|
GUILTY!
Human Rights Watch indicts Sri
Lanka
Visvanathan
| |
Tales of horror from the safe zone fails to awaken the United
Nations. The leading human rights protection body calls for an
immediate session of the UN Human Rights Council. |
|
 Twenty
one refugees, who sought the security of the ‘safe zone were left
with a Hobson’s choice, as they could find neither safety nor
security in that zone. If they remained behind in the zone, they had
to face the wrath of the Sri Lankan Armed Forces shelling and
bombing.
On the other
hand, if they risked a sea journey to
India,
they would have to encounter the perils of the sea or reckless
attacks from the Sri Lankan Navy. They chose the latter and this is
what happened to them; only ten out of the twenty one survived.
However, they brought to light the horrors of life in the ‘safe
zone’ and this was their contribution to the suffering Tamils.
Horrific
accounts from refugees fleeing the fighting in Sri Lanka by boat
show the wanton disregard for civilians by the Sri Lankan government
forces, Human Rights Watch said.
"The Sri Lankan
government is doing everything it can to keep these stories of
suffering from reaching the world," said Meenakshi Ganguly, senior
Asia researcher at Human Rights Watch. "These accounts must be
multiplied tens of thousands of times to capture the full horror of
those who remain trapped by the Tamil Tigers and shelled by
government forces."
|
"The Sri Lankan government is doing everything it can to keep
these stories of suffering from reaching the world. These
accounts must be multiplied tens of thousands of times to
capture the full horror of those who remain trapped by the Tamil
Tigers and shelled by government forces." |
|
Human Rights
Watch interviewed a group of Sri Lankan refugees in Andhra Pradesh
in India. The refugees were rescued on April 29, 2009, from Indian
waters, where they had been lost at sea for nine days after fleeing
from the government declared "no-fire zone" in northern Sri Lanka's
Mullaitivu district. Accounts by refugees are especially important
because the Sri Lankan government has long refused independent
access to the combat zone for journalists and human rights monitors.
The refugees' detailed statements contradict claims by the
government that it is not using heavy weapons in the "no-fire
zone."
A motorbike taxi
driver, S. Indra Kumar, told Human Rights Watch that his family went
to Putumattalan, on the coast, after the Sri Lankan government
declared the area a safe zone: "We were living in such fear. There
was constant shelling. On April 5 or 6, our neighbors were injured
in the shelling. A shell landed inside the bunker. Ten people were
injured, and of them, five died. There was no anesthesia. The
doctors had to cut off a girl's hand without any anesthesia. My
small daughter was crying and scared. I decided then that we had to
leave."
 He
said that sometimes the shelling lasted so long that people could
not come out to use the toilets: "Whenever there was shelling, we
were in the bunker. There was heavy shelling, and the people were
easing themselves in the bunker. I would take a bucket to clean up
the mess and bury it in the sand."
His brother, S.
Indra Meenan, a 25-year-old hardware engineer, described long
periods of shelling: "In the village, every house had a bunker. Five
or six people sitting inside, sometimes for three or four hours." He
said that the Tamil Tigers sometimes fired from areas close to where
the civilians were living, putting them at risk from retaliatory
fire. "We left [by boat] on April 20 because we were scared. There
was so much bombing and shelling. Every day, at least three or four
hours, there was shelling. The firing was coming from the Sri Lankan
army."
A mason,
Sivadasa Jagdeshwaran, whose wife and 4-year-old son died on the
boat journey to India, described his family's ordeal: "In the
beginning, before we came to the safe zone, the government hospital
was still there. My wife just had a baby, so she needed medicine.
But there was no medicine at the hospital. I waited a whole day for
medicines.
|
The refugees' detailed statements contradict claims by the
government that it is not using heavy weapons in the "no-fire
zone." |
|
"The ICRC
[International Committee of the Red Cross] was giving tents, but
they could not cope with the demand. We built a shelter with coconut
thatch. And when it rained or there was shelling, we ran to the
bunker. There was shortage of food. One day, I was waiting in queue
for food and there was suddenly shelling. I ran away, but later
heard that 40 people had died."
Jagdeshwaran
described trying to bury his father, who was hit by a shell in the
safe area when he was riding his bicycle: "Many people have died.
