Features
The Resurrection of Fiji
Law, Diplomacy and the Politics of Human Rights
by Dr. SinhaRaja Tammita-Delgoda
Sri Lanka will shortly be facing renewed scrutiny at the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva, where elements of the international community have been calling for action over unsubstantiated war crimes allegations. This may lead to sanctions against senior officers of the Sri Lanka armed services and even political leaders.
Sri Lanka’s response has been characterized by the usual lack of preparedness, last minute flurries of activity and panic. There has been very little research, serious study or thinking. This has been the hallmark of Sri Lankan strategic and diplomatic thinking over the years.
The current president of the UNHRC is Fiji’s ambassador in Geneva, Nazhat Shameem Khan, a diplomat and former judge, who has been the Permanent Representative of Fiji to the United Nations since 2014. Khan, who served as the council’s vice president in 2020, was elected on January 15, 2021.
This story began at the UN Headquarters in New York in 2018 when Fiji won its bid for a seat on the United Nations Human Rights Council, receiving the second highest number of votes among all the candidate. This was a moment of global success for Fiji, giving this small Pacific nation international recognition for its advancement and protection of human rights.
What is not widely known is that since independence Fiji has had a tumultuous recent history, characterized by ethnic tensions, military coups and recurrent suspensions of the democratic process. A closer look will reveal strong historic parallels and many commonalities between Sri Lanka and Fiji. Both countries have had to face similar problems and the challenges. These parallels and commonalities are clear and immediate and deeply relevant.
Like Sri Lanka, an island nation, Fiji was colonized by the British during the 19th century. The second Governor of Fiji (1875-1880) was the Liberal Party politician and colonial administrator Sir Arthur Hamilton-Gordon, who went onto become the 16th governor of British Ceylon (1883–1890).
Hamilton- Gordon’s policies were to have decisive influence in the shaping the history of modern Fiji. He presided over the suppression of an uprising against the British in the central highlands. As with the suppression of the Kandyan rebellion in 1818, the British adopted a scorched earth policy, burning rebel villages and destroying fields.
In 1878 Gordon decided to import indentured labourers from India to work on the sugarcane fields which had replaced the cotton plantations. As in Sri Lanka, this began a wave of emigration which completely transformed the social, ethnic and political dynamics, leaving an enduring impact on the country. Whereas native Fijians, iTaukei, remain the majority (54 %), Indo-Fijians, the descendants of these Indian laborers now comprise 38% of the population. The tension between these two ethnic groups has dominated the politics of the islands since independence.
Unlike Sri Lanka, which has remained a democracy since independence in 1948, Fiji has seen several coups and many political revolutions. It also has a history of military rule, first by Colonel Sitiveni Rabuka, later Prime Minister from 1992-1999, and then Commodore Voreqe(Frank) Bainimarama, Prime Minister since 2007. Both men seized power when they were serving officers, before going onto to become elected political leaders
In 1970 Fiji gained independence as the Dominion of Fiji. Until April 1987, it was governed by the Alliance Party, which championed policies of “multiracialism.” This government, which had a majority of Indian members in the legislature, was overthrown twice in 1987 in military coups led by Colonel Sitiveni Rabuka. These coups were driven by demands for the protection of majority rights and sought to entrench native Fijian dominance in any future government. To this end, Fiji declared itself a republic and revoked the 1970 constitution. In 1990 a new constitution, designed to concentrate power in the hands of Fijians, was established. Fiji was expelled from the Commonwealth in the same year.
Under the 1990 constitution, Colonel Rabuka was elected to parliament and went on to become prime minister in 1992. In 1999 Mahendra Chaudhry became Fiji’s first prime minister of Indian origin. Chaudhry’s premiership was bitterly opposed by Fijian nationalists, and in May 2000 he and his government were taken hostage and deposed by a military backed group, claiming to be acting for indigenous Fijians. A counter coup was launched by the Commander of the Armed Forces, Voreque (Frank) Bainimarama. The rebels were neutralized and an interim military government was formed. This led to the restoration of democracy and new elections.
