CAFFE Anyone ?
The link between Opposition Politicians and Human Rights 'Activists'
Secretariat for Coordinating the Peace Process
(SCOPP)
08th May 2008
The Peace Secretariat has often noted that perhaps the most insidious
threat to the efforts of the Sri Lankan government to promote peace
through pluralism and democracy comes from political opponents who will
say or do anything to promote their own agendas.
It is accordingly grateful to a few determined opponents of the government
who masquerade as disinterested proponents of human rights and democracy
for proving its point.
Thus the website Lanka Dissent, a project as it calls itself of the
Centre for Social Democracy, has an article citing a letter from Nimalka
Fernando, now wearing yet another hat as Consultant to the Campaign
for Free and Fair Elections (CAFFE).
Lanka Dissent begins its article with the assertion that 'The Campaign
for Free and Fair Elections has rejected an allegation by Media Minister
Anura Priyadarshana Yapa that the local poll monitoring body has UNP
supporters as its members.' In all fairness to Ms Fernando, it is unlikely
that even she would have said that in her letter, since the article
goes on to say 'CAFFE has supporters of the UNP as well as of other
parties, and your statement is either irresponsible or an attempt at
distorting a fact, its letter to Minister Yapa says.'
If CAFFE does have supporters of the UNP, it would be odd to deny the
allegation that it has UNP supporters as its members. But Lanka Dissent
is capable of claiming that black is white, and the reverse, with no
concern for reality. It was set up by Ruwan Ferdinands, whose political
predilections are no secret, and it initially came to our attention
when it was the first to publicize the Rama Mani issue and claimed that
'the Indian HC has expressed concern and took it up with the IGP and
the Ministries of Defence and Foreign Affairs'. The Indian High Commissioner
said that this was not true.
Between Lanka Dissent and Ms Fernando, there are a number of further
inaccuracies. The article asserts that 'As a multi-party effort, CAFFE
has a membership with more than 20 years of experience in poll monitoring
in the island, she says'. If it is true that that was what she said,
she must have a strange way with language. Does she mean that the membership
of CAFFE is multi-party in a political sense, or that it consists of
different organizations? If the UNP is one of these parties or organizations,
what are the others? Are there any parties or organizations which are
not implacably opposed to the government?
The article, again doubtless quoting Ms Fernando, goes on to say 'Unlike
the so-called independent organizations, CAFFE believes in a consensus
among persons with differing political leanings to ensure a free and
fair election'. In condemning other organizations as merely 'so-called
independent', does she claim that CAFFE is different in being totally
independent, or in being unashamedly dependent? And, delightful as the
thought is of a coy Nimalka Fernando, why does she not name these other
organizations, in comparison to which she obviously believes CAFFE is
a model of pure objectivity?
The article ends with the assertion that 'Mrs. Fernando notes that
CAFFE is similar in composition to the UPFA, which has many parties
as its affiliates, including those from the UNP'. This is so preposterous,
that it suggests that perhaps Mr Ferdinands is actually guying Mrs Fernando,
to show that she does not understand the difference between a political
party and what is supposed to be an election monitoring outfit. The
idea that the UNP is amongst the affiliates of the UPFA may be part
of this satire.
Underlying all this however is the fact that not only is the UNP part
of CAFFE, it also seems to be its driving force. CAFFE first burst on
the scene with Shiral Lakthileke, an avowed representative of the UNP,
talking to a media conference as a 'CAFFE Coordinating Committee Member'.
There was no confession there that he was part of the UNP.
His title changed in another media appearance, on May 6th, to 'Attorney-at-Law
and an executive committee member of CAFFE, an election monitoring mission
recognized by the Commissioner of Elections'. That appearance was in
connection with a petition to the Supreme Court, alleging that amongst
others the Commissioner of Elections was 'conniving with the Pillaiyan
Group'.
So we have the wonderful spectacle of the UNP hiding behind what is
termed an election monitoring mission specially set up for the Eastern
Province polls. Using this front they attack what they see as their
principal opponent in the election.
All this would be laughable, were it not that soon doubtless it will
be trumpeted abroad by the NGOs with which Ms Fernando works so effectively
that the Eastern Province poll was totally unfair. And what will they
cite as evidence? The pronouncements of CAFFE, dignified, if that is
the right word, by Ms Fernando, with no hint that the UNP is behind
all this.
Fortunately Ms Fernando's letter, if it was as ridiculous as reported
by Lanka Dissent, makes clear the symbiotic relations between her and
the UNP. From the time when she and her mates in Geneva started saying
the same things that Lakshman Kiriella was saying in Colombo, regarding
the urgency of external monitoring for Human Rights in Sri Lanka, it
seemed possible that this was not a coincidence, not merely a congruence
of interests, but obviously a concerted plan.
Now that Ms Fernando, rushing in where angels would fear to tread,
has shown herself Mr Lakthileke's principal apologist, it will at least
be more difficult to talk about apolitical activists altruistically
concerned with Human Rights.
Prof Rajiva Wijesinha
Secretary General
Secretariat for Coordinating the Peace Process
|
