http://www.defence.lk/new.asp?fname=Ambassador_Aryasinha_thanks_countries_that_stood_by_Sri_Lanka_20130325_03

Ambassador Aryasinha thanks countries that stood by Sri Lanka

Sri Lanka's Permanent Representative to the UN in Geneva Ambassador Ravinatha Aryasinha has said Thursdays vote on Sri Lanka in the United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC), had provided a rare moment of solidarity for countries that continued to believe in principle, to stand up and be counted, at a time the composition of the HRC is heavily weighted in favour of Western powers, and Bangladesh, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Jordan, Russia and Saudi Arabia who resisted action against Sri Lanka in 2012, were no longer members of the HRC. Ambassador Aryasinha said the Government of Sri Lanka was deeply grateful to the countries that stood by Sri Lanka this year - by voting against, abstaining and absenting themselves, and also helping in lobbying for support, thereby resisting this resolution, which was both deeply intrusive, as well as precedent setting.

With 13 countries opposing the resolution, 8 countries abstaining, and 1 country absenting itself, 22 out of a total of 47 members of the Human Rights Council, refrained from supporting the U.S. sponsored resolution on Sri Lanka which was taken up for debate and vote at the 22nd Session of the UNHRC in Geneva on Thursday (21 March 2013). This cross- regional group included Congo, Ecuador, Indonesia, Kuwait, Maldives, Mauritania, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Thailand, UAE, Uganda, Venezuela (which opposed); and Angola, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kenya and Malaysia (which abstained); and Gabon (which absented itself).

The resolution was supported by 25 countries, which included the US, 13 EU and EU aspirant member countries which vote as a block (Austria, Czech Rep., Estonia, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Montenegro, Poland, Spain, Rep. Moldova, Romania, Switzerland), as well as Argentina, Benin, Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Guatemala, India, Ivory Coast, Libya Peru, Republic of Korea, and Sierra Leone.

In March 2012 when the Sri Lanka resolution was taken up, 23 countries refrained from supporting the resolution - 15 opposing and 8 abstaining, while 24 countries supported it.

Courtesy : Department of Government Information

 

http://www.dailynews.lk/2013/03/27/news20.asp

Safeguard hard won peace - President

Some elements who cannot bear to see the existence of a harmonious society in the North and South are trying to disturb the prevailing unity by working against the country from both within and outside, President Mahinda Rajapaksa observed.

Speaking during a workshop for Sri Lankan Freedom Party(SLFP) grass roots level members at Temple Trees yesterday, the President noted that the Northern Province which was under the grip of terrorism and infested with bombs for 30 years is becoming self sufficient today.

He pointed out that elements with vested interests who cannot bear this success were working to stifle the country's progress. The President said in this backdrop, all Sri Lankan's had a responsibility to safeguard the hard won peace without being misled by false propaganda.

President Rajapaksa stressed that he expects the support of all to build a peaceful and prosperous country for the future generations .

He also told SLFP members that the government led by him had stood up to various pressures when defeating terrorism and stressed that in future too, both he and his government is committed to make any sacrifice on behalf of the country.

Senior Minister A.H.M.Fowzie, Ministers Maithripala Sirisena, Basil Rajapaksa, Dullus Alahapperuma, Susil Premajayantha, Sumedha Jayasena, Nirmala Kotalawela, Priyankara Jayaratne, Laksman Yapa Abeywardene, M. K. D. S.Gunewardene and Deputy Speaker Chandima Weerakkody were present on the occasion.

http://www.sundayobserver.lk/2013/03/24/main_Editorial.asp

The United Nations (UN) and its affiliated bodies had been set up mainly to unite all countries under one umbrella with the prime objective of helping each other while respecting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of every member country.

However, certain international organisations now seem to have deviated from its original principles. Certain so-called big countries have apparently taken unofficial control in some of these organisations and operate in an unbecoming manner to underline their supremacy across the globe.

The United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) is no exception. There is certainly no question about the importance of protecting human rights and voicing against any human rights violations in every corner of the world. Regrettably, some UNHRC member countries have descended to the lowest ebb of protecting the human rights of terrorists, thereby ignoring the human rights of civilians killed due to barbaric terrorism. It is patently clear that double standards are being adopted in treating gross human violations by the so-called big countries and allegations on human rights violations by countries such as Sri Lanka.