However, the tensions between the military and the elected government remained. In December 2006, Bainimarama seized power in another coup, removing the prime minister and establishing himself as the country’s sole leader. In January 2007 he restored executive powers to the President, Ratu Josefa Iloilo(2000-2006, 2007-2009), who then named Bainimarama as the head of an interim administration. In 2009, the Fiji Court of Appeal ruled that the Bainimarama government was illegal. In response, President Iloilo abrogated the 1997 constitution and dismissed the country’s judges. National elections were postponed and another interim government appointed, again with Bainimarama as prime minister.
During this period Fiji was isolated and largely ostracized by western powers such as Australia, New Zealand, UK and Europe. Fiji’s participation in UN peacekeeping operations was also suspended. Neighbouring Australia and New Zealand were the loudest international critics and in 2009 Fiji expelled both the Australian and the New Zealand ambassadors, accusing them of interfering in the Fijian judiciary. Fiji also shut down many NGOs. In the same way as Sri Lanka, Fiji was forced to look beyond its traditional partners towards China, who refrained from involving herself in domestic politics.
Only in 2014, after years of delays, did a democratic election take place. The parliamentary elections of 2014 were won by Bainimarama’s Fiji First party. Bainimarama, who had resigned as head of the military in March, was sworn in as prime minister. In the 2018 general election the Fiji First Party won again an outright majority for the second time and Bainimarama was sworn in as Prime Minister for a second term.
In 2017 Fiji presided over the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP23).It was the first time a small island developing state had assumed the presidency of the negotiations. Fiji’s ability to preside over an international meeting of this calibre signalled its growing reinstatement within the international order. This was followed a year later, by Fiji’s election to the seat on the United Nations Human Rights Council.
It is an extraordinary story, the resurrection of a nation which was an international outcast and its transformation into a human rights champion and a pillar of the international community. How did this turnaround take place?
Many of the answers appear to lie in the efforts of Fiji’s Permanent Representative in Geneva, Nazhat Shameem Khan. Fiji opened its first Mission in Geneva in 2014, barely months before the country’s Universal Periodic Review at the Human Rights Council. Under this process the human rights situation of all UN Member States are reviewed every five years. Every year, 42 States are reviewed during three Working Group sessions. The result of each review is reflected in the Final Report of the Working Group, which then lists the recommendations which each country will have to implement. Khan proved herself a skilled diplomat and negotiator and a convincing advocate. Not only did Fiji succeed in passing the review. In less than three years, she has managed to secure the Presidency of United Nations Climate Change Conference and now the UNHRC.
One of Fiji’s pre-eminent judges, Khan was educated at Sussex University and Cambridge, where she obtained a Master of Philosophy in Criminology. In 1983 she was admitted to the Bar of England and Wales at the Inner Temple in London. In 1994 Khan became the first woman in Fiji to be appointed as the Director of Public Prosecutions and in 1999, she became Fiji`s first female High Court judge. In 2009 she became a private practitioner, concentrating on training lawyers and judges in human rights law, sentencing law, governance and litigation.
There is a background of law and human rights in the family. Khan’s sister, Shaista Shameem, also a lawyer, was the director and then chairman of the Fiji Human Rights Commission (FHRC), later serving as United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Use of Mercenaries (2004-2005) and becoming a member of the UN Working Group. During her time as chairman of the FHRC, Shameem published a report defending the 2006 coup, an action which was strongly criticized by Human Rights Watch. What is striking is that despite their legal and human rights background, both sisters have played an important role in defending and rehabilitating their country.
What appears to have gone unnoticed is the role played by many Sri Lankans in helping revive Fiji’s judicial sector and resuscitate the country’s international reputation. During the years when Fiji was frantically trying to establish law and order, many Sri Lankans played key roles in rebuilding the country. Some of the most important judicial offices were all held by Sri Lankans and until 2014 the Fijian judiciary was heavily dependent on Sri Lankan expertise. This was despite the considerable pressure which was put on many Sri Lankans not to live or work in Fiji. In 2009 Fiji’s chief justice, Anthony Gates, accused Australia and New Zealand of telling a number of Sri Lankan judges that they would be banned from entering Australia or New Zealand if they took up appointments on the Fiji bench.
Although as a country Sri Lanka has not helped Fiji, there remains a deep recognition and gratitude towards the many Sri Lankans who lived and worked in the country during this time. There are strong connections and in some cases enduring relationships. Shameem Khan herself has worked alongside Sri Lankan jurists and is very conscious of their skill, expertise and integrity.
