ATLANTA, Georgia, Jan 3 2025 (IPS) – The fireplace in the State Dining Room of the White House that says, “May none but honest and wise men ever rule under this roof.” President John Adams wrote that in a letter to his wife Abigail in 1800.
Jimmy Carter was by all accounts a wise, just, and decent man—a man of deep religious faith, who was also circumspect—some may say old fashioned—about his rhetoric.
He was refreshingly candid in using the country-boy phrase “I’ll whip his ass!” against Democratic primary opponent Sen. Edward Kennedy. Most reporters in that era considered it too harsh or nearly obscene, so instead, they wrote, “I’ll whip his donkey!”
Carter was honest. When asked by a reporter amid stories of the Kennedy brothers’ sexual indulgences, if he had ever had lust in his heart, he responded straightforwardly, “Yes.” That’s something no other politician would ever do. But it was easy for Carter to admit because he followed the Christian and Calvinist doctrine that “We are all sinners.”
Historians view his administration as a watershed in the civil rights struggle, especially in the South. As president he negotiated the first ever peace agreement between Israel and the Arabs. In his post-presidential years, he made a worldwide impact as a humanitarian.
Civic virtue must be faithful to the original concept of American nationhood—favoring citizens ahead of government. Liberty and justice are the watchwords of democracy, not blind obedience to politicians.
George Washington said, “There exists an indissoluble union between virtue and happiness.” Lincoln advised “Malice toward none…charity for all…firmness in the right.” Carter followed these sentiments at his inauguration with a pledge from the Biblical Prophet Micah: “Do justly, love mercy, walk humbly.”
There are two ways of recognizing people as honest and wise—by their words and by their deeds. Carter told the truth straight out—even if it was inconvenient or might hurt him. His policies were based on simple fairness, especially in his efforts to overcome the endemic racism of the Old South.
By contrast, President-elect Trump is famous for the lies and invective-filled slander constantly dripping from his lips: “When somebody hurts you, just go after them as viciously and as violently as you can…. When somebody screws you, screw them back in spades.” Trump’s brand, he said, means, “Power is the only true value.”
We teach our kids differently. “Be nice,” we always say. Sesame Street TV and First Grade teachers call out children for “Courtesy Lacking.” Why can’t we demand as much from our leaders?
Trump is a symptom of the ills of our society, not the cause. Today most of us tolerate curses and obscenities that would have scandalized our grandmothers. Trump is simply riding the crest of a flood of indecency that already exists among the public.
Let’s bring back civic virtue. Jimmy Carter may be the best example of personal rectitude among US leaders in our lifetimes. Let him be your model—not the empty, sleazy suit that is soon to be the next occupant of the White House.
James E. Jennings PhD is President of Conscience International.
Carter was a man of decency and integrity who devoted his life to promoting peace and democracy. Credit: Courtesy Kul Chandra Gautam
Former US President Jimmy Carter, a leader of impeccable integrity and decency who devoted his life to promoting peace and democracy worldwide. I recall his contribution to the peace process in Nepal and his leadership in combatting deadly diseases in Africa.
Jimmy Carter enthusiastically supported the child survival campaign led by UNICEF. He had nominated Jim Grant to be the Executive Director of UNICEF and said that it was one of the most important decisions of his presidency.
KATHMANDU, Nepal, Jan 2 2025 (IPS) – Former American President Jimmy Carter was a man of peace and principles. He presided over a tumultuous period in American history from 1977 to 1981, working hard to restore trust in government after the Watergate scandal and the divisive era of the Vietnam War. He brokered a landmark peace deal between Israel and Egypt and negotiated a historic treaty to hand over the Panama Canal to Panama.
Carter, a champion of human rights both in the US and around the world, passed away at 100 on December 29, 2024.
More than any recent American president, Carter pressed gently but firmly on autocratic regimes worldwide to respect human rights and the rule of law. When he led the country with immense moral authority, it encouraged many human rights advocates, while dictators worried about the US sanctions.
At home, Carter got many progressive legislations passed in areas of consumer protection, welfare reforms and the appointment of women and minorities in America’s judiciary. However, he had difficulties managing the US economy, the Iran hostage crisis and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. And in the 1980 Presidential election, when he lost his bid to Ronald Reagan, his active political career came to an end.
Kul Chandra Gautam
But he didn’t retire to a comfortable life, rather, he embarked on a noble mission as one of the world’s highly respected elder statesmen, deeply committed to promoting democracy and human rights. He founded the Carter Center with a motto of “Waging Peace, Fighting Disease and Building Hope”.
