 |
 |
 |
 |
Amidst conjecture during the Parliamentary debate as to who killed journalist
Dharmaretnam Sivaram, it was hard to ignore the heavy gloom that hung in the
precincts of the August assembly.
Coming ironically just days after the world celebrated World Press Freedom Day,
there was hope that some civility would be accorded during the debate over the
scribe's untimely death. But, it seemed too much to expect of our legislators.
There were those who were in too big a hurry to point the finger and jump to
conclusions.
As could be predicted, accusations flew across the floor, sans sympathy or real
concern, or so it seemed. It was not difficult to gather that the killing was going to
provide enough fodder for many interested parties to carry their political agendas
forward. And one did not have to wait long as the drama began to take shape in the
exact manner feared!
But, it was certainly sad to see that there would be no real sympathy for the brutal
manner in which Siva's pen had been silenced. Whether one agreed with his writings
or not, it has necessarily to be accepted that his writings had every right to be printed
and served a necessary function in the peace process and its run-up to a viable
solution.
The refusal by the South to accept the necessity to understand the thinking of the
LTTE if it really seeks a peaceful solution to the ethnic question was reflected in the
argument that gained strength in the post-Sivaram killing.
Sivaram, subjected to a second death.
Amidst conjecture during the Parliamentary debate as to who killed journalist
Dharmaretnam Sivaram, it was hard to ignore the heavy gloom that hung in the
precincts of the August assembly.
Coming ironically just days after the world celebrated World Press Freedom Day,
there was hope that some civility would be accorded during the debate over the
scribe's untimely death. But, it seemed too much to expect of our legislators.
There were those who were in too big a hurry to point the finger and jump to
conclusions.
As could be predicted, accusations flew across the floor, sans sympathy or real
concern, or so it seemed. It was not difficult to gather that the killing was going to
provide enough fodder for many interested parties to carry their political agendas
forward. And one did not have to wait long as the drama began to take shape in the
exact manner feared!
As expected the Tamil National Alliance asked for a debate (two hours) on the killing,
the JVP and the SLFP used nonsensical technicalities to postpone it and true to its
new-found path, the opposition United National Party did not utter a word!
As opposition to the motion moved by TNA Parliamentary Group Leader R.
Sambanthan to appoint an International Commission of Inquiry grew, the Speaker
suspended sittings for 10 minutes for the Group Leaders to decide either way.
Forty minutes later the Group had decided on a full day's debate on Friday. But
being a Friday it really meant an extra half an hour only. The TNA nevertheless had
agreed and so everyone seemed happy. The TNA then deemed it fit to express its
condemnation of the killing by holding a two-minute protest walk up to the Speaker's
chair with banners demanding justice. Clearly, the TNA knew that there was going to
be some protest, hence the readiness of the banners, of course. I could almost see
the typically cynical smirk etched in Siva's face!
But, it was certainly sad to see that there would be no real sympathy for the brutal
manner in which Siva's pen had been silenced. Whether one agreed with his writings
or not, it has necessarily to be accepted that his writings had every right to be printed
and served a necessary function in the peace process and its run-up to a viable
solution.
The refusal by the South to accept the necessity to understand the thinking of the
LTTE if it really seeks a peaceful solution to the ethnic question was reflected in the
argument that gained strength in the post-Sivaram killing.
Sambanthan stressed that Sivaram was not a member of any militant organization,
and noted that he was a journalist who was respected for his clever analysis of the
ethnic issue of the country.
"He was not a member of any armed group. The motive was simply to silence his pen.
This trend must stop for the sake of democracy," he said.
However, conspiracy theories flew across the floor and both sides tried to pin blame
on the other.
If JVP MP Wimal Weerawansa, who possibly had the biggest defensive act to
perform, chose to accuse the UNP, as the best possible modus operandi. He said the
delays in alerting the police raised serious doubts in the minds of the three who had
spent the last few hours with Sivaram.
Accusing journalist Kusal Perera of not doing the 'conscious duty' he claimed that by
their failure they had given the killers time to do their job. This however was strangely
minutes after stressing that it was too early to point the finger at anyone. He accused
that by placing the body within a high security zone the conspirators had made a
clear attempt at pointing the finger at the government.