The prima facie evidence suggests that Sri Lanka could be dealing with a sympathetic interlocutor with whom it already has many connections. Even at this late stage however, there are options and strategies which can be pursued.
This administration has three to four research institutions at its disposal, the BCIS, the Institute of National Security, the Lakshman Kadirgamar Centre and the Kotalawela Defence University. Yet there has been no study or appraisal of these potential links and their possible connections. It is clear from the public discourse that we have no idea of whom we are dealing with, what their backgrounds are and where their skills and attitudes lie. Perhaps we have not even begun to think about it.
The resurrection of Fiji seems to have taken place within a decade, much the same decade that Sri Lanka found itself being gradually isolated and targeted. Through the use of law, human rights and diplomacy, Fiji has rebuilt its place in the world. The parallels suggest that this has been achieved through the implementation of a carefully calibrated national strategy, one which has been concerted, sustained and informed. It shows what could have been done and how.
by Dr Gotabhya Ranasinghe
Senior Consultant Cardiologist
National Hospital Sri Lanka
When we sought a meeting with Hon Dr. Ramesh Pathirana, Minister of Health, he graciously cleared his busy schedule to accommodate us. Renowned for his attentive listening and deep understanding, Minister Pathirana is dedicated to advancing the health sector. His openness and transparency exemplify the qualities of an exemplary politician and minister.
Dr. Palitha Mahipala, the current Health Secretary, demonstrates both commendable enthusiasm and unwavering support. This combination of attributes makes him a highly compatible colleague for the esteemed Minister of Health.
Our discussion centered on a project that has been in the works for the past 30 years, one that no other minister had managed to advance.
Minister Pathirana, however, recognized the project’s significance and its potential to revolutionize care for heart patients.
The project involves the construction of a state-of-the-art facility at the premises of the National Hospital Colombo. The project’s location within the premises of the National Hospital underscores its importance and relevance to the healthcare infrastructure of the nation.
This facility will include a cardiology building and a tertiary care center, equipped with the latest technology to handle and treat all types of heart-related conditions and surgeries.
Securing funding was a major milestone for this initiative. Minister Pathirana successfully obtained approval for a $40 billion loan from the Asian Development Bank. With the funding in place, the foundation stone is scheduled to be laid in September this year, and construction will begin in January 2025.
This project guarantees a consistent and uninterrupted supply of stents and related medications for heart patients. As a result, patients will have timely access to essential medical supplies during their treatment and recovery. By securing these critical resources, the project aims to enhance patient outcomes, minimize treatment delays, and maintain the highest standards of cardiac care.
Upon its fruition, this monumental building will serve as a beacon of hope and healing, symbolizing the unwavering dedication to improving patient outcomes and fostering a healthier society.We anticipate a future marked by significant progress and positive outcomes in Sri Lanka’s cardiovascular treatment landscape within the foreseeable timeframe.
by Fr. Emmanuel Fernando, OMI
Jesuit Fr. Aloysius Pieris (affectionately called Fr. Aloy) celebrated his 90th birthday on April 9, 2024 and I, as the editor of our Oblate Journal, THE MISSIONARY OBLATE had gone to press by that time. Immediately I decided to publish an article, appreciating the untiring selfless services he continues to offer for inter-Faith dialogue, the renewal of the Catholic Church, his concern for the poor and the suffering Sri Lankan masses and to me, the present writer.
It was in 1988, when I was appointed Director of the Oblate Scholastics at Ampitiya by the then Oblate Provincial Fr. Anselm Silva, that I came to know Fr. Aloy more closely. Knowing well his expertise in matters spiritual, theological, Indological and pastoral, and with the collaborative spirit of my companion-formators, our Oblate Scholastics were sent to Tulana, the Research and Encounter Centre, Kelaniya, of which he is the Founder-Director, for ‘exposure-programmes’ on matters spiritual, biblical, theological and pastoral. Some of these dimensions according to my view and that of my companion-formators, were not available at the National Seminary, Ampitiya.
