Family in tow

groups including political parties and diplomatic missions over their stance on constitutional reforms, SLFP ministers are also focused on the need for measures to revive the economy. It is in this backdrop that the Cabinet of Ministers at the weekly meeting on Tuesday gave final approval to a revised National Human Rights Action Plan (NHRAP) 2017-2020. The Government’s appeal to the European Union to restore to Sri Lanka the General Sceheme of Preferences (GSP Plus) necessitated the immediate adoption of the 261 page plan. See box story for highlights. At a discussion the previous Tuesday (January 10), ministers raised several issues. As revealed in (Political Commentary of January 15), Ministers Patali Champika Ranawaka, Susil Premajayantha and Mahinda Samarasinghe protested over a provision which sought to decriminalise homosexuality.

The provision in the original draft said “Decriminalise homosexuality by repealing Section 365A of the Penal Code to conform to Article 12 of the Constitution.” This provision has been included under Rights of Women, one of ten chapters in the NHRAP. President Sirisena then requested Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe to meet the ministers who raised concerns and delete this provision as well as others which drew objections. Wickremesinghe did so during a meeting at ‘Temple Trees’, as revealed in the Sunday Times (Political Commentary) of January 15.

Confirming these developments, acting Foreign Minister Harsha de Silva said in a note to ministers last Tuesday that “Having considered the NHRAP, along with the observations submitted by H.E. the President and Hon. Prime Minister and other Ministers, the Cabinet decided on 10 January 2017 to authorise the Hon. Prime Minister to discuss with the nominated Ministers, the recommendations in the National Human Rights Action Plan taking into consideration the observations made as well as any other matters as found necessary.

“Following this decision of the Cabinet of Ministers, the Hon. Prime Minister chaired a meeting at Temple Trees on 12 January, 2017, at which the participating Ministers discussed the observations and suggestions and finalized the Human Rights Action Plan after incorporation of revisions as agreed.” Minister de Silva sought approval of the Cabinet of Ministers revised National Human Rights Action Plan.

The revised draft did not contain any reference to decriminalising homosexuality. The provision had already been deleted. However, some Ministers expressed serious concern at a provision contained under the heading of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. This provision said “Eliminate discriminatory practices within healthcare settings based on perceived or actual HIV status, sexual orientation and gender identity including steps to remove structural and systemic barriers, through in-service training programmes for healthcare staff.” Could this provision be cited to claim that both homosexuality and prostitution have now been legalised? At least some Ministers thought it could create such an impression and felt the action plan should not have any ambiguous provisions.

Among them were Patali Champika Ranawaka and Rajitha Senaratne. They argued that this provision too could be interpreted as a move to legalise homosexuality. Senaratne said those in favour of the “pseudo moralistic line” were wanting to ensure that a provision existed to decriminalise homosexuality and even allow same sex marriages. He said even most Catholic churches in the West opposed same sex marriages. “We don’t want to upset them,” he said.

President Sirisena who intervened pointed out that that such provisions could create “unnecessary problems.” He said that even the Mahanayake Theras had raised issue over the matter when he had meetings with them. He had to assure them that no such steps would be taken by the Government. Thus, to avoid misunderstandings being caused, it was agreed that the clause referred to be withdrawn from the revised draft. A ministerial source who did not wish to be identified said the decision not to “decriminalise” homosexuality was taken two weeks ago. This time, it was only the withdrawal of a clause which may or may not have caused misunderstanding over the issue.

During the discussion, Ministers Mahinda Samarasinghe and Faiszer Musthapha pointed out that after their meeting with Premier Wickremesinghe, the provisions to decriminalise homosexuality were withdrawn. Another clause that was withdrawn, as exclusively revealed in the Sunday Times (Political Commentary) of January 15 was a requirement for a two thirds majority in Parliament to declare a State of Emergency. Yet another issue raised by Ministers was a provision which said “Review and consider the right to housing within its scope the right to be free from forced evictions/unlawful evictions from lands that are used for dwelling and residential purposes and livelihood purposes.” The NHRAP recommended that provisions relating to fundamental rights in the Constitution be amended to make provision for right to housing by a citizen. Similar pledges have also been made in the plan to make provision for free education being a right.

Among the ministers who said the measures were not practical were Susil Premajayantha and Faiszer Musthapha. Thye said if the provisions were enshrined, a citizen could go to Courts demanding a house on the grounds that it was his right. Minister Rauff Hakeem moved an amendment which said that such measures would be “progressively achieved.” It was accepted unanimously.

