The Country Guidance Case on Sri Lanka, a process which reassessed the current guidance on Sri Lanka was released this week.
The report recognised the on-going militarisation and repression of cultural identity, finding that,
“The former Tamil areas in the Northern and Eastern Provinces are in effect occupied territory, with one soldier for every five members of the population. Militarisation is particularly heavy in the Northern Province.”
And that,
“President Rajapaksa has stated that these areas should not now be described as “Tamil areas”: the government’s intention appears to be to dilute the Tamil population of those areas by Sinhalisation”
Noting Sri Lanka’s disregard for Tamil identity the report also acknowledged that despite economic development, “any such reconstruction does not permit recognition of separate Tamil identity at present.”
The regular occurrence of torture was mentioned and the report accepted “that those who were detained were likely to be ill-treated and the evidence suggests that for both sexes, that ill-treatment sometimes includes sexual abuse.”
The case report also outlined that Sri Lanka’s new perceived threat was the Tamil diaspora and highlighted the groups that were now at risk of persecution.
The report found that,
“The focus of the Sri Lankan government’s concern has changed since the civil war ended in May 2009. The LTTE in Sri Lanka itself is a spent force and there have been no terrorist incidents since the end of the civil war. The government’s present objective is to identify Tamil activists in the diaspora who are working for Tamil separatism and to destabilise the unitary Sri Lankan state.”
“Thus the new categories of persons at real risk of persecution or serious harm on return to Sri Lanka, whether in detention or otherwise include,
a) Individuals who are, or are perceived to be, a threat to the integrity of Sri Lanka as a single state because they are, or are perceived to have a significant role in relation to post-conflict Tamil separatism within the diaspora and/or a renewal of hostilities within Sri Lanka.
b) Journalists (whether in print or other media) or human rights activists, who, in either case, have criticised the Sri Lankan government, in particular its human rights record, or who are associated with publications critical of the Sri Lankan government
c) Individuals who have given evidence to the Lessons Learned and Reconciliation Commission implicating the Sri Lankan security forces, armed forces or the Sri Lankan authorities in alleged war crimes. Among those who may have witnessed war crimes during the conflict, particularly in the No-Fire Zones in May 2009, only those who have already identified themselves by giving such evidence would be known to the Sri Lankan authorities and therefore only they are at real risk of adverse attention or persecution on return as potential or actual war crimes witnesses."
See here for full report.