Sri Lanka 1 2004
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
COUNTRY INFORMATION BULLETIN Immigration and Nationality Directorate SRI LANKA BULLETIN 1/2004 (August 2004) Contents 1. Introduction 1.1 2. Recent Political Developments General Elections 2.1 The Make up of the current government 2.17 Continuing peace process 2.25 3. Reference to source material Introduction 1.1 This Bulletin has been produced by the Country Information and Policy Unit, Immigration and Nationality Directorate, Home Office, from information about Sri Lanka obtained from a wide variety of recognised sources. It does not contain any Home Office opinion or policy. 1.2 This Bulletin has been prepared for background purposes for those involved in the asylum / human rights determination process. The information it contains is not exhaustive. It concentrates on the issues most commonly raised in asylum / human rights claims made in the United Kingdom. 1.3 The Bulletin is sourced throughout. It is intended to be used by caseworkers as a signpost to the source material, which has been made available to them. The vast majority of the source material is readily available in the public domain. 1.4 This Bulletin is intended to cover major developments that have taken place in Sri Lanka since publication of the Sri Lanka Country Report in April 2004 and must be read in conjunction with that. It considers events up to and including 25 June 2004. 1.5 This Bulletin and the accompanying source material are publicly disclosable. Where sources identified in the Bulletin are available in electronic form the relevant link has been included. The date that the relevant link was accessed in preparing the Bulletin is also included. Paper copies of the sources have been distributed to nominated officers in Asylum Caseworking Directorate and all Presenting Officer Units. Recent Political Developments (2 April – 25 June 2004) General Elections – 2 April 2004 2.1 The Guardian, in an article dated 5 April 2004, reported that UPFA (United People Freedom Alliance), the coalition led by President Chandrika Kumaratunga, had won 105 Sri Lanka Country Information Bulletin 1/2004 seats, 8 short of a parliamentary majority forcing her to find more coalition partners to form a government. The UNP (United National Party), the main opposition party led by the Prime Minister Ranil Wickremasinghe, reduced its number of seats from 109 to 82. The TNA (Tamil National Alliance), openly backed by the LTTE (Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam) gained 22 seats in the 225-seat parliament. “Although there were allegations of vote-rigging, especially in the war-torn north and east of the country, the elections were uneventful. During the last election, in 2001, 25 people were killed on election day”. [1] 2.2 The final official results were published in the official web-site of the Department of Elections. Other parties that obtained seats in parliament were: JHU (Jathika Hela Urumaya) with 9 seats; SLMC (Sri Lanka Muslim Congress) with 5 seats and UCPF (Up- Country People’s Front) and EPDP (Eelam Peoples Democratic Party) with respectively 1 seat each. [2] The National Assembly has 225 members, elected for a six-year term, 196 members elected in multi-seat constituencies and 29 by proportional representation. [3] 2.3 The BBC reported on 3 April 2004 that “Election monitors declared the poll generally free and fair”. According to the Elections Commissioner Dayananda Dissanayake, mentioned by the BBC, although there were 250 complaints of intimidation or ballot stuffing during the polls, voting was free of violence. “Generally speaking, election laws were very well enforced." For the first time all polling stations in the country were monitored by election monitors. The BBC also reported that “Although there were few reports of violence, Tamil parties opposing the Tamil National Alliance accused the Tigers of intimidation and malpractice.” [4 a] According to the final report of the European Union’s Election Observation Mission (EU EOM) to Sri Lanka’s Parliamentary Elections (issued on 17 June 2004) problems occurred in the North and East on polling day. “EU and domestic observers reported widespread impersonation and multiple voting in most cluster stations.” [5] (p2) 2.4 The BBC report continued commenting that the UNP appeared to have lost support in its traditional stronghold Sinhalese villages bordering the northern conflict zone that had voted overwhelmingly for the party in the previous poll [December 2001]. [4 a] 2.5 According to a report of BBC News Online correspondent in Colombo, dated 3 April 2004, amongst the factors that might have contributed to the defeat of the UNP leader Wickramasinghe are the fact that many people believe he had given too many concessions to the Tamil Tigers, that his