INDIA-SRILANKA-MALDIVES

Sri Lanka: HR issue still wide open

Getting at the truth is as much important as appearing to get at the truth. Unfortunately, the Rajapakse government has not engaged itself in both exercises when confronted with the 'white flag' incident.

On November 18, the Colombo High Court’s sentenced former Sri Lankan army commander and presidential candidate Sarath Fonseka to three years’ jail on the charge of propagating a false rumour. The opposition decried the verdict as a travesty of justice.

The prosecution case is that Fonseka had spread “false rumour” related to what has become known as the “white flag incident” – the gunning down of unarmed top LTTE leaders who were carrying white flags and seeking to surrender. Shortly after the LTTE was defeated, British newspapers, The Guardian and The Sunday Times exposed cold-blooded killing of LTTE leaders in June 2009.

According to their report, there were frantic surrender negotiations between the LTTE leaders Balasingham Nadesan and Seevaratnam Puleedevan and the government via the UN and other international intermediaries. Despite guarantees given by Rajapakse to UN special envoy to Sri Lanka Vijay Nambiar that all the men had to do was “hoist a white flag high,” they and their family members were shot dead.

General Fonseka was hand picked for the post of army commander. His brief was finish the LTTE. While the President cornered the glory for victory on the war front, the general fell out with the government, resigned his post and stood against Rajapakse as the main opposition candidate in the presidential election of January 2010. His downhill journey ended in a Colombo jail.

Fonseka was arrested by military police amid government claims that he was preparing a coup. Far from proving that he was engaged in a coup plot, Fonseka was charged, tried and convicted on other charges. He is currently serving jail terms handed down by military courts appointed by Rajapakse as commander-in-chief—supposedly for engaging in political activities while in uniform and for corruption in procuring arms.

It is unclear whether Fonseka acted alone in the white flag incident or was merely carrying out orders from above.  During the presidential election, he told the Sunday Leader that the army acted on orders. “Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapakse (brother of the President) had told Brigadier Shavendra Silva to give ‘orders not to accommodate’ any LTTE leaders attempting to surrender and that ‘they must all be killed’”. But these comments sparked off a furore, and the general was accused of betraying the president and army colleagues.

Amidst demands for his prosecution under the Official Secrets Act, Fonseka issued a statement that he had been misquoted.  It’s too early to say curtains have come down on the white flag incident.  Human rights campaigners contend that this episode alone was enough to put Lanka leadership on war crimes trail.  .

The High Court made a split decision—two to one—to convict Fonseka of “spread[ing] a rumour to create unrest and fear among the public.” It found him not guilty on two other charges: that his remarks “aroused communal feelings directly or indirectly” and “aroused anti-government feelings among the public.”

The majority judgment concluded that Fonseka had only indirectly accused Defence Secretary Rajapakse of complicity in the murders. After the formal interview, the Sunday Leader’s editor Fredrica Jansz and owner Lal Wickramatunga had asked Fonseka about “white flag” allegations while chatting with him. “He had said he had heard of such a story from two journalists who were in the front,” the judgment stated. “He said he was unaware of anything beyond what he had heard from the journalists.”

The majority judgment looked at the ‘remark’ from the prism of his known animosity towards the government and that did him in. “The defendant has told the editor that he received information about the shooting order from two journalists. We have to consider if the motive behind making such a statement was to discredit the government and cause disaffection against the government.” Having decided that “he had a grudge against the president and the defence secretary,” the judges pronounced Fonseka guilty.

Judge Warawewa, who differed with the majority view, did not query whether the “rumour” was correct or not, but assailed the main witness, Fredrica Jansz. After pointing to several discrepancies in the editor’s evidence, the dissenting Judge said: “Hundreds of lies have been uttered by her and it is not only one lie. It has been proved that her evidence is woven with lies and the article subject to question had been prepared based on other articles and on lies.” The prosecution, he concluded, had failed to prove its case beyond doubt.

Fonseka did not accept the verdict. “I do not accept that this judgment was reasonable”, said after the verdict was pronounced. He however exonerated the army of any war crimes, a move his critics see his way of becoming a party to any war crimes trail. He has allowed the needle to point at his political masters. But remained short on details.

“I am of the strong opinion that the army which I commanded was not involved in war crimes during the military victory. They followed my instructions according to the humanitarian laws protecting human rights during fighting,” he said and added: “As a respected commander of the army I am of the view that if any one ordered that terrorists surrendering should be shot, that person should be brought before the law.”

He went no further, however, in shedding any light on what did happen in the final days of the war.

Expert Panel appointed by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to advise on human rights violations in Sri Lanka found “credible allegations” that the Colombo government had committed a “wide range of serious violations” of international law, some of which “would amount to war crimes and crimes against humanity.”

Rajapakse government has offered no detailed rebuttal. Nor has it taken the initiative to address the ethnic Tamil minority concerns, which had given birth to the LTTE phenomenon nearly three decades ago.


Pinning the blame on Fonseka undoubtedly gives the President and the defence secretary some reprieve. But it is at best temporary. Both run the risk of the charge coming back to haunt them unless they put their act together to come to grips with the ‘White Flag’ incident. Getting at the truth is as much important as appearing to get at the truth. Unfortunately, the Rajapakse government has not engaged itself in both exercises. It was content with setting up its own Commission to find out ‘the truth’, and getting a varnished report. So, the issue of human rights violations during the Eelam War IV remains very much wide open.

-m rama rao

Sharing:

Your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *