Gajalakshmi Paramasivam
28
July 2019
Human
Rights Laws – UN Envoy’s Responsibility
I recently said to a Tamil Teacher - not to mark rights and wrongs but to connect ‘what’
(happened) with ‘why’ (it happened). Often we resort to this when we do not
have comfort for our pain through other pathways. Knowing why helps cure the
causes within our control. Other causes do not result in deep pain.
Adaderana News reports as follows about UN Special Rapporteur
on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, Clément
Nyaletsossi Voule’s recent statements in Sri Lanka:
“At the root of the
rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association is the ability of
people to come together to make their voices heard. It is important that the
people of Sri Lanka unite in order to bolster the democratic progress that the
country has made so far,” the expert said, presenting a preliminary statement
at the end of a visit to the country.
“While
Sri Lanka is party to many of the international human rights instruments which
have created clear human rights obligations for the State and while legislation
has been put in place to largely reflect these obligations, divisions in
society represent a threat to them being fully achieved.”
The
‘rights’ of Sri Lankans need to be made and/or inherited. Mere agreement nor
words do not make rights. The second paragraph above confirms that the UN
Rapporteur recognized that Sri Lanka is at the level that it has to ‘inherit’
because it has not ‘made/developed’ its own rights. Taken as a whole – basic human
rights have been seriously damaged by warring sides each time national level
conflicts are out of control.
Human
Rights as described by an American therefore is not likely to look the same as
Human Rights envisioned by a Sri Lankan. We know our rights as per our inner
truth. Americans who have been denied freedom of expression by their government
for example would not be able to envision that right the same way a member of
the government would. But the right is the same at root level.
One
who peacefully assembles to establish that right despite the risk of being
punished confirms more reliably that that right has been earned. One who reacts
and hits back – confirms that what s/he wanted was the ‘substance’ more than
the ‘right’. Yesterday I received such a communication as follows:
[the TNA has been directly responsible for depriving the people of
the North and East of the two Provincial Councils that my government gave the
people]
If
we made the Provincial Councils – then we have ‘rights’ as per our respective
contributions. Money donation for example is substance form and hence is not a ‘right’.
One is entitled to expect some other tangible return in turn – as in quid pro
quos. At the other extreme is invisible ‘right’ that happened due to foregoing
earned benefits. The two essential criteria to qualify as ‘right’ – is that a
benefit ought to have been earned and that benefit ought to have been renounced
for the higher level – formless ‘right’. The former is like the statue in the
temple. The latter is the abstract value/philosophy that the statue represents. The former has to
be possessed to confirm ownership. The latter is physically free of possession
but it shared with others traveling along that pathway – through various
avenues including teaching. The easiest is through Due Processes to get from
one point in the pathway to another.
In
Sri Lanka most communities have officially had their own customary laws. Those
who were leaders in customary / religious laws are not likely to demonstrate
leadership in Common laws at the same time. The reason is that they have
developed through different mind structures. A Buddhist leader cannot be
automatically a Christian leader. Likewise between the Judiciary and the
Executive. Hence separation of powers is essential until one reaches the
abstract level of ownership.
When
People come together without this common abstract ownership – there are
possessions / votes and hence lateral leadership to go first. Such a person has
no authority to punish or reward. It is one who forewent earned and/or
inherited benefits who has the authority to punish or reward. One who
sacrificed for authority under Buddhist law does not have the right to reward
or punish one who is outside that law. Most of the UN laws are in fact
applicable to non-Buddhists due to Article 9 of the Sri Lankan constitution. Hence
Human rights by law in Sri Lanka would look different to Human Rights by law in
America.
Ultimately,
we do whatever we do for ourselves. We have natural vision of our human rights
as per our own truth. We may not seek,
find and give form to our truth. But it is always there and is known through
our conscience. We connect naturally with others who carry truth that is
positive to our truth and stay away from those who carry truth that is negative
to our structures. In a free environment this is likely to be confusing due to
lack of order. Family and Community structures help us to regulate these
energies and therefore maximise their values to others who inherit our work.
Sri
Lankan government becoming a party to various ‘agreements’ helps the government
participate at that level. But have the capability to ‘share’ they need to
believe those who are leaders in it or live in Sri Lanka’s truth without any
executive/administrative powers. None of the current political leaders have
demonstrated this capability. Hence it is better to work through smaller
structures that are sovereign. This may be just an individual cleaning the
streets as if s/he is cleaning her/himself
No comments:
Post a Comment