News

The Free Media Movement in a letter to the Secretary of the Ministry of Mass Media and Information has vehemently objected to the structural reforms and reorganising of the Press Council Law, which is nearly 50 years old with legal provisions that are severely detrimental to media freedom, calling for it to be repealed.

The Media Ministry Secretary published an advertisement stating the expectation to structurally reform and reorganise the Sri Lanka Press Council established by the Sri Lanka Press Council Law No 05 of 1973 covering electronic, print and new media as a tribunal for journalists and media institutions.

The Free Media Movement, in a letter dated March 12, states that it has perennially objected to a unilateral media regulatory process by a government agency with detrimental legal provisions.

The movement agrees to "a regulatory" methodology encompassing all media that is developed through the engagement of the media community, protecting media diversity, independence, freedom and social responsibility. They have detailed the adverse legal provisions and the basis for opposing the Press Council in the following manner.

Adverse legal provisions that form the basis for opposing the Press Council

• The Press Council is not an independent institution
• According to Section 3 of the Press Council Law of Sri Lanka, out of the seven members of the Council, the President appoints six members. Since it is a process that takes place at the absolute discretion of the President, the Council has become an institution composed solely of the persons required by the President.
• The Council has also lost its independence with the President's power to remove its members.
• The independence of the Council is also lost with the Minister in charge of the subject determining the salary of the members of the Council.
• Members are eligible for re-appointment after a term of three years and such appointments are made at the sole discretion of the President, therefore it is not possible to avoid the members of the Council inevitably becoming persons who do what the President wants.

Minimal representation of the media sector in the Press Council

A representative of working journalists under Section 3 (b) (1) of the Press Council Law of Sri Lanka and a representative of the Press Trade Union in terms of Section 3 (b) (2) are the only representatives from the newspaper industry. Accordingly, out of the seven members, only two members represent the sector. It is by no means a fair representation. Also, according to Section 7 of the Law, it is stated that the Council can act notwithstanding a vacancy amongst the members of the Council, thereby permitting the Council to function even in the absence of the two representatives of the newspapers.

Certain offences under the Press Council Law restrict media freedom

According to Section 16 of the Law, it is an offense to publish information on Cabinet proceedings in newspapers unless the Secretary to the Cabinet of Ministers has approved it for publication in the Newspapers. This provision is very outdated and violates the freedom of the press as well as the people's right to information.

Absence of a provision for appeal - The decision is final

Section 9 (5) of the Law states that any order or censure of the Press Council shall be final and conclusive and shall not be questioned in any court of law. Accordingly, there is no authority or tribunal to appeal against such a decision of the Council. This is contrary to Article 4 (2) of the Convention on Civil and Political Rights No. 56 of 2007. In particular, when considering Article 12 (1) of the Law, which states that a violation of the order of the Council is construed as guilty of the offence of contempt against or disrespect of the authority of the Council is in no way in agreement with the rule of law.

Provisions for the offence of contempt against the Council

Article 12 of the Law states that the Supreme Court has the power to hear cases of contempt of court and that the Supreme Court must accept the certificate submitted with the signature of the Chairman of the Press Council at such a hearing without further proof. It also states that Council members should not be summoned for the case without their consent in such an offence of contempt. Accordingly, journalists find it difficult to challenge the certification submitted by the Council to the Supreme Court. It also exacerbates the situation by not having the opportunity to file a civil or criminal case against the Council.

The Commission did not seek the views of the media in prescribing the Code of Ethics for Newspapers

Section 10 (2) of the Law provides the power to prescribe a Code of Ethics as a function of the Commission. However, when it comes to establishing media ethics, the Council has the power to do so without any consultation with the media. It, therefore, appears to be a media regulation carried out from outside the media sector.

Introduce offences that could result in imprisonment through a summary trial

Section 15 of the Press Council Law of Sri Lanka defines a number of situations as criminal offences and carries a fine not exceeding five thousand rupees, or with imprisonment of either description for a term not exceeding two years or with both such fine and imprisonment. Introducing offences that result in the imprisonment of journalists by a regulatory Law is not appropriate. The most serious situation is that under Section 31 of the Law, a Magistrate Court should hear cases for offences through a summary trial.  It is a great injustice to the journalists to be prosecuted based on a complaint lodged by a non-independent entity.

The Free Media Movement, which has stated in its letter that it will not comment on the practical issues about the Press Council, has urged the Secretary to the Ministry of Mass Media and Information to repeal the Press Council Law that contains the above detrimental legal provisions.

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson on Tuesday defended the safety of the AstraZeneca coronavirus vaccine, after several European countries halted its rollout over blood clot fears.

Sri Lanka has asked retail giant Amazon to take down bikinis, briefs and doormats featuring the nation's lion flag from its site, authorities said on Sunday, two days after it protested against the China-made products.

When questioned whether Vimukthi Kumaratunga would enter into politics in the future, former President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga said that he would likely join if the youth of this country decides to change the existing political culture.