With his team, he worked tirelessly to help resolve conflicts, monitor elections and improve human health through campaigns to eliminate several neglected diseases afflicting the poorest people worldwide, particularly in Africa.
“For his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights and to promote economic and social development,” Carter won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002.
Links with UNICEF and Nepal
Carter greatly admired UNICEF Executive Director James Grant and strongly supported the UNICEF-led global child survival and development campaign. Further, the organisation was a key partner in the Carter-led global campaign to eradicate a debilitating disease called dracunculiasis or Guinea-worm disease.
My first substantive meeting with Carter took place on August 3, 1995, at an event in Washington, DC, organised jointly by the Carter Center, USAID, WHO and UNICEF to mark the 95 percent reduction in Guinea worm cases worldwide and to recommit to its total eradication. I had a long and fruitful discussion with Carter on strengthening our collaboration in the global campaign to eradicate Guinea-worm disease.
In February 2004, I joined President Carter and WHO Director-General JW Lee on a 3-day field visit to observe and advocate for Guinea-worm eradication in Ghana. I learned about Carter’s humble personality, deep commitment to many worthy causes and impressive advocacy skills.
In our informal interactions, we often talked about Nepal.
Carter’s involvement in Nepal
Carter visited Nepal twice to observe Nepal’s Constituent Assembly Elections. He advised Nepali leaders, including the Election Commission, based on his worldwide experience and credibility in observing elections and conflict resolution. Over the years, the Carter Center produced several reports on Nepal dealing with issues related to the peace process, challenges in drafting Nepal’s Constitution and other important issues of social justice and equity.
I instinctively supported Carter’s noble efforts to promote peace, democracy and development. However, like everybody else, Carter was human and fallible, and some aspects of the Carter Center’s reports on Nepal were flawed.
In particular, Carter’s hasty verdict that Nepal’s first Constituent Assembly election was free, fair and peaceful ignored the fact that there was an unusually high degree of intimidation in many rural constituencies. The non-Maoist parties’ candidates were prevented from campaigning, and voters were threatened with physical violence for weeks preceding the actual voting.
There were well-intentioned but inaccurate analyses of Nepal’s socio-political dynamics by the Carter Center, the International Crisis Group, and even the United Nations. In their effort to appear “balanced and even-handed”, they gave the undue benefit of the doubt to the progressive-sounding rhetoric of the Maoists, ignoring their violent and corrupt practices.
Carter witnessed the insincerity and duplicity of the Maoists when they initially welcomed the 2013 election for the second Constituent Assembly but then denounced it as rigged and unfair when the results showed that they had suffered a humiliating loss.
Unlike during the first CA election, Carter took the necessary time to analyse the second CA election better. He left somewhat sobered by a deeper understanding of the Maoists’ opportunistic and undemocratic nature.
A man of faith and integrity
Jimmy Carter was a deeply religious and spiritual man who often turned to his faith during his political career. But as a progressive man and defender of human rights and gender equality, he found himself at odds with his Southern Baptist Church when it opposed gender equality, citing a few selected verses from the Bible that women must be “subservient” to their husbands and must not be allowed to serve as priests.
Carter protested and took a painful decision to sever ties with his Baptist Church, saying that parts of its rigid doctrine violated the basic premises of his Christian faith. He wrote to his fellow Baptists and published an op-ed article “Losing my religion for equality”.
Carter had a philosophical and spiritual perspective on death. As he suffered from multiple bouts of cancer treatment, he remarked, “I didn’t ask God to let me live, but I just asked God to give me a proper attitude toward death. I found that I was absolutely and completely at ease with death”.
May Carter’s noble soul rest in eternal peace.
Source: Kathmandu Post, Nepal
Kul Chandra Gautam is a distinguished diplomat, development professional, and a former senior official of the United Nations. Currently, he serves on the Boards of several international and national organizations, charitable foundations and public-private partnerships. Previously, he served in senior managerial and leadership positions with the UN in several countries and continents in a career spanning over three decades. As a former Deputy Executive Director of UNICEF and Assistant Secretary-General of the United Nations, he has extensive experience in international diplomacy, development cooperation and humanitarian assistance.
The people walk to Saydnaya prison to search for the detainees. Credit: Abdul Karem al-Mohammad/IPS
IDLIB, Syria, Dec 16 2024 (IPS) – Detained without trial for over three years for trial for allegedly treating “terrorists” (as opponents of former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad were deemed), Alaa al-Khalil, a 33-year-old nurse from the Syrian city of Hama, recounts the agony of her time in a prison cell she shared with at least 35 women.
