The Sri Lankan minister for Fisheries and Aquatic resources Mr. Mahinda Rajapaksa today said there was no particular region of the world where the phenomenon of involuntary disappearances was more sharply present and expressed his concern that the practice continued unabated in a number of countries around the world.
"Recent history has shown that we, who are heirs to the great civilizations of south Asia, are not immune to the global phenomenon of involuntary disappearance and human rights violation", the minister told participants of a post graduate diploma course on human rights being conducted jointly by the Visva Bharati, Shanthiniketan and the Dehra Dun based Rural Litigation And Entitlement Kendra here.
According to the books of the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances, which functions under the UN Human Rights Commission there were more than 49,000 cases of which 46,000 were kept under active consideration, as they had not yet been clarified, the minister said.
He was delivering a lecture on "Enforced Or Involuntary Disappearances: A South Asian Perspective". Sri Lanka is actively supporting the course and offers two scholarships to candidates from the country. The course has participants from Nepal and Bangladesh besides India.
Mr. Rajapaksa pointed out that authoritarian regimes seek to suppress all forms of dissent for their own ends often to perpetuate their hold on power. In modern times they have used enforced or involuntary disappearances as a tool of suppression. This was the reason why the issue was closely linked to the issues of human rights, social progress and democracy.
Referring to the situation in his country the minister said the period 1988-1991 had been one of exceptional turbulence in the south with more than 16,000 cases of disappearances being recorded. Sri Lanka he said had cooperated fully with the UN Working Group that had visited the country several times. In fact his country had won approbation for its human rights record especially in relation to the issue.
Mr. Rajapaksa said his country had taken several steps to minimize the possibility of involuntary disappearances. These include providing families of those taken into custody with an immediate receipt certifying such taking into custody. In addition a high level anti-harassment committee had been set up in 1997 the Sri Lankan minister said state or government involvement and impunity for the perpetrators constituted other aspects of the problem which needed to be addressed.
The minister said it was not justifiable to permit extra judicial action to safeguard the interests of the state and of the community at large nor do the extraordinary exigencies born of conflict and strife permit extraordinary actions on the part of the state and its servants. To concede to this line of thought was to pave the way to anarchy and ruin.
Mr. Rajapaksa said while it was true that the state should protect itself and its citizens it was equally true that each and every citizen was entitled to his or her liberty and to the security of his or her person within the limits of the law.
He pointed out that in the contemporary world human rights constitute an important component of the agenda of international relations. No nation and certainly not developing countries such as Sri Lanka could afford to ignore international repercussions of its actions.
The argument however rages whether national sovereignty should be subjugated to human rights protection. The sad reality the minister said was that in today's world where nations such as Sri Lanka look to more fluent nations for much needed development assistance, the measures taken in the field of human rights were of immediate and telling significance. Whether or not this should in fact be the order of things was a matter for debate.
Stating that the issue of disappearance was closely linked to the issues of human rights, social progress, governance and democracy, Mr. Rajapaksa made it clear that attempts in his country to give constitutional recognition to social and economic rights and to make them enforceable as rights was a "move in the correct direction".
"I believe it is a move in the correct direction to give constitutional recognition to these rights not as directive principles but as enforceable rights", he said adding that it was the belief of his country as it was in India that people cannot advance their economic and social condition without political space and freedom.
He said with 30 per cent of the people living below poverty in his country such a right to dissent was pivotal in guaranteeing social mobility and the upliftment of living standards. However such dissent should be democratic because violent dissent that threatens the social fabric cannot be tolerated in any civilized society.