UN Human Rights Commissioner Navi Pillay’s handling of human rights issues against Sri Lanka and the West leaves much to be desired. Pillay should take cognizance that the UNHRC is not privy to her to put personal agendas in motion. It is the supreme duty of moderate member countries to prevent Pillay from exploiting the UNHRC to treat human rights issues as she so pleases.

It is crystal clear that Pillay’s bizarre concern for the human rights of terrorists killed while confronting a legitimate army of a sovereign country, has gone beyond the mandate under Resolution 19/2 which limits her role to reporting on the provision of technical assistance.

Minister of Plantation Industries and Special Envoy of the President on Human Rights, Mahinda Samarasinghe had told the UNHRC Sessions in Geneva that the Report refers several times to the United Nations Secretary General’s Advisory Panel of Experts’ (PoE) Report on Sri Lanka.

Sri Lanka earlier called upon the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) to delete all references to the Panel of Experts (PoE) Report as it was not referred to in Resolution 19/2. Hence, its reference in the OHCHR Report expands the ambit of the Report beyond the original scope and mandate of the Resolution.

On the other hand, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon is not empowered to officially appoint a committee on Sri Lanka and the PoE was commissioned by the UN Secretary-General as a private consultation. Hence, the highly controversial PoE Report is by no means the product or a request of the UNHRC, or any other inter-governmental process for that matter. Neither has it received the endorsement of any inter-governmental body nor credence or legitimacy.

Pillay's recalcitrance to visit Sri Lanka is baffling the international community. Nevertheless, it is an open secret to most Sri Lankans as to why Pillay continues to postpone her scheduled visit to Sri Lanka. Any visitor to Sri Lanka would certainly perceive the peaceful coexistence that prevails among all communities, contrary to the gloomy picture projected by LTTE cohorts and a section of the Tamil diaspora.

Sri Lanka has been inviting the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights to visit Sri Lanka since April 2011, following the country's ongoing engagement after terrorism was defeated. Despite her finding the time to visit the region in the recent past, in particular her visits to the South Asian sub-region within the past 12 months, she has been unable to schedule a visit to Sri Lanka and see for herself the remarkable transformation in the day-to-day lives of civilians liberated from the clutches of LTTE terror.

When over half a million hapless civilians in the North and the East had been subjected to untold misery, there was a deafening silence from Pillay and the UNHRC. At the time the LTTE forcibly held them as a human shield, neither the UNHRC nor the so-called international human rights watchdogs - Amnesty International or Human Rights Watch - came to their rescue.

It were only the brave sons of our soil who risked life and limb to rescue these civilians from the jaws of death. The Government resettled them in double quick time and afforded them all facilities. There is rapid development in the North and the East and a new lease of life has been opened for those civilians. However, Pillay and some UNHRC member states have conveniently ignored these stark facts and continue to sing hosannas for dead terrorists.

Minister Samarasinghe has expressed his strongest reservations on the content of the report on Sri Lanka and the procedure followed in formulating the document which bears number A/HRC/22/38. This report purports to be pursuant to Resolution L. 19/2 which Sri Lanka had rejected in toto. It is highly questionable as to how a technical mission, after a whistle-stop visit could produce such a document purporting to be a comprehensive report pursuant to L.19/2.

There is no doubt, whatsoever, that in its Report, the Office of the High Commissioner has gone beyond its mandate under Resolution 19/2 which limits her role to reporting on the provision of technical assistance in terms of OP3 thereof. The OHCHR has ventured into territory not envisaged by L.19/2 by making substantive recommendations. The recommendations contained in the Report introduce substantive measures which are totally unrelated to the mandate under 19/2.

The Report refers several times to the United Nations Secretary-General’s Advisory Panel of Experts’ (PoE) Report on Sri Lanka despite there being no provision to do so on a report filed by a panel appointed in a personal advisory capacity. Therefore, reference to it in the OHCHR Report expands the ambit of the Report beyond the original scope and mandate of the Resolution.

The conduct of the OHCHR team, on its return to Geneva, too is highly controversial and is worth a closer look. It chooses to brief a selected group of countries at an event hosted by a third country even before sharing the outcome of its visit with Sri Lanka either in Colombo or with its Permanent Mission in Geneva. Sri Lanka's Permanent Representative had, at the time, raised these concerns with Pillay.