She was released from Aydnaya prison on December 8 after the fall of the Assad regime.
Following the fall of Assad’s regime and his escape to Moscow on December 8, armed opposition factions managed to open the doors of prisons, freeing hundreds of detainees who had endured the most horrific forms of torture for opposing Assad’s rule and demanding his removal from power. Many lost their lives within the prisons and were buried in mass graves, while the families of the detainees continue to search for their missing loved ones in the prisons of tyranny.
Years of Torture
“I was arrested at a security checkpoint belonging to the former Syrian regime and transferred to the Political Security Branch in Damascus—my hands were cuffed, and my eyes were blindfolded. In prison, we were 35 women in a small, cramped room with the toilet in the same room, without any privacy,” Khalil told IPS. “The marks of severe torture were clearly visible on some of the women. As for sleep, we would lie on the floor and take turns sleeping due to the very small size of the room. The most painful thing was that there were many pregnant women who gave birth to children who grew up inside the prison.”
The search for survivors in Sednaya prison. Credit: Abdul Karem al-Mohammad/IPS
During that time, she said the prisoners suffered from “hunger, cold, and all forms of torture, including beatings, burning with cigarettes, and nail pulling.”
Many of the female detainees were raped and exposed to sexual violence as a form of punishment. After midnight, the guards would come to the detainees’ room to select the most beautiful girls to take them to the officers’ rooms.
“We preferred torture and even death to rape. When a girl refused to have sex or confess to the charges against her during interrogation, she would be killed by the guards or interrogators, and her body would be thrown into the salt room, which was prepared in advance to preserve the bodies of the dead for as long as possible,” she said, tearfully remembering the daily trauma.
Khalil confirms that prisoners were not allowed to look at the guards, talk, or make any noise, even during torture. They were punished by being deprived of water or forced to sleep naked without covers in the freezing cold. The meals consisted of a few bites of spoilt food, and many people contracted serious infections, diseases, and mental disorders.
Now released, Khalil hopes to enjoy safety, stability, and peace in this country after years of oppression and injustice.
Adnan al-Ibrahim, 46, from the southern Syrian city of Daraa, was also released a few days ago from Adra prison on the outskirts of Damascus after spending over 10 years there on charges of defecting from Bashar al-Assad’s army and seeking asylum in Lebanon.
“I feel like I’m dreaming after being released from prison. They accused me of terrorism, subjected me to torture, and I was never brought before a court during my imprisonment. I’m still traumatized by what I endured,” Ibrahim says.
“We were subjected to the worst treatment imaginable in prisons. All we want now is the right to live a decent life, far from injustice, arbitrary arrests, and the ongoing killing in Syria.”
He is now emaciated and weak—his weight drastically reduced due to malnutrition and poor diet. Most of his fellow inmates suffered from life-threatening illnesses as a result of the torture they endured. Many inmates lost their memory due to being beaten on the head during interrogations, and the bodies of the dead remained for long periods before being removed. Many of these bodies were disposed of by burning.
Burdened by Psychological Prauma
Samah Barakat, a 33-year-old mental health specialist, says the survivors of Syrian detention centres will need help to overcome their traumas.
‘The experience of imprisonment and torture in prisons is painful and traumatic for survivors. Imprisonment is not limited to physical torture; the mental state is also affected. Prisoners were subjected to various forms of torture and oppression, leading to a significant deterioration in their mental health. These effects include a range of psychological disorders such as psychosis, memory loss, and speech impediments, in addition to the spread of diseases due to their deprivation of basic medical care.”
Barakat confirms that some detainees are likely to suffer from physical, psychological, and behavioural effects, accompanied by constant anxiety, depression, and social withdrawal.
She explains that survivors of detention need psychological support, which varies depending on the impact of the detention experience. Some need psychological counseling or therapy sessions with specialists, while others require medication prescribed by a psychiatrist due to depression or other mental illnesses.
An Unknown Fate
For some, the uncertainty of the fates of their loved ones means the trauma of the Asad regime lives on.
Alaa al-Omar, 52, from the northern Syrian city of Idlib, went to Saydnaya prison and the Palestine Branch in Damascus after the fall of the Assad regime, hoping to find his son, who had disappeared in the prison’s depths.
“I went to the prison with great longing, but I found no trace of my son. I think he died as a result of torture.”