Ever since that time, our Oblate formators/ accompaniers at the Oblate Scholasticate, Ampitiya , have continued to send our Oblate Scholastics to Tulana Centre for deepening their insights and convictions regarding matters needed to serve the people in today’s context. Fr. Aloy also had tried very enthusiastically with the Oblate team headed by Frs. Oswald Firth and Clement Waidyasekara to begin a Theologate, directed by the Religious Congregations in Sri Lanka, for the contextual formation/ accompaniment of their members. It should very well be a desired goal of the Leaders / Provincials of the Religious Congregations.
Besides being a formator/accompanier at the Oblate Scholasticate, I was entrusted also with the task of editing and publishing our Oblate journal, ‘The Missionary Oblate’. To maintain the quality of the journal I continue to depend on Fr. Aloy for his thought-provoking and stimulating articles on Biblical Spirituality, Biblical Theology and Ecclesiology. I am very grateful to him for his generous assistance. Of late, his writings on renewal of the Church, initiated by Pope St. John XX111 and continued by Pope Francis through the Synodal path, published in our Oblate journal, enable our readers to focus their attention also on the needed renewal in the Catholic Church in Sri Lanka. Fr. Aloy appreciated very much the Synodal path adopted by the Jesuit Pope Francis for the renewal of the Church, rooted very much on prayerful discernment. In my Religious and presbyteral life, Fr.Aloy continues to be my spiritual animator / guide and ongoing formator / acccompanier.
Fr. Aloysius Pieris, BA Hons (Lond), LPh (SHC, India), STL (PFT, Naples), PhD (SLU/VC), ThD (Tilburg), D.Ltt (KU), has been one of the eminent Asian theologians well recognized internationally and one who has lectured and held visiting chairs in many universities both in the West and in the East. Many members of Religious Congregations from Asian countries have benefited from his lectures and guidance in the East Asian Pastoral Institute (EAPI) in Manila, Philippines. He had been a Theologian consulted by the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences for many years. During his professorship at the Gregorian University in Rome, he was called to be a member of a special group of advisers on other religions consulted by Pope Paul VI.
Fr. Aloy is the author of more than 30 books and well over 500 Research Papers. Some of his books and articles have been translated and published in several countries. Among those books, one can find the following: 1) The Genesis of an Asian Theology of Liberation (An Autobiographical Excursus on the Art of Theologising in Asia, 2) An Asian Theology of Liberation, 3) Providential Timeliness of Vatican 11 (a long-overdue halt to a scandalous millennium, 4) Give Vatican 11 a chance, 5) Leadership in the Church, 6) Relishing our faith in working for justice (Themes for study and discussion), 7) A Message meant mainly, not exclusively for Jesuits (Background information necessary for helping Francis renew the Church), 8) Lent in Lanka (Reflections and Resolutions, 9) Love meets wisdom (A Christian Experience of Buddhism, 10) Fire and Water 11) God’s Reign for God’s poor, 12) Our Unhiddden Agenda (How we Jesuits work, pray and form our men). He is also the Editor of two journals, Vagdevi, Journal of Religious Reflection and Dialogue, New Series.
Fr. Aloy has a BA in Pali and Sanskrit from the University of London and a Ph.D in Buddhist Philosophy from the University of Sri Lankan, Vidyodaya Campus. On Nov. 23, 2019, he was awarded the prestigious honorary Doctorate of Literature (D.Litt) by the Chancellor of the University of Kelaniya, the Most Venerable Welamitiyawe Dharmakirthi Sri Kusala Dhamma Thera.
Fr. Aloy continues to be a promoter of Gospel values and virtues. Justice as a constitutive dimension of love and social concern for the downtrodden masses are very much noted in his life and work. He had very much appreciated the commitment of the late Fr. Joseph (Joe) Fernando, the National Director of the Social and Economic Centre (SEDEC) for the poor.
In Sri Lanka, a few religious Congregations – the Good Shepherd Sisters, the Christian Brothers, the Marist Brothers and the Oblates – have invited him to animate their members especially during their Provincial Congresses, Chapters and International Conferences. The mainline Christian Churches also have sought his advice and followed his seminars. I, for one, regret very much, that the Sri Lankan authorities of the Catholic Church –today’s Hierarchy—- have not sought Fr.
