.
 .

 .
 .
.
 

By GOMIN DAYASRI

It is in the zone of the bizarre to the bewildering. Action Contre la Faim(ACF) the controversial French NGO made a dramatic entry to the sittings of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry into Human Rights Violations purporting to safeguard the interest of their deceased employees but soon took to heel when the relatives of the deceased employees turned tables and blamed the ACF for negligence and holding their employer answerable for the 17 deaths.

The passage of the ACF to the Commission was ushered by a representative for the Eminent Foreign Persons (IIGEPP) who was the official foreign observer at the Commission. Inviter IIGEP departed blaming the Commission before the invitee ACF did likewise. In another vaudeville cartwheel IIGEPs complimented the Commission for their work in earnest. The Government should take blame for opening the floor to such burlesque entertainers.

ACF sneaked out of the Commission nary a word. Was it that they could not stomach the outbursts of the wailing parents? Or they could not face reality of the situation of their looming liability? Or were they guilty of negligence of which they were being targeted that made them play truant? Or did they desire to escape from their impending imminent strictures?

Walking out of a Commission without an explanation is a contemptuous act. It is more than an ethical nicety to tender an explanation-it is a legal obligation. They had the benefit of both local and foreign legal advisors for assistance. Least they could have done it to tender an explanation through Counsel retained. At least they could have tendered an explanation in writing from far away Paris. None was forthcoming. Still the Commission is unaware of the reasons for slinking after having obtained the right to represent as the employer of the deceased persons, possibly on the premise, to safeguard the interest of their late workers. Can they throw to wind the obligations they undertook to perform and take flight to Paris especially where their own conduct was now in the dock due to evidence of the family members?

Having closed in haste the office in Colombo, remaining insulated in Paris the ACF circulated worldwide a report condemning Sri Lanka for human rights violations, the Commission and its investigation officers and its Counsel, the Attorney Generals department and the local judicial system. If they had issued the report from Sri Lanka they would have much to answer in terms of the law of contempt as a party represented at the Commission and leaving without permission and an explanation. Now the ACF by their conduct makes itself a necessary party at the Commission as reparation to the next of kin is a mandated feature in the warrant issued to the Commission.

Commission has in the circumstances announced that the ACF would be summoned to appear. Rightly so, no party carrying an obligation which was voluntarily undertaken can take refuge by running away. The relatives have claimed that their children were dispatched to Mutur by ACF before making a proper assessment and ascertaining the realities on the ground. Thereupon a dubious decision was made to hold the workers captive on the orders of the employer in keeping them bonded in the office premises in Mutur. Surely a refugee centre with hundreds of refugees under the control of authorities -both private and official- has better protection than an premises of an NGO, which had lost access and maintained only telephonic contact to its branch sans any protection provided. The culpability is more; knowing that the adjoining premises (General Hospital-Muter) was shelled on the first day of the clashes. If the general hospital is subject to attack what protection can the neighboring office premises of a NGO expect? Yet the employees were gated in office. For these decisions ACF officials are answerable on the test of due diligence of an employer.

Notwithstanding the pleas of the deceased workers themselves, and calls from a high ranking public servant and a prominent clergyman asking the workers to leave the premises and move to a refugee shelter the employer forbid their employees to leave because of the difficulties they would encounter in collecting them when ACF officials arrive in their vehicles from Trincomalee. ACF was aware that the road to Trincomalee was not open to traffic. Probably to trace the workers in refugee camps was thought to be tedious and uncomfortable to those in the NGO community used to comfortable lifestyles when stationed in distant outposts. To an international humanitarian organization personal inconvenience appears to outweigh the importance of the right to life of 17 poor and destitute natives. The evidence has revealed that at the helm was a recently arrived Frenchman in Trincomalee whose knowledge on local affairs appears to be scanty. The report of the ACF declares directions on Mutur situation was issued from their offices in Colombo and Paris.

The rest of the Mutur refugees left the city to safety carrying even their chicken. However the ACF with 3 vehicles at their disposal at the Mutur office with 3 drivers failed to move a single worker to safety. The evidence on record reveals people in Mutur left the city on every available vehicle while the ACF vehicles remained in the garage.

The parent of a deceased worker in a letter to the ACF has asked the Paris based ACF headquarters “Is this the manner a so called humanitarian organization acts in respect of their deceased employees after being responsible for their death? Is this the way, an institution which talks of humanitarian achievements globally, treat employees and give instructions which lead to their death and run away after paying a pittance? They should be made accountable.”

The deceased persons families were paid around 2 years compensation plus a bonus linked to family status and a consideration of the seniority of the employees within the ACF according to unofficial ACF sources. Is it compatible with European or French standards; if it was a national of such a European national who met with their deaths in similar circumstances? Could they have slipped out after paying around US $ 4000? On a comparison of compensation packages by Sri Lankan standards this is grossly inadequate where there is death resulting during the course of employment.

There is liability under the law of delict where there is a lack of a duty of care by an employer and in the law of employment for an act caused due to the orders of an employer which the employee obeyed. Have these workers being paid their statutory dues of provident and trust funds? If not would ACF be guilty of statutory offences punishable with imprisonment as an errant employer? Is this a case where a humanitarian organization which has closed its office in Sri Lanka and stealthily left the shores without an explanation without paying proper compensation and damages and informing the relevant supervisory state authorities of their due discharge of their lawful obligations.

The tragedy is that the “good Samaritans in these humanitarian organizations” are well aware that the poor victims come from humble origins and can be used and disposed and their families do not have the economic strength or the intellectual fiber or support of state forces to take issue with them and challenge these organizations in proper forums and unmask these lords of poverty and exhibit when it becomes necessary as plundering inhumane missionaries whose agenda is “to do a little good to extract a pot of gold from their financial patrons”. Should they additionally succeed in internationally discrediting Sri Lanka’s human rights record it will give them more credibility in attracting friendly donors to enhance their treasury? It is the NGOs that tell us that we should handle terrorists gently and softly and make representations internationally of humanitarian violations in Sri Lanka.

Here is a classic case to place on record the manner in which an NGO conducts itself when humanitarian considerations places itself on its own doorstep. Those who attempted to expose Sri Lanka on human rights now stands exposed themselves for their conduct in the humanitarian realm.

Disclaimer: The comments contained within this website are personal reflection only and do not necessarily reflect the views of the LankaWeb. LankaWeb.com offers the contents of this website without charge, but does not necessarily endorse the views and opinions expressed within. Neither the LankaWeb nor the individual authors of any material on this Web site accept responsibility for any loss or damage, however caused (including through negligence), which you may directly or indirectly suffer arising out of your use of or reliance on information contained on or accessed through this Web site.
All views and opinions presented in this article are solely those of the surfer and do not necessarily represent those of LankaWeb.com. .

BACK TO LATEST NEWS

DISCLAIMER

Copyright © 1997-2004 www.lankaweb.Com Newspapers Ltd. All rights reserved.
Reproduction In Whole Or In Part Without Express Permission is Prohibited.