Omar affirms that his son was arrested by the Assad regime forces in 2015 while studying at a university in Aleppo, accused of participating in demonstrations, carrying weapons, and joining the opposition factions.
Omar indicates he heard nothing from his son or about his son since his arrest, and his fate remains unknown even now.
Human Rights Violations
Human rights activist Salim Al-Najjar (41), from Aleppo, speaks about the suffering of survivors of detention and told IPS that the history of building prisons and expanding detention centers in Syria dated back to the rule of Hafez al-Assad, whose regime in the 1980s exercised excessive force against its opponents, turning the country into a “large slaughterhouse.”
“In the regime’s prisons, lives are as equal as stones in the hands of a sculptor, killed and discarded without regard or importance. In them, a person becomes a mere number, with their history, feelings, and even dreams that haunted them until the last moment of their lives ignored,” Najjar says.
Al-Najjar confirms the existence of many prisons in Syria, but the Saydnaya prison, located north of the Syrian capital Damascus, is known as the most prominent political detention center in Syria and was notorious for its horrific reputation as a site of torture and mass executions, especially after the outbreak of the Syrian revolution in 2011. Saydnaya prison was where Assad’s detained opponents or defectors from his army or those who rejected his “killing policy.”
He points out that few detainees were released through family connections or bribes, while the detainees were left to die from their untreated wounds and diseases in “dirty, overcrowded” cells.
He notes that many detainees emerged from behind bars suffering from a loss of their mental faculties, unable to remember their names or identify themselves, and due to the severe changes caused by malnutrition and brutal torture, their features had changed to the point that their families did not recognize them at first.
Najjar hopes to achieve justice for the victims by presenting evidence and documents to international courts and holding Assad and all perpetrators of violations in Syria accountable.
The Syrian Network for Human Rights said in a statementon December 11 that Assad is accused of killing at least 202,000 Syrian civilians, including 15,000 killed under torture, the disappearance of 96,000 others, and the forced displacement of nearly 13 million Syrian citizens, as well as other heinous violations, including the use of chemical weapons.
“Syrian detention centers and torture chambers symbolize the agony, oppression, and suffering that Syrians have endured for decades. Survivors of detention continue to heal their wounds and strive to return to their normal lives and reintegrate into society. Sadly, a significant number of them have perished under torture.”
Territorial integrity is not limited to physical land territory. It must be conceived as of a historical and cultural norm linked to the vitality, dignity and identity of the people holding the right to self-determination to ensure respect for territorial integrity goes beyond ensuring the maintenance of physical land boundaries—Professor Phillipa Webb
Water floods in, showing how nature and people are at risk. Trees can’t grow because of salt, leaving no protection. This photo warns about climate change’s effect on our islands and atolls. It’s a clear sign we need to act to keep our world safe. Credit: Gitty Keziah Yee/Tuvalu
THE HAGUE, Dec 13 2024 (IPS) – Rising sea level caused by greenhouse gas emission-fueled climate change is threatening existence in coastal communities and island nations. At the International Court of Justice (ICJ), on Thursday, December 12, 2024, small island states, including Tuvalu and a Pacific-based fisheries agency detailed their ongoing existential threats caused by the climate change-induced sea level rise and impacts on fishery-based livelihood.
Tuvalu, the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) and the Pacific Islands Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA) both focused their oral presentations before the court on highlighting added and exacerbated struggles faced by people in the region through visual evidence and testimony of the frontline community.
At the request of Vanuatu, the UN General Assembly asked the ICJ to issue an advisory opinion on the obligations of UN member states in preventing climate change and ensuring the protection of the environment for present and future generations. While its advisory opinion will not be enforceable, the court will advise on the legal consequences for member states who have caused significant harm, particularly to small island developing states. So far, more than 100 countries and agencies have presented their case before the court.
On Thursday, island states stressed the disproportionate effects of climate change on small islands, urging the court to recognize the duty of cooperation, the stability of maritime zones, and the principle of continuity of statehood.
Climate Crisis Can not be Solved in Isolation—Tuvalu
The low-lying island nation of Tuvalu is fighting for its existence; according to scientists, much of their land area, along with critical infrastructure, will be under water by 2050. Tuvalu urged the ICJ to issue a strong advisory opinion on states’ obligations to combat climate change and protect small island states.
Furthering the submission, Laingane Italeli Talia, Attorney General of Tuvalu, said climate change is the single greatest threat the country is facing. “It cannot be that in the face of such unprecedented and irreversible harm, international law is silent.
