Gajalakshmi
Paramasivam – 17 April 2016
Terrorism Accusations – part of Hate Speech?
As per regular feedback – there are some
positive signs from within the Tamil community that they are open to
downgrading the Terrorism label. As
stated previously – to majority Tamils LTTE were rebels. The more people hear
the label the less the motivation to merge with wider society. A study of the
caste system as practiced in Northern Sri Lanka and in many parts of India would
confirm this ‘separation’. Instead of studying one could do it the express way –
i.e. – to have the experience as a victim. Likewise, in the case of Terrorism
accusations. I often refer to my Association with the LTTE in 2003 – to confirm
whether or not LTTE are terrorists. To me the answer is NO. I felt more terrorized when my expressions of ‘intellectual discoveries’ as per my lawful
position – were suppressed and I was threatened with punishment by law
enforcement officers much less educated than I – in the Australian system, than
I ever felt in Sri Lanka – including when working with the LTTE. But the
experience helped me not to limit myself to the ‘official’ system – but to go
beyond it to experience the system of Truth. I am however cautious not to act
in breach of the laws known to me – be they secular or cultural to that
place/institution.
On that basis – did the LTTE deserve the
Terrorism label more than the group that eliminated them? The answer to that is easier for me when I go into the caste
system. The mind structure of majority members of the LTTE would be close to
the folks of Thunaivi than to those of Vaddukoddai town area where the higher caste ruled over lower caste. Thunaivi itself
is a toddy tapper village and one would from time to time hear someone in Vaddukoddai
say even today ‘Nalam Nalamthaan’/Toddy tapper is toddy tapper. Those who lived
by the caste hierarchy tend to use that pathway for their interactions and this
is more on the side of the Thunaivi folks towards their own ‘freedom’.
I filed a Defamation case against Australian
branch of our family of Vaddukoddai origin, claiming that they defamed me on the basis that I was
married a second time. Initially I had the experience of that downgrading
within the family. I did not take any public action on that basis. But later
when they claimed this in Sri Lankan Court through their legal Attorney it
became a Public label. I had to then act on behalf of all women who married more
than once. The Defamation case itself was filed here in Australia on the basis
of my true experience. But the Court ruled that it did not have jurisdiction to
hear the case. However, as an Australian leader – the Judge confirmed her identity that it would have been hurtful to me. To me
that was the real victory. The parallel of that happened in Jaffna Courts in
November 2015, when the Judge disciplined the very same legal Attorney for not
keeping his team ready to merge with the reality of Jaffna which shutdown in
protest over the rape and death of a teenager. The Court may or may not rule in
our favor at the technical/money level. But to the extent we are true – the return
will happen to those who appreciate the difficulties of the system as theirs. The
Colombo barrister in the above matter in Jaffna expressed that he could move to
have the matter dismissed due to our Attorney not turning up due to the
shutdown. I did not know of a law that would facilitate this. But I knew that
such would be unjust. So I brought out my Truth – and said that since I had
done most of the paperwork – I was ready to represent myself. The Judge
postponed the hearing and then disciplined the Attorney for the other side.
Yet, all this would have been prevented in
the family had worked out the pathway shown by Thesawalamai – according to which
males led males and females led females and they did not become common until
the same side was not available. I practiced Thesawalamai for my husband and
Common pathway for my children to whom the Australian pathway is the trunk
route. This deprived both of their ‘freedom’ when in the ‘other’ system but
they are stronger in self-governance than their parallels known to me.
If therefore we have the choice of two
pathways – and we choose the easier one – then we do enjoy more freedom but we
also separate ourselves from the stronger minded leaders. Those who accept
defeat not because they think they are failures / wrong doers but because it is
the limit of the system – succeed by become owners of the whole. THIS is the
opportunity that has been taken by the Tamil Community leadership at National level
through the position of Opposition Leadership. That was not directly as per the
UN system. Like in 1977 – it happened due to the real failures of Majoritarian
rulers. It happened as per the system of Truth which cannot be controlled by
the physical nor the mental.
The LTTE itself happened due to caste based
separation that deprived those separated from being connected to the higher
mind. When activated at young age – they would show good outcomes / wins but
beyond that they would stagnate. This happened to the Sinhalese at Global level
through Mr. Rajapaksa who did not have the ‘experience’ in wider world the same
way many Tamil politicians also do not have. In fact by asking for Eelam State
to be facilitated – the Hon C.V. Wigneswaran is also confirming that he is also
as local as the Hon. Mahinda Rajapaksa. One who is local needs to be driven by
her/his Truth at all levels. This becomes difficult when one accepts official
leadership positions which require using the picture that would get the best
grades from wider world. Neither side has true global mind on its side and
hence the struggle to come to terms with their respective weaknesses as seen
through the measures used by the UN.
The Human Rights Commission is reported to
have written to the Prime Minister in relation the proposal to criminalize Hate
Speech:
[The
Commission wishes to recommend to the Government that it be substituted by a
formulation which has already been adopted by the Parliament of Sri Lanka in
the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (lCCPR) Act, No. 57 of
2007 which is in accordance with fundamental rights and our international human
rights obligations.
"The
proposed formulation to criminalize hate speech (contained in the Gazette of
November 6, 2015) reads as follows:
Whoever,
by the use of words spoken, written or intended to be read, or by signs, or by
visible representation, or otherwise, intends to cause or attempts to instigate
acts of violence, or to create religious, racial or communal disharmony, or
feelings of ill-will or hostility, between communities or different racial or
religious groups, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for
a terrn which may extend to two years.
"That
formulation is almost identical with s.2(1)(h) of the Prevention of Terrorism
Act, No.48 of L979. The broad wording in the PTA provision did pave the way for
abusive applications which resulted in the chilling of free expression. A prime
example is the prosecution of journalist Tissanayagam.
"ln
the ICCPR Act of 2007, our legislature adopted the following provision criminalizing
hate speech:
No
person shall propagate war or advocate national, racial or religious hatred
that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence. (s.3.1)
"That
formulation is in accordance with Sri Lanka's international human rights
obligations on free speech and permits prosecution only when there is proof of
incitement.
"Therefore,
we recommend that the Government withdraw the proposed amendment to the penal
Code and substitute it with the above provision.
"Moving
that provision in the ICCPR Act to the Penal Code is an advisable step. The
Commission is of the view that the ICCPR Act should be abrogated in the future
and all the human rights recognized therein should be incorporated into a
future constitutional Chapter on Fundamental Rights."]
Like with Terrorism label the actions
against Journalists like Mr. Tissanayagam also happened due to the gap between
law and the pathway of Truth. The law
needs to be customized to suit the Natural tendencies of locals or be limited
to the Truth discovered by locals. This is essential in institutions that have
neglected the very laws applicable to them as per their core purposes. This
includes the Judiciary – in Colombo as well as in Jaffna. Where the pathway
shown by those who practice their own system is as per their own Truth and this
negates the effects of the official law – they are rebels. Where such pathways
are alternate systems to suit the convenience of those in power – such practitioners
are Terrorists – even if it were the judiciary and/or the elected government.
No comments:
Post a Comment