The main objective of this project is to  facilitate the daily activities of the rural people, improve their livelihoods and promote the tourism industry.

This programme is implemented jointly by the Ministry of Highways, the State Ministry of Rural Roads and Other Infrastructure, the Road Development Authority and the State Development and Construction Corporation.

Minister Fernando said that the project is being implemented after listening to the demands of the people as those in rural areas are facing many difficulties due to the dilapidated condition of many bridges.

He further said that this will enable the government to provide necessary support to strengthen the economy through infrastructure development.

Flyovers and underground passages to ease traffic congestion

Meanwhile, the government has decided to build flyovers and underground passageways for pedestrians and overhead pedestrian bridges and alternative and bypass roads in the places with heaviest traffic reported in Colombo and suburbs.

“The decision has been taken as a solution to ease traffic congestion in Colombo and suburban areas,” Highways Minister Johnston Fernando said, adding that funds for this purpose has already been allocated from the 2021 Budget.

Attorney-at-Law Upul Kumarapperuma says that the way Police acted is ambiguous with regard to obtaining a statement from Bhagya, the Sirasa Lakshapathi contestant who raised concerns on environmental destruction at the Sinharaja forest area recently.

Indian and Sri Lankan leaders held talks on the reinforcement of strong bonds between the two countries and to iron out certain misunderstandings in recent developments on the eve of UNHRC’s ’conclusion on HR resolution against Sri Lanka.

The chairman of the Adani Group, Gautum Adani has thanked the Sri Lankan government for the opportunity to develop the Western Container Terminal of the Colombo Port. He said that this partnership between India and Sri Lanka is a symbol of the deep strategic relations between the two countries.

"Grateful to the leaders of GoI, GoSL, SLPA & John Keells for the opportunity to build WCT, Colombo. This partnership is a symbol of the deep strategic relations between countries with great intertwined history. It will launch decades of container growth," Adani said on Twitter.

A consortium led by Adani Ports and Special Economic Zone Ltd (APSEZ) has received a letter of intent from the Sri Lankan government to build and run the West Container Terminal (WCT) at Colombo Port with an investment of some USD 1billion, the Hindu reported.

APSEZ will own a majority stake of 51 per cent in the terminal, while local partners John Keels Holding PLC will hold 34 per cent and the Sri Lanka Ports Authority (SLPA) will have the balance 15 per cent equity.

India has been looking for a terminal presence in Colombo port — a regional transhipment hub through which a large portion of India’s export-import cargo containers are transhipped — for strategic and security considerations.

Sri Lanka and China have agreed that the recommencement of negotiations on the bilateral Free Trade Agreement with the view to concluding it soon would be advantageous to Sri Lanka.

This was revealed during discussions Ambassador Dr. Palitha Kohona held with Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs of China Mr. Luo Zhaohui on 03 March 2021.

Ambassador Kohona also raised the issue of non-tariff barriers which are hindering access to the lucrative Chinese market for a range of natural, agricultural and industrial products.

Sri Lanka has shown interests in exploring a bilateral trade agreement with China.

Both countries now have agreed that they would embark on a free trade agreement, which is hoped to open up the vast Chinese market to Sri Lanka’s producers, manufacturers and exporters.

This would not only boost bilateral trade but help reduce Sri Lanka’s heavy reliance on traditional markets in Europe and the USA. In this regard, it is imperative that the agreement covers a substantial number of tariff lines and trade as well as address non-tariff barriers that may hinder export expansion.

Considering the reservations about adverse effects of a FTA with China, the agreement needs to be prepared carefully taking into account asymmetries between the two economies, with a rational negative list and a longer phase-out liberalisation schedule.

Vice Minister Luo warmly welcomed the Ambassador and stated that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of China will continue to extend its fullest support to the Ambassador in Beijing and effusively acknowledged his long standing connections with China.

The long discussion that followed included cooperation and mutual support in international fora, in economic matters for post Covid-19 recovery, effective management of the Covid-19 pandemic and future high-level visits.

Vice Minister Luo assured of China’s support to Sri Lanka at the UNHRC and its continued assistance as Sri Lanka confronts a critical economic challenge.

The Chinese Foreign Ministry will proactively support efforts to increase Chinese tourism to Sri Lanka and more businesses, including SOEs, to invest in the Colombo Port City and the Hambantota Industrial Zone.

The Vice Minister acknowledged that it was time for these two Chinese supported ventures to get off the ground.

Dr. Kohona commended China for successfully eliminating extreme poverty by 2020 consistent with a key SDG and congratulated the Communist Party of China as it celebrated its 100th year Anniversary.

China’s spectacular success could be attributed to the prudent management of the country by the Party.

Sri Lanka will be implementing a National Trade Policy for the people by maintaining price stability and eliminating monopolies and oligopolies.

The 46th Session of the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) is currently in session in Geneva, with a report on human rights violations in Sri Lanka being discussed and a group of countries, including the United Kingdom, planning to pass another resolution against Sri Lanka.

The group also includes Canada, the United Kingdom, Germany, Northern Macedonia, Montenegro and Malawi.