“Tuvalu, accordingly, asks the court to keep the unprecedented infringement on our people’s right to self-determination at the very center of his critical advisory opinion in order to help chart the pathway forward for our very survival.”
‘Annihilation Posed By Nuclear Weapons’
Professor Phillipa Webb, representing Tuvulu, used the analogy that the threat of disappearance faced by states like Tuvalu is like the potential annihilation posed by nuclear weapons.
“This extreme circumstance triggers all the tools that international law provides for respecting statehood, ensuring territorial integrity and protecting sovereignty over natural resources,” Webb said.
“Tuvalu’s constitution affirms that its statehood will remain in perpetuity, notwithstanding any loss to its physical territory. In the same way that the right to survival requires state continuity, the right also compels respect for territorial integrity, which encompasses a state’s permanent sovereignty over its natural resources,” Webb said, drawing on the drawing on the Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States.
“Respect for territorial integrity and territorial sovereignty is an essential foundation of international relations in the context of climate change. This obliges States to prevent and mitigate transboundary environmental harm. It requires that States facilitate adaptation to climate change impacts, and these measures should not be limited to the preservation and restoration of coasts and islands but also to protecting the rights of peoples to self-determination.”
The right to self-determination includes aspects other than physical land, and the court should take this into account.
“Territorial integrity, a corollary of the right to self-determination, is not limited to physical land territory. It must be conceived as a historical and cultural norm linked to the vitality, dignity and identity of the people holding the right to self-determination to ensure respect for territorial integrity goes beyond ensuring the maintenance of physical land boundaries. Like other concepts in international law, such as cultural heritage, biodiversity and intellectual property, it covers tangible and intangible assets.”
Quoting Tuvaluan climate activist Grace Malie, Webb told the court, “Tuvalu will not go quietly into the rising sea.”
Statehood Should be Ensured—AOSIS
AOSIS submitted its case on behalf of the 39 small island and low-lying coastal developing states and urged it to consider the existential threat posed by climate change-induced sea level rise and the possibility that some states may not even have dry land in the near future.
It emphasizes the importance of equity and self-determination in the context of climate change and the need for international law to support the continuity of statehood and sovereignty.
Fatumanava-o-Upolu III Dr. Pa’olelei Luteru, Chair of AOSIS and Permanent Representative of Samoa to the United Nations, focused on the impact of the climate crisis on states defined by the ocean’s limited resources and geographic vulnerability.
“Small island developing states rely heavily on coastal and marine resources as key drivers of our economies,” he said. “However, climate change is disrupting the fishery sector because of warming waters and an altered marine environment.”
The AOSIS asked the court to uphold the principle of continuity of statehood as established in international law, ensuring that statehood and sovereignty endure despite physical changes to land territory.
Luteru added, “In this era of unprecedented and relentless sea level rise, international law must evolve to meet the climate crisis and the disproportionate effect that it has on states.”
Focus on Sustainability of Tuna Fisheries—FFA
Rising sea level and ocean warming are not only threatening the existence of island nations but they are also hammering a major way of livelihood, fishing. Representing the fishing community at the ICJ, FFA highlighted the state of loss of fisheries, including tuna.
Tuna fisheries are crucial for the economic, social, and cultural development of Pacific Island communities, with 47 percent of households depending on fishing as a primary or secondary source of income.
FFA, an intergovernmental agency, focuses on sustainable use of offshore fisheries resources, particularly tuna, which are facing threats to climate change impacts.
“Damage to fisheries and loss of fish stocks will have a significant negative impact on the income, livelihoods, food security and economies of Pacific small island developing states, as well as social and cultural impacts,” Pio Manoa, Deputy Director General of FFA, said.
“Climate change is driving tuna further to the east and outside of members, exclusive economic zones into the high seas, threatening the loss of economic and food security of Pacific small and developing states.”
Studies show climate change-driven redistribution of commercial tuna species will cause an economic blow to the small island states of the Western and Central Pacific, ultimately threatening the sustainability of the world’s largest tuna fishery.
By 2050, under a high greenhouse gas emissions scenario, the total biomass of three tuna species in the waters of 10 of the Pacific small islands developing states members of the agency could decline by an average of 13 percent.
“The adverse consequences for the livelihood and well-being of coastal communities are profound, including their very security and survival impacts on marine resources, including offshore fisheries such as tuna,” Manoa said. “It is therefore incumbent upon the international community to take necessary action to deal with anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases and their consequences.”