"Who is the idiot who will put the body right behind Parliament, if it was the
government as alleged?," he asked.
"Look at the timing. It was days before the donor meeting in Kandy, weeks from the
Geneva NGO conference and days prior to the Press Freedom Day. It was a clear
attempt to point the finger at the government," he asserted.
Weerawansa used the opportunity to place blame with the LTTE when he pointed out
that it was fast becoming necessary for the Tamil society to nourish free thought,
which he alleged the LTTE was thwarting. Claiming that free thinkers like Rajini
Thiranagama and Neelan Thiruchelvam were denied their contribution to society. He
said that Tamil society was "threatened into silence by the LTTE, and not the Sinhala
society".
But, it became the 'necessary' function of the next speaker for the UNP, Dr. Rajitha
Senaratne to demolish that argument and accuse the government of pushing every
free-thinking Tamil to the camp of the Tigers. He accused that by calling them Tigers
the government had pushed "Sivaram and the entire Tamil society to the arms of the
LTTE as the sole representatives of the Tamil people".
"Every time a Tamil stands up for his community this fate befalls him," he added. It
wasn't however clear if he was using the opportunity to kill two birds with one stone
when he vouched that Sivaram was not a Tiger.
"He wouldn't go down to that level," he maintained.
He seemed not bothered with beating about the bush about the assassination theory
however, when he claimed that the High Security Zone and the point of abduction in
Bambalapitiya were elements that only the LTTE or the government used to its effect.
And he didn't bat an eyelid when he used the very next line to suggest that it was the
JVP that had created the backdrop for the killing.
"The JVP laid the foundation for it. They should take responsibility for the killing," he
added, recalling that the JVP at a recent meeting called Siva the biggest Tiger.
Certainly his words ring true of the plight that befalls any writer that attempts to
espouse the cause he or she believes in, regardless of whether the rest of society
can accept such justification or not.
Sadly, Deputy Minister Sripathy Sooriyarachchi thought it fit to go deeper into a
conspiracy theory that was losing its lustre by the minute. He went on to question why
Kusal Perera delayed going to the police, maintaining however that there wasn't any
basis why the JVP should be implicated 'simply because they spoke against his
political beliefs.'
He then expressed a strange notion, however, that they as MPs had every right to tell
the country the 'background' of certain journalists. It would certainly be interesting to
find out if the Deputy Minister was going into the immunity enjoyed by the MPs to
greater length, whereby they could not be held responsible for anything they said
against anyone!
The LTTE theory is likely to have gained steam from the fact that Siva did of late
write questioning the ability of the LTTE to continue to hold the Tamil community
under its reins, or if the LTTE will indeed allow free _expression through its proposed
radio station. But the manner in which the debate was moving, it was not difficult to
see that Siva's was not going to be the last such end to a journalist's life. In the
apparent failure by both sides to come to terms with the injustice that had been done
to the pen, and thereby free _expression in the country, came the necessary
realization that even the most brutal of killings was only going to serve a political
purpose.
Hence, barely had the gloom disappeared, before Sivaram had become victim to a
second cruel death. His name was only the last in a list of some five that the
politicians were throwing around to gain political mileage. Politics and the backdrop to
the death apart, the sad manner in which a journalist who had carried out his duty in
penning his convictions was being dealt with, spoke volumes of the huge gap that still
remained in the two sides to the peace process.
Irrespective of whether he gave life to the arguments of the terrorist LTTE or not,
none other than the legislators who had a crucial role to play in the peace process
themselves had little patience for the argument of the opposing camp. It is clearly
such hypocrisy that is going to prove a stumbling block to the peace process than
anything else.
