whenever vehicles carrying the president or other leaders, such as the secretary of defense, pass by, people have to move from the immediate area and turn their backs to the road. This practice was followed in ancient China and other monarchies in earlier times. Often, security personnel chase people into private compounds and prevent them from moving.
At public functions attendees often have to remain in a fixed location until the ceremony is over, however long it may take. In addition to normal security personnel, some ministers employ “goon squads” to ensure that people are not allowed to move.
Sri Lanka reportedly has the largest number of bulletproof vehicles in Asia, yet an additional five have been ordered. When members of the presidential clique travel, they are accompanied by an entourage including many vehicles of security personnel.
The opposition has demanded that a peacetime protocol be introduced for the use of such vehicles. Prior to the conflict with the LTTE, Sri Lanka had protocols for the use of vehicles and security for the head of state, ministers and other officials. With suitable rearrangements, peacetime protocols rightly demanded by the opposition should be introduced.
During the conflict, security personnel in civilian clothes were everywhere, on the lookout for possible suicide bombers and other security threats. Even now large numbers of security officers are tirelessly being recruited and are present almost everywhere. But instead of being on the alert for possible terrorists they now conduct surveillance on ordinary civilians.
The purpose of this security is to create an atmosphere of fear among the people, particularly those who engage in opposition politics. Such surveillance creates suspicion among the population and encourages a mindset of distrust among people. The presence of such security adversely affects the community spirit.
The presence of this security apparatus helps maintain a mentality of conflict even in peacetime. Why should the government maintain such a tense mentality? The only reason is to utilize the security apparatus to boost the ruling party’s political strength and the power of the regime.
Political leaders traveling with a large entourage and security vehicles create the image that they are supermen with extraordinary powers. This image does not represent a democratic spirit; it rather smells of authoritarianism.
Children feel the worst impact of such a security presence. The wartime atmosphere creates a lasting impression of fear among children. They will grow up without any experience of a peacetime mentality.
This kind of military and security presence makes it impossible for teachers and parents to impart to children a democratic spirit and friendly and easy community relations. They cannot demonstrate what they are trying to teach.
It is obvious that the claims of a return to peace under the present circumstances will sound hollow as long as such security prevails. There are also a quarter of a million people living in camps for internally displaced persons, and their conditions and treatment have been criticized once again by the United Nations.
The government has reportedly said that it accepts most such criticism. However, its sincerity can only be judged by practical actions. It must give freedom of movement to the detained persons, who suffer the worst living conditions in the country. Their presence in camps does not give credibility to government claims that it is trying to return to peacetime.
Antiterrorism laws are still in effect in Sri Lanka, as they were during the war. The country cannot return to peacetime until the normal laws of the country are restored and the Prevention of Terrorism Act is repealed. It is absurd to claim a return to peacetime while people are still ruled by this draconian law and other emergency laws.
--
(Basil Fernando is director of the Asian Human Rights Commission based in Hong Kong. He is a Sri Lankan lawyer who has also been a senior U.N. human rights officer in Cambodia. He has published several books and written extensively on human rights issues in Asia. His blog can be read at http://srilanka-lawlessness.com.)
Recently Norwageian diplomats too barraged accusations and the faliure of handling the Tamils genocide by the UN as well as other dismal performance of important global crisis.
Now the world has questions of independence and neutrality of the UN mission in Afghanistan when Harvard and Oxford educated well known diplomat Peter Galbrith was removed from the UN mission. It looks that Peter was too honest and sincere and this caused his job.
UN has lost its credibility and its name as a neutral body. UN has certainly tarnished its name by the poor handling of the Sri Lankan Tamil genocide. Peter Galbrith is an honest and highly talented diplomat and Tamils and the civilized world are behind him.