Agnes Callamard, Secretary General of Amnesty International, addresses the media and the community at the site of the Mullivaikal massacre. She says justice is overdue for the families of those killed and disappeared during the Sri Lankan civil war. Credit: Johan Mikaelsson/IPS
MULLIVAIKAL, Sri Lanka , Sep 16 2024 (IPS) – Thousands of Tamils are heading to Mullivaikal on the northeast coast of Sri Lanka, many of whom were here 15 years ago and still live in the region. They are there, May 18, to commemorate the massacre of civilians in a ‘no fire zone’ during the final stages of the civil war.
This was the last day of the bloody civil war, which raged mainly in the northern and eastern parts of the island since 1983. The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) guerrillas had finally surrendered to the Sri Lankan government. The aftermath continues to rock the island.
The ethnic conflict between the island nation’s majority Sinhalese population and the minority Tamils (who were in the majority in the north and east) had escalated after 1948 when the country gained independence from Britain, the last in the line of colonial powers.
The whole island suffered during the war. Sri Lankan Tamils have been through a lot, especially those who lived in the war-torn north. Everyone who came to the beach on this day of remembrance wants to honor the memory of loved ones who fell victim and the blood that was spilled in the sand.
“Everyone here has a family member or relative who didn’t make it,” explains the teacher Shanmuganathan, who has stopped with his motorcycle by the road where porridge made from rice, the only thing that was available to eat in the war zone, is being offered before Memorial Day.
The war has left its mark. He shows scars from shrapnel and tells us that he lost his wife in the final stages of the war. He has continued to work and is involved in a teacher’s union.
Women pray during the commemoration of the Mullivaikal massacre. Thousands died in no fire zones in the final days of the war. Credit: Johan Mikaelsson/IPS
Internationally, the calls to investigate targeted bombings of civilians, mass executions of surrendering Tiger soldiers and leaders, widespread sexual violence and other torture are no longer as loud. Many of those who protested and demanded to know what happened to missing relatives have died without receiving any response from the government.
When war crimes are discussed, the government side highlights that the terrorist-branded LTTE carried out acts of terror against civilian targets in the south and that Tamils in the north were used as human shields.
The peace process that began in 2002 with a ceasefire and peace talks led by the Norwegian government and facilitator Erik Solheim stalled and the ceasefire agreement was torn apart by the parties. Sri Lankan government forces in 2008 launched a final offensive to capture the parts then still controlled by the LTTE, which had been fighting for a separate Tamil state in the northern and eastern parts of the island.
In early 2009, the Tigers abandoned their main stronghold, the town of Kilinochchi. The areas under guerrilla control were shrinking ever faster. Tiger leader Velupillai Prabhakaran did not listen to calls to lay down arms and surrender. Eventually, a narrow coastal strip remained, with several hundred thousand civilians and the remnants of the guerrilla movement pressed together and under fire from land, sea, and air.
For Remembrance Day, a school in the town of Puthukkudiyiruppu is organizing a poetry competition. One of the participants, Kamsaini, now 24, wants to share her experiences with the schoolchildren, who were born after the war.
“The generations after me know nothing about the pain I felt these days. We had neither food nor water and I lost several family members; some died, and my sister is missing,” explains Kamsaini.
In place under the hot sun in Mullivaikal is Agnes Callamard, Secretary General of Amnesty International. During her stay on the island, she has met President Ranil Wickremesinghe, who opened up for the visit, which was not a given. When the Rajapaksa brothers ruled the country (2005-2015, 2019-2022), the government allowed the military and police to prevent Tamils from observing commemorations linked to the war.
One reason why Callamard and Amnesty International want to be there is that she does not want Sri Lanka to “fall off the agenda,” which could happen if the main actor within the United Nations, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in Geneva, does not succeed with the latest in a series of resolutions on Sri Lanka voted through in the UN Human Rights Council.
She sees the issue of the war in Sri Lanka as a crucial test for the international community. A 30-year-long civil war must not be swept under the carpet, she believes
“Every time we fail to create justice, we all, including the international community, get a wound. We’re here because we don’t want that to happen. We feel the determination of many people in Sri Lanka and civil society, both Tamils and Sinhalese and a range of actors who are committed to seeing justice delivered,” says Callamard.
In this way, it represents a defining moment for the United Nations. Callamard is critical of the UN Security Council, which “has not taken a single step for Sri Lanka.”
Amnesty International advocates, as do a number of states, that the latest resolution must be implemented.