policies favoured the rich and failed to impress the population and that he lacks charisma and may have lost out in the battle of personalities with the president. [4 b] 2.6 According to the EU EOM report: ”Overall, it would be fair to conclude that the 2004 elections were largely conducted in a democratic manner, apart from the North and the East. If the election results in the North and East had been a critical factor in determining who formed the government, it would have raised questions about the legitimacy of the final outcome. The events that took place in this part of Sri Lanka during the course of this election were totally unacceptable and are the antithesis of democracy. “[5] (p3) 2.7 The report continued: “During the 2004 elections the major incidences of violence originated with the LTTE, whereas in the earlier elections, the primary source of the violence (although not all) were the country's two largest political parties. However, tension between them still resulted in some violence this time, especially in Kurunegella and Digamadulla at the end of the election campaign. A number of factors contributed to Sri Lanka Country Information Bulletin 1/2004 the overall improvement. In the 2000/2001 elections, the rule of law was not enforced impartially. This created an election environment which experienced unacceptable violence and intimidation. In contrast, policing of the 2004 campaign and Election Day was much less politicized. During the campaign the police also enforced the prohibition of posters and political processions, removing potential flashpoints and therefore contributing to a substantial decrease in election-related violence. The combined effect of the establishment of a National Police Commission and the determination of the Commissioner of Elections contributed to the substantial improvement.” [5] (p1) 2.8 According to the EU EOM report, the reason for the LTTE motivated violence was due to two factors: firstly that the LTTE intended that no other rival Tamil party to the TNA would be able to claim to represent Tamil interests; secondly the split between the LTTE in the north and in the east that exacerbated the situation. [5] (p2) 2.9 The EU EOM report continued: “The election campaign experienced a number of other significant shortcomings. Although there were fewer complaints about abuse of state resources during the 2004 campaign, there was, once again, major controversy regarding media reporting of the election. The state controlled media which was under the control of Presidential appointees did not fulfill their duty to ensure that all political parties and candidates obtained balanced and objective coverage thereby ensuring voters were provided with sufficient and objective information upon which to base their choice. Additionally some of the private electronic media also failed to discharge their responsibilities in this way.” [5] (p2) 2.10 The report continued stating that: “Apart from the unique problems of the North and East, the overall election administration functioned well. Personnel at all levels were well prepared, well organized and fulfilled their responsibilities professionally and impartially. Despite the fact that 17th Amendment to the Constitution has not been fully implemented, the Commissioner of Elections has been able to exercise some of the powers vested in him by this amendment compared to previous elections. Strengthened by these powers and his already established commitment to conducting a "free and fair election" the Commissioner of Elections earned the respect of Sri Lanka's diverse political community. His consensual approach and the way he involved representatives of the political parties instilled confidence in and respect for the election administration.” [5] (p2) 2.11 According to the EU EOM observers: “Compared to the two previous elections, the scale and gravity of the problems was greatly diminished during the 2004 general election. While this is to be welcomed, it must also be stressed that there are no grounds for complacency particularly as this may give rise to false hopes that the disturbing features of the 2000 and 2001 elections will not re-occur. Although the most serious incidences of violence originated with the LTTE, it must not be forgotten that over two thousand cases of election-related violence were reported. This grim statistic underlines once again the continuing fragility of democracy in Sri Lanka.” [5] (p2) 2.12 Sri Lanka government sources detail a lower figure on complaints than the EU EOM report. [7 a] 2.13 As far as the Election Day was concerned, according to the EU EOM report: Sri Lanka Country Information Bulletin 1/2004 “The overall pattern on Election Day was of a well-administered process with voters participating in large numbers. The EU observers assessed the polling