Whenever they heard there were bodies, they would collect for
burial. Two months ago, my father went missing. I went to the
hospital to look for my father. I found his body. The entire back of
his head was missing. Only his face was there. We asked the doctor
to do something to his head so we could bury him, but they said we
should just be grateful that we had a body to bury."
 The
refugees described conditions along the sandy coastal strip where
the fighting currently is ongoing. Some were able to use tents
provided by the ICRC, while others huddled into makeshift shacks
made of sheets and coconut fronds. They found it difficult to dig
bunkers into sand. Some of those who had boats buried them in the
sand to provide a base, and then created a roof of coconut tree logs
and leaves. This was the only protection they had from the shelling.
They also described shortages of food and medicine. S. Indra Kumar,
the motorbike taxi driver, said: "The government was sending some
grain. But if the need was for 100 kilos, they were sending 25
kilos. There were no NGOs [nongovernmental organizations], no
medicines inside."
The refugees
detailed to Human Rights Watch their harrowing journeys by boat to
India, in which many died. The boat owner, Mariyada Yesudas, whose
father, sister, nephew and two brothers and his uncle, the captain
of the boat, died during the journey, said they felt they had no
choice but to leave the safe area: "The army was really close.
|
"Many
people have died. Whenever they heard there were bodies, they
would collect for burial. Two months ago, my father went
missing. I went to the hospital to look for my father. I found
his body. The entire back of his head was missing. Only his face
was there. We asked the doctor to do something to his head so we
could bury him, but they said we should just be grateful that we
had a body to bury." |
|
The LTTE was
also very close. We thought the fighting had reached us. So we
decided to leave before it was too late ... The army is very
powerful and the LTTE was withdrawing. How could it be safe for
us?"
The accounts
show the urgent need for safe humanitarian corridors for civilians
to flee the fighting.
S. Indra Meenan,
the hardware engineer, said: "We left at night when the shelling
stopped. We were 21 people. No one saw our boat. Not the LTTE, not
the army. No one tried to stop us. The boat driver had said that he
would take enough food and water for us."
He said that the
boat driver told them the trip to
India
would take nine hours. But they got lost, the motor stopped running
and they ran out of fuel. They just drifted until they ran out of
food and water: "We were drinking salt water. One by one, the people
started dying. First it was the children. My brother's little
daughter died."
Jagdeshwaran,
the mason, told Human Rights Watch about the journey by boat that
included his wife and two children and his wife's relatives: "My son
died on April 24, four days after getting on the boat. He was 4
years old. We had no water, no food on the boat. Then her father
died. Her two brothers jumped into the sea. My wife was in shock.
She was weak and not even able to move. That morning, April 29, she
asked for some water. We gave her seawater. She vomited and then she
passed away." Their 8-month-old son, having been fed on breast milk
until his mother's death, survived.
 Human
Rights Watch called on the UN Human Rights Council in
Geneva
to hold a special session on the current situation in Sri Lanka.
Human Rights Watch also reiterated its call for the UN Security
Council to place Sri Lanka on its agenda and to create a commission
of inquiry to investigate violations of international humanitarian
law by both sides.
"While the Human
Rights Council has sat on its hands, the Security Council has
repeatedly failed to discuss Sri Lanka in a way that would permit
even the mildest action," said Ganguly. "Given the gravity of the
situation, both UN bodies need to come to grips with the scale of
the disaster."
However UN
Secretary General Ban Ki-moon was displaying double standards. In
the case of Gaza and Dafur he moved fast, but when it came to
Sri Lanka
he was dragging his feet, partly constrained by objections from
China and Russia. Last month he sent his chief of staff Vijay
Nambiar to
Colombo
to pressurise President Rajapaksa to restrain from firing into the
safe zone. On his way back Nambiar broke journey in Delhi. On his
return nothing much happened.
The Tamil
Diaspora has many a task at his hands. Now, more than ever before,
they can take solace that some sections of the international
community are coming out with support. The call by University
teachers in Canada supporting the cause of right to
self-determination for the people of Tamil Eelam is a good omen.
The author is
a prolific writer on Tamil affairs.
13
May 2009
|
Read Also