“Just a lot of ‘blah, blah, blah,’ something for the eyes, investments in so-called institutions and nothing, nothing, nothing. Fifteen years. Come on!” she urges.
Even on the island, there are far too many who have done nothing at all.
“The point is that the government in power must step forward, the political parties must step forward, the parliament must step forward, the religious leaders must step forward, cultural leaders must step forward. It should be an issue that everyone rallies around. The problem is that governments are being replaced. So it’s not good enough. Everyone must take their responsibility,” says Callamard.
In Mullivaikal, many people share memories. James Confucius, a Catholic priest, tells how he and a group of people barely made it out of the war zone alive.
“We waved a white flag, and we went in the direction of the soldiers to surrender, but then they shot at us, so we had to turn back,” he says.
They waited in a sand bunker and finally got another opportunity. The soldiers they encountered believed that an injured woman in the group was a Tiger soldier, because she had short hair. The priest pleaded and said she needed hospital treatment, but the soldiers said the woman had to stay.
The group had to move on and when they had gone only a short distance, they heard a shot.
“I turned around and saw that the woman had been shot,” says Confucius.
In total, roughly 300,000 people got out of the war zone. An estimate that has often been used is a death toll of 40,000 civilians in the final stages of the war alone. Tamils state higher numbers, while Sri Lankan authorities write low death tolls, including in the 2010 report by the Lessons Learned and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC), appointed by the government.
The then sitting president, Mahinda Rajapaksa, had previously said that “not a single Tamil civilian has been killed by the military.”
Experts have dismissed the statement as absurd. While the majority of Tamil politicians still refer to “genocide,” the issue of death tolls rarely receives the same attention as it did in the years after the civil war.
The UN Human Rights Council has voted through a number of non-binding resolutions that Sri Lanka is expected to follow, but no real action on the problem has been taken in Sri Lanka. There is also nothing to suggest that this will happen.
None of the main candidates in the presidential election on September 21 have highlighted truth-seeking, the rule of international law, regional power-sharing and reconciliation—what the UN is asking for. The economy is in focus, the nation and the citizens, and all candidates want to stop corruption.
The agreement that the government reached with the International Monetary Fund (IMF), is also being discussed. It was negotiated by President Ranil Wickremesinghe, who is not elected by the people but took over by a vote in Parliament after Gotabaya Rajapaksa resigned and fled the country as a result of the April-July 2022 Aragalya (meaning struggle in Sinhalese) protest movement. Before that, Rajapaksa had appointed Wickremesinghe as Prime Minister.
At the Ministry of Defense (MOD) on the outskirts of the capital Colombo, soldiers and officers move inside the compound, which is surrounded by high walls. For some, the Vesak holiday awaits when the full moon approaches. The armed forces also marked the end of the war and Victory Day, but more quietly than in previous years.
Colonel Nalin Herath is the MOD media spokesperson. Right now, work is being done to adapt the forces to actual needs. Herath says they will shrink to 100,000 by 2030. Many who were previously employed in the military have faced unemployment as civilians.
An urgent issue is trying to bring home hundreds of ex-soldiers who were lured by middlemen to go to Russia to work for Russia’s army. Most are said to have received promises not to take part in battle, which hasn’t been the case.
“We should not have mercenaries in war; it violates international law,” says Nalin Herath.
Some have also fought and died on Ukraine’s side. Herath emphasizes that Sri Lanka is neutral, adheres to non-alignment, and does not want to comment on whether it is worse to fight for Russia, which is waging an illegal war of invasion and committing war crimes.
Close to 20 men from Sri Lanka, who were on the Russian side of the front in June, were confirmed dead. An unknown number of men have surrendered to Ukrainian forces. Hundreds of former soldiers have not been heard from for a long time, which emerged after the Ministry of Defense in April-May opened a telephone line where relatives can call.
Sri Lankans who have become Russian citizens can effectively be stuck in a death trap, as the Sri Lankan government became aware after a delegation traveled to Moscow in June to discuss the matter with the Russian counterpart. It was explained that the Sri Lankans who became Russian citizens are now under Russian law.
As a spokesperson for a military organization, Herath talks about a general goal.
“War means destruction. Both parties suffer. This should not be an era of war. As a soldier, I want to see a peaceful world. The smartest thing would be to avoid the wars,” he states.
He highlights international humanitarian law, which he teaches, both in Sri Lanka and internationally. He mentions the good the Sri Lankan military has done. After the war, minefields were cleared, land was returned and soldiers donated blood to the hospitals.