It has now come to light how these sinister elements had operated in its lead-up to the UNHRC Sessions in Geneva. What is more interesting is that the new draft Resolution relies heavily on the OHCHR Report. Hence, it is as clear as daylight as to how these elements had operated under the guise of a fact-finding mission.

The Government has all along conducted itself in a transparent manner. It has nothing to hide and showcases to the world the new lease of life given to over half a million people rescued from the jaws of death.

The Government, in good faith, facilitated the visit of the OHCHR team, engaged in a dialogue with its Sri Lankan counterparts, and moreover, facilitated field visits and consultations with selected segments of the Sri Lanka polity. The High Commissioner herself too had welcomed the open access granted to her team.

It is deplorable that Pillay's team had exploited this opportunity for a specific hidden agenda. It was highly unethical on its part to make use of such an opportunity as a launching pad for a fresh Resolution against Sri Lanka, rather than an attempt to stay within its bounds of strictly following up on L.19/2 which stipulates the requirement of consultation and concurrence on the provision of technical assistance, consistent with Resolutions 5/1 and 5/2.

Despite its dissociation from L.19/2 and measures pursuant to that action in the Council, Sri Lanka has never ruled out cooperation with the High Commissioner for Human Rights. Sri Lanka had a Senior Advisor to the UN Country Team from the OHCHR following the tsunami devastation in December 2004.

Sri Lanka had hosted Pillay's predecessor Louise Arbour and her visit during the humanitarian operation in 2007 was characterised by open and constructive engagement.

Since 2008, the Senior Advisor from the High Commissioner’s Office contributed to the formulation of the National Action Plan on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights. Such conduct amply demonstrates Sri Lanka's willingness to work with the international community.

The international community should take a closer look at Sri Lanka’s milestone achievements since defeating terrorism and give the country sufficient time to go ahead in reconciliation. It should make a tangible contribution towards development in the North and the East as such deeds would go a long way to further improve the living standards of the Tamils and Muslims in these areas.

 

http://www.defence.lk/new.asp?fname=Govt_committed_to_reconciliation_development_Minister_Samarasinghe_20130324_03

 

No major impact of Resolution:

Govt committed to reconciliation, development - Minister Samarasinghe

Minister Mahinda Samarasinghe, Sri Lanka’s Permanent Representative in Geneva Ravinatha Aryasinha and members of the Sri Lanka delegation Dilini Gunasekera and Priyanga Wickremasinghe (back row) at the UN Human Rights Council.

The Sunday Observer conducted an email interview with Leader of the Sri Lanka Team to Geneva, President's Special Envoy on Human Rights, Minister Mahinda Samarasinghe soon after the 22nd regular session of the UN Human Rights Council ended on Friday. The Minister answered our questions, explaining the outcome of the US Resolution against Sri Lanka, minutes before he departed Geneva for another engagement.

Excerpts of the interview:

Q: Why did Sri Lanka decide at the eleventh hour to go for a vote on the US-sponsored resolution?Why do you think the US succeeded in convincing 25 countries to vote for the Resolution when Sri Lanka has shown so much progress since the end of terrorism in May 2009?

A: The results of the voting show why calling for a vote was desirable. In the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC), on this issue, there are increasing divides both in terms of the numbers of members and in geographical terms. There is a discernible shift in terms of north/south perspectives. The main proponent of the Resolution only managed to get one more vote in support of their initiative than in 2012.

This is despite the present configuration of the Council being weighted against Sri Lanka with the exit of several countries that viewed our side of the story with objectivity. Enormous political and economic pressure was brought to bear, especially on developing countries, to vote in favour of the Resolution. However, only 25 of the 47 UNHRC Members voted against our side of the argument.

Some speculated that the US-sponsored Resolution would be carried by an overwhelming majority. Others, that it would be carried by consensus with Sri Lanka caving in to pressure; both groups were wrong. Sri Lanka will not silently acquiesce in any initiative that goes against our interests.

Q: What impact will the Resolution have on Sri Lanka in general, and the country's long-term development plan and the reconciliation process in particular? Will there be any sanctions involved?

A: I do not see any major impact as long as we have our plans on track. You spoke of the progress since 2009 and also raised the issues of reconciliation and development. This is what our Government is committed to doing. We have not remained in one place since the end of the battle against terrorism in 2009.

Since then, we have done tremendously well in terms of resettlement, demining, promoting livelihoods in affected areas, ensuring economic development, rehabilitation and reintegration of ex-combatants and in the restoration of social, physical and economic infrastructure.