The continuing refusal to accept the ground reality that the LTTE, despite its bloody
past and present, was a decisive factor in the peace deal, is obviously going to prove
a bigger threat to a viable peace than the terrorism that the LTTE is involved in the
North, East and the South. And given the manner in which the decision makers of
both sides of the divide handled the issue over Sivaram's death, a lot is going to
remain undone, a lot more immaturity displayed and a greater deal more injustices
towards the freedom of the media than would seem the terrorists alone could force
upon us. [Courtesy: Daily Mirror - 7th May 2005]
All parties condemn Dharmaratnam Sivaram killing a
dastardly crime
By Sajeewan Wijewardana and Gihan de Chickera
The blame on who killed reputed journalist Dharmaratnam Sivaram alias Taraki
spinnned to and fro across the divide in parliament yesterday when it took up a
debate on the killing, with fingers being pointed at the JVP, UNP, EPDP and LTTE.
Almost all party leaders spoke on the manner of the killing and how competent a
journalist he was, and roundly condemned it as a dastardly crime. The JHU however
did not participate in the debate.
Though no party directly framed another in the killing, each hinted and pointed a
finger at a certain party, with the JVP hinting it was the UNPs work, the UNP hinting it
was the JVP, TNA blaming the EPDP and EPDP blaming the LTTE.
At one point of the debate, TNA MP Suresh Premachandran seeing the melee said
that the reason for asking for an international commission of inquiry was because
they could not trust the government. "See, the JVP is blaming the UNP, the UNP is
saying it was the JVP, EPDP says it was the LTTE, how can we accept this situation,"
he queried.
The TNA wanted an international commission of inquiry of eminent persons to
investigate the killing and ensure that justice was done.
Winding up the debate, Deputy Defence Minister and Minister of Public Security, Law
and Order Ratnasiri Wickremanayake noting the suspicions in the house said that
they had received new information relating to the killing.
"We got new details yesterday. But I'm afraid we cannot divulge them inside the
house due to its potential impact on the inquiries. But I assure that the details that
emerged in today's proceedings will be used to enrich our investigations. I as the
Minister in charge, give the fullest assurance in the floor of this house that we will find
the culprits and bring them to book," he said.
He however said that it might take sometime; but in the end justice would be done.
"We have faith and confidence in our Police and CID," he said.
Meanwhile Media Minister Mangala Samaraweera said that 'no cover up' will be
allowed, and assured a transparent inquiry. "If there are any lapses, then we can
consider of an international inquiry. But I don't think we need to internationalise this
issue at this juncture. I understand that the UNP blamed us, but they have no right to
criticise us as they never respected media freedom," he said.
UNP MP Dr. Rajitha Senaratne said that Mr. Sivaram was not an LTTEer, but was
made one by his opponents. "Sivaram gave voice to the Tamils. At times it may be
parallel to the LTTE's views. I have information that he was told to stop writing in ten
days, according to a friend of mine. The only people who could have done it was the
LTTE or the Government. But with the JVP in the UPFA it is more powerful. JVP
attacked him in their LANKA paper. The Patriotic National Movement prepared the
background for his killing," he said.
Meanwhile the EPDP leader and UPFA Minister Douglas Devananda condemned the
killing of Sivaram and said the slain journalists wife would soon reveal the truth about
the killing and the past. He said the LTTE killed many Tamils and neither the LTTE
nor the TNA honoured those dead. "Why honour only some? They killed
Balanadarajah Iyar and Nimalarajan, but the TNA or LTTE didn't make a fuss. Why
don't you speak against these killings? The LTTE has a history of killing its own and
blaming others", he said.
SLMC Leader Rauf Hakeem said opinions cannot be silenced by killing people who
express them, and said that Sivaram's writings be remembered for ever.
Int'nl Commission needed on Sivaram killing: TNA
TNA leader R. Sambandan said in Parliament yesterday that the killers of reputed
journalist Dharmaretnam Sivaram had acted with impunity and with a confidence that
they could evade the law, and it was therefore necessary to initiate an international
commission of inquiry into killing of the journalist.
Opening the debate on the killing and abduction of Sivaram, Sambandan said that
the international commission could comprise qualified persons either from SAARC
countries like India, Pakistan and Bangladesh or from Commonwealth countries like
Australia, New Zealand and Canada.
"Mr. Sivaram was not an armed person. He did not carry a weapon even for
self-defence. He was not a member of an armed organization. He was not an
intelligence operative. The motive of the killing was to silence the pen of Sivaram. If
this trend continues free and fearless journalism could become the jackboot of
fascism", he stressed.