Aloy’s expertise for the renewal of the Catholic Church in Sri Lanka and thus have not benefited from the immense store of wisdom and insight that he can offer to our local Church while the Sri Lankan bishops who governed the Catholic church in the immediate aftermath of the Second Vatican Council (Edmund Fernando OMI, Anthony de Saram, Leo Nanayakkara OSB, Frank Marcus Fernando, Paul Perera,) visited him and consulted him on many matters. Among the Tamil Bishops, Bishop Rayappu Joseph was keeping close contact with him and Bishop J. Deogupillai hosted him and his team visiting him after the horrible Black July massacre of Tamils.
Sri Lanka-Singapore Free Trade Agreement
By Gomi Senadhira
senadhiragomi@gmail.com
“You might tell fairy tales, but the progress of a country cannot be achieved through such narratives. A country cannot be developed by making false promises. The country moved backward because of the electoral promises made by political parties throughout time. We have witnessed that the ultimate result of this is the country becoming bankrupt. Unfortunately, many segments of the population have not come to realize this yet.” – President Ranil Wickremesinghe, 2024 Budget speech
Any Sri Lankan would agree with the above words of President Wickremesinghe on the false promises our politicians and officials make and the fairy tales they narrate which bankrupted this country. So, to understand this, let’s look at one such fairy tale with lots of false promises; Ranil Wickremesinghe’s greatest achievement in the area of international trade and investment promotion during the Yahapalana period, Sri Lanka-Singapore Free Trade Agreement (SLSFTA).
It is appropriate and timely to do it now as Finance Minister Wickremesinghe has just presented to parliament a bill on the National Policy on Economic Transformation which includes the establishment of an Office for International Trade and the Sri Lanka Institute of Economics and International Trade.
Was SLSFTA a “Cleverly negotiated Free Trade Agreement” as stated by the (former) Minister of Development Strategies and International Trade Malik Samarawickrama during the Parliamentary Debate on the SLSFTA in July 2018, or a colossal blunder covered up with lies, false promises, and fairy tales? After SLSFTA was signed there were a number of fairy tales published on this agreement by the Ministry of Development Strategies and International, Institute of Policy Studies, and others.
However, for this article, I would like to limit my comments to the speech by Minister Samarawickrama during the Parliamentary Debate, and the two most important areas in the agreement which were covered up with lies, fairy tales, and false promises, namely: revenue loss for Sri Lanka and Investment from Singapore. On the other important area, “Waste products dumping” I do not want to comment here as I have written extensively on the issue.
1. The revenue loss
During the Parliamentary Debate in July 2018, Minister Samarawickrama stated “…. let me reiterate that this FTA with Singapore has been very cleverly negotiated by us…. The liberalisation programme under this FTA has been carefully designed to have the least impact on domestic industry and revenue collection. We have included all revenue sensitive items in the negative list of items which will not be subject to removal of tariff. Therefore, 97.8% revenue from Customs duty is protected. Our tariff liberalisation will take place over a period of 12-15 years! In fact, the revenue earned through tariffs on goods imported from Singapore last year was Rs. 35 billion.
The revenue loss for over the next 15 years due to the FTA is only Rs. 733 million– which when annualised, on average, is just Rs. 51 million. That is just 0.14% per year! So anyone who claims the Singapore FTA causes revenue loss to the Government cannot do basic arithmetic! Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, I call on my fellow members of this House – don’t mislead the public with baseless criticism that is not grounded in facts. Don’t look at petty politics and use these issues for your own political survival.”
I was surprised to read the minister’s speech because an article published in January 2018 in “The Straits Times“, based on information released by the Singaporean Negotiators stated, “…. With the FTA, tariff savings for Singapore exports are estimated to hit $10 million annually“.
As the annual tariff savings (that is the revenue loss for Sri Lanka) calculated by the Singaporean Negotiators, Singaporean $ 10 million (Sri Lankan rupees 1,200 million in 2018) was way above the rupees’ 733 million revenue loss for 15 years estimated by the Sri Lankan negotiators, it was clear to any observer that one of the parties to the agreement had not done the basic arithmetic!
Six years later, according to a report published by “The Morning” newspaper, speaking at the Committee on Public Finance (COPF) on 7th May 2024, Mr Samarawickrama’s chief trade negotiator K.J. Weerasinghehad had admitted “…. that forecasted revenue loss for the Government of Sri Lanka through the Singapore FTA is Rs. 450 million in 2023 and Rs. 1.3 billion in 2024.”