But he cannot comment on Amnesty International’s statement. Political leaders are responsible for handling this. He nevertheless states:
“Violations occur in all wars. Here we are dealing with isolated cases,” he adds.
Jul 25 2024 (IPS) – CIVICUS discusses the recent US Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity and its potential impact on the 5 November presidential election with Ciara Torres-Spelliscy, a professor of Law at Stetson University College of Law.
On 1 July, the US Supreme Court ruled that presidents have absolute immunity for the exercise of their core constitutional powers and are entitled to a presumption of immunity for other official acts, although they don’t enjoy immunity for unofficial acts. The decision comes as Donald Trump faces criminal charges for trying to overturn his 2020 election loss to Joe Biden. The question now is whether Trump’s actions will be considered official or unofficial. But it’s unlikely he’ll be tried before the election, and if he returns as president he could pardon himself. Critics claim the Supreme Court ruling violates the spirit of the US Constitution by placing the president above the law.
What are the main points of the Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity?
This is a ruling in the federal case against Trump for trying to overturn his loss to Biden in the 2020 election. He is accused of pressuring state officials to overturn the results, spreading lies about voter fraud and using the Capitol riot of 6 January 2021 to delay Biden’s certification and stay in power. Trump pleaded not guilty and asked the US Supreme Court to dismiss the entire case, arguing that he was acting in his role as president and was therefore immune from prosecution.
The Supreme Court didn’t do that, but instead created three new categories of presidential immunity: complete immunity for official acts involving core constitutional powers, potential immunity for acts within the ‘outer perimeter’ of official duties and no immunity for private, unofficial acts.
The key question now is whether Trump’s actions will be deemed official, giving him immunity, or unofficial, leaving him open to prosecution. This is the first case of its kind, as Trump is the first American president to be prosecuted.
How does this ruling affect Trump’s other criminal cases?
This immunity ruling is likely to delay all four of his criminal cases, as judges will have to apply these new rules and drop any charges that involve the use of core presidential powers, as these can no longer be used as evidence against him.
As well as being accused of trying to overturn his 2020 defeat, Trump is also accused of paying adult film actress Stormy Daniels hush money during the 2016 election and not properly accounting for it in his business records. This case is unlikely to be affected by the ruling, as his actions don’t involve either core or peripheral presidential powers. Judge Merchan will have to decide whether any of his 34 felony business fraud convictions will stand or be thrown out.
But some of his other crimes occurred during his time in the Oval Office. Trump is accused of conspiring to overturn his 2020 loss in Georgia by asking the state’s top election official to ‘find 11,780 votes’. Trump has pleaded not guilty and could be prosecuted in his personal capacity, as presidents have no role in administering US elections. As in the Capitol case, this was a private action he took as a candidate and it would be difficult to fit into the category of presidential immunity.
The fourth case Trump faces is the Mar-a-Lago classified documents case. Trump is accused of mishandling classified documents by taking them to his Mar-a-Lago residence after leaving office and refusing to return them to the National Archives when he could no longer lawfully possess them. As his alleged crimes took place when he was no longer president, this case shouldn’t be affected by the immunity ruling. However, he could argue he possessed the documents while in office and ask that his case be treated differently from other defendants. This case was dismissed by Judge Cannon. However, the Mar-a-Lago criminal case could come back to life if the 11th Circuit reverses her dismissal.
What are the broader implications of this case for the presidential election?
After this decision, the American public should think about the consequences of who they elect as president, because the presidency can become a wellspring of crime.
An honest president wouldn’t be affected by the Trump v. US decision, because an honest person doesn’t need criminal immunity. Only time will tell whether the Supreme Court has invited future presidents to go on a crime spree. But what is certain is that only US voters can keep criminals out of the White House. So, as I write in my new book, Corporatocracy, the stakes in the 2024 election are incredibly high for the fate of US democracy.
Civic space in the USA is rated ‘narrowed’ by the CIVICUS Monitor.
On 1 July, the US Supreme Court ruled that presidents have absolute immunity for the exercise of their core constitutional powers and are entitled to a presumption of immunity for other official acts, although they don’t enjoy immunity for unofficial acts. The decision comes as Donald Trump faces criminal charges for trying to overturn his 2020 election loss to Joe Biden. The question now is whether Trump’s actions will be considered official or unofficial. But it’s unlikely he’ll be tried before the election, and if he returns as president he could pardon himself. Critics claim the Supreme Court ruling violates the spirit of the US Constitution by placing the president above the law.