Sambandan moved a motion in Parliament on Wednesday for a two-hour debate on
Sivaram that day itself but a decision was taken at the party leaders meeting to set
aside a full day debate on the issue on Friday. [Daily Mirror]
CP opposes Int'l Commission on Sivaram's killing
The Communist Party, which is a member of the UPFA government while condemning
the killing of Sivaram, in Parliament yesterday said they were opposed to an
International Commission being appointed to investigate the incident.
Minister of Constitutional Affairs D. E. W. Gunasekara speaking on the debate on
Sivaram's killing said that when prominent leaders such as former President,
Presidential candidate Gamini Dissanayake, Lalith Athulathmudali were killed and
when President Chandrika Kumaratunga was injured in an attempted assassination,
there were no suggestions of such an International, Impartial and Independent body
being appointed to probe the incidents.
The Minister said that in such a context where so many killings had taken place,
Sivaram's killing did not warrant for such a commission.
The Minister made this statement in response to the TNA requesting the government
to constitute an independent, impartial, international commission to probe the
abduction and killing of journalist Dharmaretnam Sivaram.
The Minister also urged all parties not to speculate at this point who killed Sivaram
but to wait for the facts to come out. "The truth must be told, but it must first be
verified until such time we should not speculat," he said.
The Minister also attacked unprofessional conduct of both politicians and the media
and said the media has got used to abusing its freedom without responsibility.
"Reason must come before emotion in tackling these issues. The media also has a
responsibility.
The Tamil media in the South must specially learn to report with impartiality," the
Minister said. [Daily Mirror]
Don't use Sivaram's killing to point fingers says JVP
By Sajeewan Wijewardana and Gihan de Chickera
The JVP in parliament yesterday questioned of persons who last associated Sivaram
before his abduction, the motives of the killers behind placing his body near the
parliament complex, and the reporting of the killing by certain electronic media,
immediately after the killing in the morning.
Speaking during the debate on the abduction and killing of journalist Dharmaretnam
Sivaram, JVP Group leader Wimal Weerawansa said from what he knew of the
circumstances surrounding the incident, the people who last associated Sivaram
made no attempt to make a police complaint on the abduction on the night of April
28, and the motives behind such inaction needs to be questioned.
"Anyone would agree that the most practical thing to do at the time of such an
abduction would be to make a police entry. But none of the three people present
made an entry that night," said Weerawansa referring to journalist Kusal Perera,
Prasanna Ratnayake, brother of UNP MP Sagala Ratnayake and health sector trade
union leader Ravi Kumudesh who met with Sivaram at the Bambalapitiya restaurant
that night.
"Sivaram's wife was the first person to make an entry to the police at 1.30 a.m. Why
didn't Kusal Perera, Prasanna Ratnayake and Ravi Kumudesh make police entries
that night? What were the motives behind such inaction, questioned Weerawansa
who also condemned the killing of Sivaram and advocated a full state inquiry into the
incident.
Weerawansa also said that whoever placed Sivaram's body near the parliament, did
it with the motive of implicating the government to the killing, "By dumping the body of
Sivaram near the parliament it is obvious that the killers, whoever they were, wanted
the government to be held responsible for the abduction and killing, he said.
Weerawansa also charged that two leading media personalities Bandula
Padmakumara and Lasantha Wickremetunga reported the incident on their
respective morning TV shows in a manner, which implicated the JVP to Sivaram's
killing. Weerawansa said that Padmakumara had at the start of 'Mul Pituwa' TV show
made a comment which created suspicion over the JVP's involvement in the killing
and that Lasantha Wickremetunga had interviewed Sunanda Deshapriya of the Free
Media Movement on 'Good Morning Sri Lanka' and implied that JVP had a hand in
the killing.
Weerawansa also mentioned the killing of Thinamurasu editor Balanandaraja Iyer
and several other Tamil journalists and writers who had been gunned down in the
recent past.
Weerawansa concluded his speech by stressing the need not to use Sivaram's killing
as a chance to point fingers but to use it to work towards a culture within Tamil
journalism where different viewpoints are allowed to flourish.