If these numbers are correct, as tariff liberalisation under the SLSFTA has just started, we will pass Rs 2 billion very soon. Then, the question is how Sri Lanka’s trade negotiators made such a colossal blunder. Didn’t they do their basic arithmetic? If they didn’t know how to do basic arithmetic they should have at least done their basic readings. For example, the headline of the article published in The Straits Times in January 2018 was “Singapore, Sri Lanka sign FTA, annual savings of $10m expected”.
Anyway, as Sri Lanka’s chief negotiator reiterated at the COPF meeting that “…. since 99% of the tariffs in Singapore have zero rates of duty, Sri Lanka has agreed on 80% tariff liberalisation over a period of 15 years while expecting Singapore investments to address the imbalance in trade,” let’s turn towards investment.
Investment from Singapore
In July 2018, speaking during the Parliamentary Debate on the FTA this is what Minister Malik Samarawickrama stated on investment from Singapore, “Already, thanks to this FTA, in just the past two-and-a-half months since the agreement came into effect we have received a proposal from Singapore for investment amounting to $ 14.8 billion in an oil refinery for export of petroleum products. In addition, we have proposals for a steel manufacturing plant for exports ($ 1 billion investment), flour milling plant ($ 50 million), sugar refinery ($ 200 million). This adds up to more than $ 16.05 billion in the pipeline on these projects alone.
And all of these projects will create thousands of more jobs for our people. In principle approval has already been granted by the BOI and the investors are awaiting the release of land the environmental approvals to commence the project.
I request the Opposition and those with vested interests to change their narrow-minded thinking and join us to develop our country. We must always look at what is best for the whole community, not just the few who may oppose. We owe it to our people to courageously take decisions that will change their lives for the better.”
According to the media report I quoted earlier, speaking at the Committee on Public Finance (COPF) Chief Negotiator Weerasinghe has admitted that Sri Lanka was not happy with overall Singapore investments that have come in the past few years in return for the trade liberalisation under the Singapore-Sri Lanka Free Trade Agreement. He has added that between 2021 and 2023 the total investment from Singapore had been around $162 million!
What happened to those projects worth $16 billion negotiated, thanks to the SLSFTA, in just the two-and-a-half months after the agreement came into effect and approved by the BOI? I do not know about the steel manufacturing plant for exports ($ 1 billion investment), flour milling plant ($ 50 million) and sugar refinery ($ 200 million).
However, story of the multibillion-dollar investment in the Petroleum Refinery unfolded in a manner that would qualify it as the best fairy tale with false promises presented by our politicians and the officials, prior to 2019 elections.
Though many Sri Lankans got to know, through the media which repeatedly highlighted a plethora of issues surrounding the project and the questionable credentials of the Singaporean investor, the construction work on the Mirrijiwela Oil Refinery along with the cement factory began on the24th of March 2019 with a bang and Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and his ministers along with the foreign and local dignitaries laid the foundation stones.
That was few months before the 2019 Presidential elections. Inaugurating the construction work Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe said the projects will create thousands of job opportunities in the area and surrounding districts.
The oil refinery, which was to be built over 200 acres of land, with the capacity to refine 200,000 barrels of crude oil per day, was to generate US$7 billion of exports and create 1,500 direct and 3,000 indirect jobs. The construction of the refinery was to be completed in 44 months. Four years later, in August 2023 the Cabinet of Ministers approved the proposal presented by President Ranil Wickremesinghe to cancel the agreement with the investors of the refinery as the project has not been implemented! Can they explain to the country how much money was wasted to produce that fairy tale?
It is obvious that the President, ministers, and officials had made huge blunders and had deliberately misled the public and the parliament on the revenue loss and potential investment from SLSFTA with fairy tales and false promises.
As the president himself said, a country cannot be developed by making false promises or with fairy tales and these false promises and fairy tales had bankrupted the country. “Unfortunately, many segments of the population have not come to realize this yet”.
(The writer, a specialist and an activist on trade and development issues . )
US sports envoys to Lanka to champion youth development
Rahuman questions sudden cancellation of leave of CEB employees