The Resolution has, at its heart, an agenda other than that of promotion of humanitarian issues or human rights. It seems to be pursuing other agendas bordering on the political. This we will expose time and again and resist with all our efforts.

After all, what we are doing is for the benefit of all our people. We must project this positively to the outside world and ensure that the international community is enabled to take an objective and impartial view of our situation as it evolves.

LTTE presence

Q: Why didn't we get the support of the entire Asian bloc? Is it correct to say the strong presence of the LTTE in the African region had an impact on their vote? Are you concerned about this development?

A: I adverted earlier to the extreme pressure brought on countries to vote in favour of the Resolution. We opposed it on principled grounds which I set out in my statement to the Council on Thursday (March 21).

There are internal and external dynamics in every region which must be analysed and appropriate remedial measures taken.

I took the opportunity, along with our Ambassador Aryasinha in Geneva, to meet as many delegations as we could and brief them on the reality in Sri Lanka and to inform them as to why the Resolution was unnecessary, unwarranted and ill-conceived.

The remnants of the defeated LTTE remain and wield influence in many countries. They are highly motivated, well-funded and are working against any success in reconciliation in Sri Lanka. They do exercise some influence in countries in which they have taken up domicile. They influence the domestic agenda in these countries.

We have done much to lay out the facts pertaining to the conflict before our friends in the international community. We must, nevertheless, do more to safeguard the image of the country.

Q: Is it correct to say the US watered down the Resolution to appease the countries who would agree to vote in their favour? What are the key areas that were altered in the final draft and how can we say that those are in our favour?

A: The United States, as the main sponsor of the Resolution, held two informal meetings with stakeholders to discuss the text.

This is the usual practice prior to bringing resolutions before the UNHRC. We made a comprehensive presentation on March 8 at the first of these meetings, as to our principled opposition. Several other countries also suggested amendments, making the text more objective and balanced. It may be the case that some suggestions were taken on board to convince developing countries that the text was moderated or softened in some way, to win their support.

However, the main thrust of the Resolution was kept intact. These amendments to the text did not win over many members except those predisposed to vote in favour. I think our categorical rejection of the text as unacceptable, based on logical and reasoned argument, won us the support and understanding of many members. This is so because our arguments were presented in a professional and forthright manner. There was little rhetoric in what we said and we were able to present our case effectively.

Invitation to visit Sri Lanka

Q: Has the HR High Commissioner conveyed a date on which she will undertake the visit to Sri Lanka?

A: To my knowledge, she has not, even though our invitation of April 2011 has been reiterated several times, most recently, this month.

As we said in our statements, several further developments could take place after we have a discussion with her pursuant to a country visit.

We note that she has visited the Asian region and the South Asian sub-region in the past few years, but had not visited Sri Lanka.

We could, for instance, based on her on-site observations, discuss further cooperation in support of Sri Lanka's national reconciliation including measures for the promotion and protection of human rights.

Sri Lanka does not need resolutions to work with the High Commissioner for Human Rights. We have had a representative of her office as Senior Advisor for Human Rights to the UN Country Team in Sri Lanka for several years.

I hosted a visit, as Human Rights Minister, for Louise Arbour in 2007. We have no issue engaging with special procedures and mandate holders. We have engaged in the past and will do so in the future. We are awaiting dates from Pillay, and if those dates are mutually convenient, we can facilitate a visit.

Q: You mentioned that the US Resolution will set a bad precedent and the Indian Opposition too warned against supporting the US in view of the Kashmir issue. How valid are these concerns?

UN Human Rights Council sessions

A: Our concerns are genuine and are shared by many countries which could be subject to such inordinate scrutiny based on subjective and political criteria.

As I said in the Council, our battle against terrorism ended three years and 10 months ago. We have, as I also said, shown verifiable progress.

This was acknowledged and appreciated during the UPR of Sri Lanka between November and March. However, we find that we are subject to disproportionate attention when there are other situations, ongoing conflicts elsewhere, which require the urgent attention of the UNHRC.

When the UNHRC becomes politicised, when it is manipulated to focus on situations which do not warrant such attention, it ceases to have relevance and credibility. This is what happened to the Council's predecessor - the UN Commission for Human Rights. We do not want the same fate to befall the UNHRC.

It was our hope, as a founder member of the Council in 2006, that constructive engagement between and among Member and Observer States would be the order of the day.