President Sirisena was to ask acting Foreign Minister de Silva about the veracity of media reports that the Government had to heed 58 conditions from the European Union for the GSP plus to be restored. He noted that the ministers have not been informed of this position. De Silva said he would provide a report to the Cabinet of Ministers next week on the factual position. He said he was, however, aware of the EU requirement to implement 27 different conventions. Sirisena replied that the ministers should know. He said he would appoint a Ministerial Sub Committee to go into the conditions, if any.

Ministers also asked the acting Foreign Minister whether the draft NHRAP has already been submitted to the EU Headquarters in Brussels. He replied that it would be done by the Foreign Ministry after the Cabinet of Ministers had approved the revised draft. Other than the pleas with the EU to restore GSP plus, the NHRAP will also be a tool for the Government’s defence when human rights issues crop up at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva. The Council, which meets in March, is due to review the US sponsored resolution (co-sponsored by Sri Lanka) to probe alleged war crimes.

The fact that the SLFP has chosen to go its own way on the issue of constitutional reforms is significant. It has virtually shut the door for dialogue with the UNP to seek common ground. On the other hand, seeking such common ground would also mean the UNP would have to shift position. Thus, one sees an irreconcilable situation in the making. However, both sides remain determined to ensure that the current financial and economic situation is improved hurriedly and further burdens on the people are avoided. The question is whether there would be irreconcilable positions in this regard too. My dear Donald, I am writing to you to congratulate you on assuming office as the 45th President of the United States of America. What is so special about this is that just a few months ago, no one thought it would be possible and Hillary’s win was a foregone conclusion. For us in Paradise, it is a familiar feeling!

Even though you are now the most powerful person in the world, you are a businessman and you have no political experience whatsoever, having never held public office. So, you may not even know where we are on the world map. Just ask John Kerryhe was busy passing resolutions against us!

Believe me, winning elections that you are not expected to win has its disadvantages. During the election campaign, you make many promises. Because no one expects you to win, no one takes them seriously and you can say anything you want. But now that you have won, you have to honour them.

Take it from us here in Paradise, Donald, that is easier said than done. Why, didn’t you also say that the government in Washington was full of crooks and that you would clean it up? Be careful, Obama may have left the White House and you may have taken his place, but the same officials run the show.

During your election campaign, didn’t you also promise to investigate Hillary and put her behind bars for endangering national security by using a private e-mail account? If what happened in Paradise is anything to go by, threatening to put your rival in jail is one thing, actually doing it is near impossible!

Even if you manage to get a lackey of your rival arrested and remanded say, for instance, on charges of misusing government vehicles, there is a big hue and cry about going on a political witch hunt. It is as if they want you to just forgive and forget their crimes, just because they are your political rivals!

Donald, I also know that your election was controversial. In fact, some argue that you are President today only because of the ‘system’ of elections in America because, in terms of the popular vote, Hillary was ahead of you by a couple of million votes. Ah, we had the same situation in Paradise too.

Why, there were people who went around waving maps of the country which showed that the defeated candidate had in fact ‘won’ the election in the South of the country and the winner was President only because he won in the North and East. The areas he won resembled the map of ‘Eelam’, they argued.

It was as if they were saying that the winner was not fit to rule the country because his majorities came mostly from the North and East. And here we were, thinking that we were united as one country at last, after three decades of war - for which, of course, we have to thank the loser, no matter what.

Donald, even before the ink had dried on the paper you signed when you assumed office, I heard that some people were making plans to impeach you. I don’t know how the system works over there, but haven’t you got someone like an elder brother who you could appoint as Speaker to prevent that?

I also heard that you had already appointed your son in law as your senior advisor. Now, having siblings in Congress to help you out in a crisis is one thing but getting family members involved in the government is another. People like to make a big fuss about it and ask embarrassing questions.

You have already done that, so here’s a little bit of advice to minimise the damage: don’t appoint your brother to head your country’s largest telephone company. And, whatever you do, never take Donald (Jr.) with you as part of your delegation when you are visiting New York to address the UN!

I know the Constitution of the United States allows someone to hold the office of President only for two terms. That is exactly what we have here in Paradise. Even then, I am so glad that you were not rash enough to solemnly promise at your inauguration that you will never run for President again.

Sometimes people make foolish statements like that - and regret it later. Then they have to get their lackeys to sound out the public, saying silly things like the party forcing them to run again for President. We all know the general public is gullible at times, but they are not that stupid, are they?

Donald, we wish you well. If you succeed at your job, that will make the world a safer place to live in. I don’t know whether you are thinking of a second term because you will be seventy four when you finish your first, but we do know of former Presidents in their seventies who have no wish to retire! Yours truly, Punchi Putha PS: Although there are many similarities between what you did in America and what happened in Paradise, there is also a big difference. You are a businessman who has now become a successful politician on assuming office. In Paradise however, almost every politician becomes a successful businessman, once he assumes office!