The group will present a draft resolution on Sri Lanka to the UN Human Rights Council on March 16. The Island recently reported that "Canada and the United Kingdom, its co-sponsoring members, are actively promoting support for the resolution against Sri Lanka at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva."

It further stated that the Canadian High Commissioner to Sri Lanka, David McKinnon, met with the High Commissioner of Bangladesh, Tarek Ariful Islam at the Canadian House (official residence of the High Commissioner of Canada) in Colombo 07, and the Sri Lankan High Commissioner to the United Kingdom, H.C. Sarah Halton had recently met with South Korean Ambassador Wunjin Jeong.

Bangladesh as well as South Korea are members of the 47-member Human Rights Commission. Meetings between diplomats in these countries are generally rare, The Island added.   But the report, presented by UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet, notes very different recommendations from the suggestions made by the group of co - sponsors, including targeted sanctions against Sri Lanka's perpetrators of war crimes and violence, their assets and travel bans. She called on member states of the UN Human Rights Council to consider doing so.   Michelle Bachelet's report was recently taken up and 21 countries, including Nicaragua, Eritrea and North Korea, spoke in support of Sri Lanka. Nicaragua, Eritrea and North Korea are also facing resolutions based on them in the Human Rights Council.

Cuba, Venezuela, Indonesia and Pakistan have been among those who have taken a clear stand against resolutions on Sri Lanka at the UN Human Rights Council in the past as well as this time. But in the past, they have not been able to defeat those proposals.

“The support of 21 countries is not a pleasant reality to face, Azerbaijan speaking on behalf of Sri Lanka in the Council or anywhere else really shows a big difference between perhaps the US speaking in support of Sri Lanka. Failure to recognise this is a failure to calculate the true nature of the problem” Journalist Dharisha Bastians said.   There are various opinions in the country at present and some people say that the resolution of the Human Rights Council could have adverse effects such as the imposition of economic sanctions on the country. But can the Human Rights Council really do that?       Composition of the Human Rights Council:

The Council consists of 47 member states and is elected by direct and secret ballot of the members of the United Nations General Assembly.   The General Assembly considers the role of these candidate states in promoting and protecting human rights, as well as their commitment and voluntary action in this regard.

Council membership is based on equal geographical distribution.   Accordingly, 13 seats are reserved for African countries, 13 seats for Asia-Pacific countries, 8 seats for Latin American and Caribbean countries, 7 seats for Western European and other countries and 6 seats for Eastern European countries.

Relevant countries hold a three-year membership period and are not eligible for re-election immediately after two consecutive terms of membership.   Following the adoption of Resolution 60/251 in March 2006 to create the Human Rights Council, the member states will have the responsibility to uphold the highest human rights standards upon their accession to the Council, in accordance with the criteria emphasized by the States.

Member Countries :   The UN Human Rights Council has 47 member states.   As of January 1, 2020, 117 of the 193 UN member states are members of the Human Rights Council. A list of member states from 2006 to 2020 is found below. Afghanistan, Algeria, Argentina, Australia, Bahrain, Bolivia, Chile, China, Congo, Costa Rica, Ivory Coast, Croatia, Cuba, Czech Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Denmark, Djibouti, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, El Salvador , France, Gabon, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Guatemala, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Magdalen, Latvia , Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Pakistan, Philippines, Phile, Victory, Republic of Moldova, Republic of Northern Macedonia, Romania, Russian Republic, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Switzerland, Switzerland, Switzerland , United Arab Emirates, Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States, Uruguay, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic), Vietnam and Zambia  Powers of the Council:   At the Human Rights Council, no state has the veto power as in the UN Security Council. Resolutions are passed by consensus or by a majority vote. Therefore, it is not correct to say that countries like China and Russia have the "veto power" of the UN Human Rights Council.   The Human Rights Council has no ability to impose sanctions economically or otherwise.

Relevant states are not bound to implement or not implement the resolutions of the UN Human Rights Council. This means that a government is "forced" to comply, but the Council has no direct consequences, sanctions or penalties.

But highlighting the human rights abuses exposed by the council's resolutions could have consequences, such as the imposition of individual bilateral sanctions based on them.   Bachelet's report call for "targeted sanctions" implies that governments have the sole discretion to impose sanctions on individuals, not just the country as a whole.

As a result of their involvement in wartime abuses, some military officers are barred from engaging in international travel or trade.   This is a course of action already being followed by some countries.For example, the United States has already imposed a travel ban on Army Commander General Shavendra Silva and his family members.

Unlike in previous years, the United States, which has now withdrawn from the UNHRC, is seeking to rejoin the UNHRC. They have not yet been given the right to vote.   Therefore, it is doubtful whether the co-sponsors of the resolution on Sri Lanka will still be able to get a majority vote on their resolution, as China, Russia and Pakistan all have the right to vote in the Council and it is significant.   But even if the resolution is defeated by the Council, those countries still have the power to make their own decisions.

(BBC Sinhala Service)