That is the spirit in which we engage with our peers and friends. If some are trying to pursue political agendas through the Council, that would be a great pity.

Courtesy : Sunday Observer

Development of Town Hall Square, Viharamahadevi Park under MCUDP:

Bringing city's beauty closer to people

By Ranil Wijayapala

What the Town Hall Square would look like

People who used to visit the Colombo City on a daily basis and accustomed to viewing the nearly 100-year-old colonial type Town Hall building in the heart of the city with its surrounding fences, the lawn and adjoining Viharamahadevi Park today see it with demolished fences, a ground filled with soil and dead grass and a lot of other activities that are taking place in and around that area.

Despite this situation, people who used to walk across the Town Hall area to attend to various day-to-day needs feel that the area is more accessible to them than before as they can walk freely across the Town Hall area and the Viharamahadevi Park with no fences to delay them from reaching their desired destinations. Therefore, people feel that the Viharamahadevi Park and the Town Hall building are closer to them than ever before. So, the Town Hall Square, the main square in the city of Colombo, which attracts hundreds and thousands of people on a daily basis on multiple reasons varying from visiting hospitals, recreational purposes, education and various other purposes is becoming closer to the people.

However, what puzzles them now is whether that closeness will be temporary or permanent for them with the ongoing changes and the construction work. The answer lies at the hands of the authorities implementing the Metro Colombo Urban Development Project (MCUDP) which is aimed at mitigating floods and improving public convenience in the Metro Colombo area which consists of areas under the Colombo Municipal Council, Dehiwala - Mount Lavinia Municipal Council, Kotte Municipal Council and Kolonnawa Urban Council, as development of the Town Hall area and Viharamahadevi Park is also a part of this project. The project which has many components is now being implemented under the supervision of the Defence and Urban Development Ministry.

An artist's impression of the Viharamahadevi Park

According to Senior Engineer, Procurement of the Metro Colombo Urban Development Project C.M.M. Iqbal, under the MCUDP, this important and landmark area of Town Hall and the Viharamahadevi Park will be developed as a public square, integrating urban activity with recreation, beauty and increased connectivity while preserving and enhancing its colonial characteristics. The Town Hall area is an important landmark of the city and it is estimated that on a daily basis, except on public holidays, 60,000 pedestrians and 35,000 motorists use this section of the city. The Viharamahadevi Park attracts about 5,000 people a day which increases to about 8,000 on public holidays.

Therefore, it has become a prerequisite to develop this area to facilitate the people who are visiting this area on a daily basis.

In three stages

“These developments were commenced in three stages and the three stages of the project will cover the painting of the colonial type Town Hall building, improvement of the lawn surrounding it, resurfacing of the roads surrounding Town Hall and Viharamahadevi Park and the development of the Viharamahadevi Park. The three phases of the project have already commenced and will be completed by the end of this year”, Iqbal said. The Colombo Municipal Council is supervising the project that is being implemented under the MCUDP with funding made available by the World Bank. “If we take the Viharamahadevi Park, we are going to improve the park on par with public parks in other developed countries as the present park is in a primitive and dilapidated state compared to the standards of the public parks in other countries”, he said.

Inside the park, all the paths will be improved with an interlocking pavement with a linear park around it. Restaurants foot paths, an elephant bath, tables to facilitate the people to have their meals are some of the improvements to be carried out under this project.

According to Engineer Iqbal, the play area of the children’s park will be reinstalled according to international standards. “We are considering the safety of children when installing this new equipment which are available in major parks in other countries. We are also going to have water-based play areas in the park, enabling the children to have fun inside the park”, he said.

“We have given specifications for the contractors to install these equipment for the play area, considering the safety and standards” he said.

Apart from this, other facilities inside the park will also be developed by installing toilets, restaurants for the people to have their meals and refreshments while visiting the park for recreational purposes. As these developments are made in the Viharamahadevi Park, the area around the Town Hall will also be improved parallelly, enabling the people to relax in the area peacefully.

The Town Hall as it looks now

“Under this project, we are preserving the Town Hall building by painting it after removing its old paint. However, we are not going to make changes inside the building. It is up to the CMC authorities to make the required changes within the Town Hall building”, he said.

The development of Anagarika Dharmapala Mawatha, C.W.W. Kannangara Mawatha, F.R. Senanayake Mawatha and Nelum Pokuna Mawatha will also be carried out parallel to the improvement in the Viharamahadevi Park and the Town Hall area.

