Saturday, 10 November 2012

What a fool is this UNHCHR Navi Pillai ?


Navi Pillai is the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, therefore   it is incorrect that I  call her a “ fool  “, but circumstances are such that I cannot do otherwise.  

 Navi Pillai goes to attend a summit in Bali  which was also attended by the Australian Prime Minister  Julia Gillard.  Navi Pillai had told National Times, “''I am highly concerned that detention in regional offshore processing centres such as in Nauru could result in indefinite detention and other human rights violations''  

When she was informed that the Australian Immigration Department has sent home dozens of Sri Lankans - from Christmas and Cocos islands - deemed not to have a refugee claim, Navi Pillai has said  Sri Lanka was still volatile, despite the end of the civil war in 2009. She has added,''Now that was a conflict area, matters have not stabilised as yet.''All the reports reaching me are that people are concerned over controls being imposed over them,….So I can understand if they'd be leaving out of fear or for their personal security, and it really cries out for all the refugee protections, asylum seeker protections to be made particularly applicable to them.''

This is what shows that she is a “ fool “ with  a warped mind, which prohibits her from looking at a problem with an open mind.  She has a psychological problem being the offspring of South African apartheid, racism, and living in poverty in the slums of South Africa’s segregated  residential areas.  She has not been able to rid  of that childhood  hatred, distrust and fear of those who maltreated  her, as a child of a segregated  ethnic group.

Hence looking at Sri Lanka with that psychologically wounded mind of hers she forgets that she is a jurist.  A jurist does not accept any thing on face value. A Jurist seeks proof without  even a reasonable doubt. 

But what  are the evidence on which  Navi Pillai  relies to state “Sri Lanka is  still volatile, despite the end of the civil war in 2009.” ? 

She relies on UK Channel 4,  anti Sri Lanka pro-terrorist Tamil Diaspora, pseudo human rights activists- the Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International , and  International Crisis Group.  But to what extent can she rely on information coming from them as reliable evidence acceptable in law?  To accuse Sri Lanka  on these “ evidence” most of them on cooked up stories without  eye witnesses or even the semblance of  circumstantial evidence.

Has she the “sacrosanct” UN High  Commissioner for Human Rights,  set foot on Sri Lanka  to  find out “where on earth” it is  and make a fact finding Mission ?  No, She relies on  nondescript persons and organisations which have  only collected hearsay evidence from the anti Sri Lanka pro-terrorist Tamil diaspora- most of them not having even visited Sri Lanka during or after terrorism..

We expect a United Nations Commissioner of Human Rights  to be open minded  without bias and prejudices able to evaluate evidence from those accusing  Sri Lanka,  as well as from  the 

Government and those people who know exactly what happened in  Sri Lanka, before she comes to a lopsided conclusion  that  Sri Lanka is  still volatile, despite the end of the civil war in 2009.”
The so called asylum seekers  who leave Sri Lanka to Australia on ramshackle boats  hired by criminals dealing in human traffic  some of them   now cornered in  Nauru are economic refugees, and not people running away from Sri Lanka for fear of likely Sri Lankan atrocities committed against them. 

The  frightful  voyage they had  undertaken to escape  from the   Frankenstein Monster  back in Sri Lanka,  was in the hope that they will be  accepted as asylum seekers,  is nothing more than a story they had invented to  recounted to any gullible Australian  Immigration Officers. Unfortunately for the so called “ asylum seekers” ,the Australian  International Organisation for Migration has seen through their  “concocted  story”.

To a question asked by the  reporter Stephanie March of  ABC Radio Australia why the  number of Sri Lankans trying to reach Australia by boat has increased dramatically over the past 12 months, against  211 so-called irregular maritime arrivals from Sri Lanka last year, to  more than 5300 so far in 2012 ?

Richard Danziger, Chief of mission, International Organisation for Migration in Sri Lanka, had said that, “   many of those who have chosen to return to Sri Lanka rather than wait to be processed on Nauru or Australia originally left their homeland in search of work. You know that is often what we hear, people tell us they were just seeking better lives, jobs, money and so forth…..The asylum seekers who do chose to go home often return to tough financial times, with debts owing to the people smugglers who helped them get to Australia.”

But Pillai the UNHCHR does not want to accept that fact but she stands by what she had heard from some one or some video footage of doubtful origin put together to make a film by the UKChannel 4
Ms Pillay visited Australia last year, meeting with Ms Gillard, and visiting detention centres in the country, and said,  ''They were all [in] very good condition, but not the detainees. These are, after all, not people who are criminals and so they were handling the detention badly; many attempts at self-harm, and I'm still receiving reports of self-harm, suicide attempts and protests at the off-shore processing facilities. And these are all highly worrying - and unfortunately it was a predictable outcome.''

That is what she said,  but she did not think it is necessary to verify about the fears in Sri Lanka that made them take a precarious voyage  at high financial cost  and still higher risks to their lives. 
Pillai if she is  not “foolish” as I claim should have also gone to Sri Lanka to see for herself whether there is so much of hatred amoung the Sinhala Comlmunbity, against the Tamil Community and how the Government is treating the Tamils in the North and East of Sri Lanka.  If she makes the voyage to see for herself  the ground situation in Sri Lanka I am sure she will be surprised.

Sri Lanka is far from the apartheid South Africa in which Navi Pillai spent her childhood.  Sri Lanka is different,  quite opposed to the stories she had heard about the Sinhala majority committing atrocities against the Tamils in Sri Lanka, the Tamils and Sinhala have lived together for generations. 

The Tamils, Sinhala and Muslims have attended the same schools and enjoyed each others  cultural values, for instance  the Hindu-Sinhala New Year.   The Tamils even enjoyed their religious worship along side that of the Sinhala who shared the belief in the Hindu Gods despite their Buddhist philosophical engagements.

All communal problems started after India took to  expansionist politics and trained a group of disgruntled  Tamil youth in terrorism and let them loos in Sri Lanka in 1983. That was the beginning of three decades of terrorisms.

Now Navi Pillai believes, and trusts the White West,  who did not  help the poor Natives and the Tamil labour class in apartheid South Africa to find a way out of their suffering under apartheid.  Except for Olof Palme of Sweden, it is said that the  other Western Countries “ adopted a more ambivalent position”.

It was only after Mohandas Karamachand Gandhi who appeared in the scene of South African apartheid that the world  began to look at the danger of apartheid.  Therefore Navi Pillai should begin to think differently of the West and its Human Rights activists accusing  a developing country like Sri Lanka attempting put the Communities against each other  to continue their leadership over the world,  denying the developing countries to rise above their  under development and rob them of their independence.

Be it America and the rest of the West or the anti Sri Lanka Tamil Diaspora  they are all working for their own Agenda, and their accusation of developing countries is not well founded.  We know how America, France,  Germany, Italy and Canada among others  accused the Libyan Leader Gaddafi and ended up bombarding the whole of Libya just to eliminate Colonel Gaddafi and leave the country in complete disarray. The Libyan rebels are  now killing each other  no one intervening to settle matters and develop the country to bring it back to what it was under Colonel Gaddafi.

Do you see Navi Pillai how the Western political system works ? Is it not time you take time to think over whether the accusations being levelled against Sri Lanka are justified, and that at least now there should not be a change of attitude ?

It had recently been reported that it is likely that Navi Pillai may visit Sri Lanka to see for herself how Sri Lanka attends to the question of Human Rights.   If she comes to Sri Lanka she should come open minded leaving behind her bias and prejudice  against  Sri Lanka and forgetting all what others have said about the country , and see for her self and come to conclusion after an intelligent perception of the situation.

No comments: