Monday, April 7, 2014
How do you establish in law that the testimony one gives before a UNHRC inquiry infringes the Constitution of Sri Lanka?
the GOSL has just made a statement that they will prosecute individual testimony if it infringes the Constitution of Sri Lanka.
You can only do this if the Supreme Court, a GOSL vassal says so. They are the final arbiter of court action. The statement made by the Govt. that they would prosecute witnesses at the UNHRC hearings is a DIRECT threat, another method of muzzling freedom of expression and of stopping people from telling the truth, as the truth hurts for the GOSL who are pretended it is a lie, and a pretense now being shown as fact, and that fact has been put in the heads of the gullible people who now believe the lies and then some, and it is then going to be difficult in the current climate for evidence to be obtained for a proper investigation.
It appears to me that the GOSL is bent on scuppering any chance of the UNHRC from proceeding by knobbling the potential witnesses before they get to say anything. This is just ridiculous.
I have seen film taken by soldiers on the frontline that were brutal depictions of their behavior. However it is behavior that is normal of our people. You only have to visit a police station to know how people are beaten to obtain a confession! The policeman will tell you that unless he is beaten almost to death he will not confess, so though he knows it is against the rules he has to do it to protect the public!
This is therefore similar to that example, as it is NOT just a race thing, it is a Sri Lankan uncivilized behavior thinking that we must change. UNHRC is not going to change that.
Further race does not determine man’s inhumanity to man. All races and religions in Sri Lanka are just as culpable, and there is a long way to go before we as a country are able to control our emotions rationally and NOT resort to hitting till death just because we have an argument or disagreement or slight altercation.
In that context may I remind our reader that if a pedestrian or motorcyclist is killed by a car, van, bus or lorry, it is assumed that the driver is the culprit, and unless he flees the scene of the accident, he is liable to be lynched by an easily aroused mob who seconds earlier, before the incident was kissing babies and passing the time of day on the road!!! I hope these examples put in perspective what I am trying to say, and why Sri Lankans don’t want the rest of the world telling them they are bent on genocide, and I know for a fact only a minority of Sri Lankans are such, and of that a higher percentage of Tamil and Muslim fall into the category of implicitly not trusting Sinhala people due to their own prejudices.