Senior Architect of the Colombo Municipal Council S.U.B. Dolapihilla, further explaining the development of the area around Town Hall, said the basic idea behind these developments is to facilitate the people arriving at the Town Hall Square, which is considered to be the biggest square in the Colombo City.

However, at present, this important part of the city is not planned in a way that unlocks its potential as a major landmark and vital open space in the heart of Colombo, limiting opportunities to integrate and increasing urban activity with recreation and beauty.

Different purposes

“We know that people are coming to this area for different purposes. If they have to walk far to get their businesses attended to fast and if they don’t have a place to relax while attending to their work, that will definitely inconvenience them. What we hope to do through this project is to avoid that inconvenience to the people”, he said.

Accordingly, the area around the Town Hall will be beautified and improved, enabling the people to relax there. He said the lawn of the Town Hall grounds will be replanted with Bermuda grass after removing the entire lawn it had earlier and a sophisticated sprinkler system will be installed in the lawn after improving the drainage system to prevent the lawn getting flooded during heavy rains.

Asked whether the area will be made available for public and political meetings in the future, he said that the ground was earlier used for political and other public meetings because it had security with the fence around it. “With the new improvements and the removal of the fence, the ground will no longer be suitable for such public events”, he said.

He said the road behind the Town Hall building will also be open to the public to move from one street to the other easily.

Apart from the projects under the MCUDP, the Colombo Municipal Council will also allocate Rs. 200 million to have two separate buildings in the Town Hall premises - one to relocate the section which people attend on a daily basis to pay their rates to the CMC and also to have an information centre for tourists.

“We are hoping to preserve the original architectural value of the Town Hall building as its ground floor was originally designed as a ballroom. We are trying our best to preserve it as a ballroom, shifting the offices currently there to another location”, he said.

Buildings for vendors

A special feature under this project is that not a single vendor will lose their livelihood; three small buildings will be set up to relocate the businesses of the vendors, he said.

He said although Viharamahadevi Park is centrally located in the city, it offers limited connectivity between the busy urban streets that surround it with a fence that has been erected right around its perimeter. As such, the present use and presentation of space within the Town Hall area makes its resources less visible and less usable to the public. “Through this project, we hope to create that connectivity between the people and this area”, Dolapihilla said. He said the connectivity of the area will be improved with the removal of the fence around the park and by making the park more accessible to the people. “Even those who are working and residing around the park will be able to walk across the park at any time of the day with the removal of the fence and with the installation of the lighting system within the park”, he said.

Asked whether there is any possibility of having unwanted elements there in the park after making it accessible during night, Dolapihilla said that there is no need to worry about such a situation as the park will be lit up in the night with a special lighting system.

“We should not stop these developments fearing that bad things would happen. When the Independence Square area was open for the public during the night, there were such fears among the people. But nothing happened as enough security was at hand in the area. Likewise, the Viharamahadevi Park will also be made accessible to the people during the night and either the Colombo Municipal Council or the Urban Development Authority will deploy security personnel in the park”, he said.

Explaining the changes within the park, he said the equipment of the present ‘Sathutu Uyana’ area will be replaced with a children’s play area as the CMC has decided to shift the Sathutu Uyana to Elli House Park, Madampitiya since there is a proposal to develop it as a theme park.

“The children’s play area in the Viharamahadevi Park will be redone in a more innovative manner and a lot of activities will be available for the children once this play area is completed”, he said.

According to Dolapihilla, people in the city will be able to have a wonderful experience once these changes are effected within the Viharamahadevi park and the area surrounding the Town Hall, developing it as the main square in the Colombo City where people can gather and relax, improving the connectivity between the city and its people.

http://www.dailynews.lk/2013/03/26/news17.asp

 

Communal harmony helps defeat conspiracies - Kumarasiri Hettige

Secretary to the President on Parliamentary Affairs Kumarasiri Hettige said that if we fail to strengthen the reconciliation process with the country experiencing rapid development, we would be forced back into the dark age . Therefore, we should further strengthen peace and unity between the communities in our Motherland.

Secretary to the President on Parliamentary Affairs Kumarasiri Hettige unveiling the plaque to open the Sri Lanka Red Cross Ampara branch. Sri Lanka Red Cross Chairman Jagath Abesinghe, Sri Lanka Red Cross National Secretary Nimal Kumara, Deputy Director General Col Sudath Madugalla, Sri Lanka Red Cross Ampara District office Chairman Sunil Dissanayake, Medical Superintendent of Ampara Lanka Jayasinghe and Chief Representative of the International Red Cross and Red Cresent Movement in Sri Lanka Bob McRow were also present.

Hettige was speaking as the Chief Guest at a recent function to declare open the Ampara branch office of the Sri Lanka Red Cross.

He further said that if we harbour divisions among ourselves using various petty issues as an excuse, this would only serve the purpose of those conspiring against Sri Lanka.

Hettige said the Sri Lanka Red Cross helps the government by rendering a magnanimous service in providing relief and assistance to people in need. We should not forget how Sri Lankans,one and all stood shoulder to shoulder to provide relief to those affected during the 2004 tsunami disaster. President Mahinda Rajapaksa who was Prime Minister at that time played a leading role in coordinating the relief work.

“The Sri Lanka Red Cross has rendered a very important service to the Northern and Eastern Provinces. The Indian government has also providing houses to the people who were displaced by the terrorist conflict in the North. The Sri Lanka Red Cross has initiated work to construct 20,000 houses on a request made by President Mahinda Rajapaksa.

“Some officials only think of their positions. They should go beyond that and think of the people who suffer. The government implements huge development projects for the good of the people. If noble selfless people can help the distressed families get back on their feet, it would be a worthwhile task which would spur social development. Voluntary services are very important for a country’s progress.

The Red Cross was founded by great humanist Henry Dunant.The war between France and Austria in 1859 had a great impact on Dunant’s way of thinking. That humanitarian concept developed into the Red Cross which operates in 188 countries today,” Hettige said

http://www.dailynews.lk/2013/03/26/news15.asp

Aranthalawa monument could be a symbol of amity’

Dharma Sri Abeyratne in Aranthalawa

President Mahinda Rajapaksa said the Aranthalawa monument which has been erected at the exact place where, the horrendous massacre of members of the Sangha took place could pave the way for ethnic harmony and help build bridges between different communities .

President Mahinda Rajapaksa inspecting the sculptured recreation of the ill-fated Aranthalawa bus in which the massacre took place. Picture by Sudath Silva

The President said so while participating in the opening ceremony of Aranthalawa Sri Indrasara International Buddhist Centre.

The Buddhist Centre has also been constructed at the exact place where the massacre took place.

The President unveiled the special monument setup in Aranthalawa where 31 Buddhist Bikkhus were brutally killed by the LTTE 26 years ago. Chief incumbent Ven. Hedoga Indasara Thera and a group of Buddhist monks fell victim to this act of barbarism of the LTTE while they were travelling in a bus belonging to Ampara depot.

To commemorate this incident an international Buddhist centre will be established at the assassination site named after the Ven. Hedoga Indasara thera.

The President added that the monument has not been constructed to create hatred among ethnic groups. It will help to strengthen friendship and mutual understanding between all Sri Lankans understanding and realizing the futility of conflict.

All countrymen are duty bound to take steps to prevent conflicts of this nature . Accordingly, everyone has to join hands to promote ethnic harmony. Eventhough the monument signifies the gravest atrocity committed against members of the Sangha, it paves the way for fostering amity and brotherhood among communities, the President added. The President said that terrorism which brought much disaster to the country was eradicated due to the sacrifice of the brave soldiers.

With the dawn of peace, the areas which bore the brunt of terrorism such as Aranthalawa are being gradually developed paralell to the national development drive of the government.The Aranthalawa Massacre took place on June 2, 1987, when a bus carrying Buddhist monks and a few unarmed civilians were ambushed by 20 armed LTTE cadres near the village of Nuweratheanne, in Aranthalawa. They then ordered the driver of the bus, which was carrying the monks on a pilgrimage from their temple in Mahavapi to the Kelaniya Raja Maha Vihara, to drive into the nearby Aranthalawa jungle.

After the bus stopped, the LTTE cadres went on a rampage, attacking the monks with guns and swords and also shooting some of them with machine guns.

Among the dead were 31 young novice monks and their mentor, the Chief Incumbent of the Vidyananda Maha Pirivena, Hegoda Sri Indrasara Thera. Four civilians, who were traveling in the bus were also among the dead.

Three monks, who escaped the massacre sustaining critical injuries are still receiving medical treatment. Another monk was permanently disabled.