PBI, whose mandate allows it to provide international observers to accompany local peace and social activists threatened with violence, as well as other peace initiatives, began its work in Sri Lanka at the request of the Sri Lanka Bar Association in October 1989.
The Defence Ministry demanded that PBI should submit its situation reports from eastern Sri Lanka for “editing” before publication and provide the names and addresses of PBI’s clients and contacts. PBI says that agreeing to these demands would make its non-partisanship meaningless. Furthermore, the agency finds it hard to fathom the rationale behind the Defence Ministry’s new demand for censorship.
Humanitarian space is increasingly restricted. In a Relief and Rehabilitation Network (RRN) paper titled The coordination of humanitarian action: the case of Sri Lanka, the author Koenraad Van Brabant, says that the single most important impediment to effective humanitarian coordination is the Sri Lankan government and, more particularly, the military, retaining the final authority and keeping agencies outside their mechanisms.
Military and political objectives, the author argues, are allowed to override humanitarian concerns, though not to the point of creating a mass emergency, which would generate more international pressure. The paper also points out that representations by agencies in the north-east to the government on the needs of the people have led to suspicions that they are manipulated by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE).
The Sri Lankan government believes that the bans by the US and Indian governments on the LTTE is a recognition by the international community that it is the only viable political organ in the island. This, the argument goes, makes NGO policy of non-partisanship redundant and has also meant the need for assurances that no NGO is in league with the LTTE.
The Sri Lankan government has in the past accused NGOs of having links with the Tigers, whose 15-year war is aimed at establishing Eelam or separate Tamil state in the north-east of the island. In January the LTTE was proscribed by the government, following an attack on Sri Lanka’s holiest Buddhist shrine, the Dalada Maligawa.
Analysts believe NGOs will face increasing pressure not to deal with the Tigers thereby stultifying humanitarian intervention and peace involvement. Consequently, the condition of civilians in LTTE-held areas in the northern Vanni region and the east is expected to further deteriorate. There are already signs in the eastern province of dislocation as a result of NGOs and government officers being unable to contact the LTTE to arrange relief to the beleaguered population.
There is also concern over the powers granted under the Emergency regulations banning the LTTE which allows the Defence minister to seize money and property of those suspected of funding the Tigers. The minister’s decision is final and cannot be challenged in courts.
It is alleged that the government is encouraging inter-governmental agencies to operate in conflict areas while imposing restrictions on NGOs. Reports say that the government and the Army have indicated their opposition to the international development agency UNDP, which has been permitted to clear landmines in Jaffna, working with local NGOs. Soon after the Army capture of Jaffna in early 1996, cooperation between local and international NGOs was prohibited.
Observers say the setting-up of new subsidiary organisations by inter-governmental agencies in the South Asian region may reduce funding for NGOs and affect their humanitarian work. The relegation of NGOs in Sri Lanka is aimed, they contend, at manipulating information about conditions in the war zone which will help facilitate return of asylum-seekers from Western nations.
In March, a controversial amendment to the Voluntary Social Services Act was passed allowing the Social Services minister to appoint an interim board to run an agency suspected of fraud or misappropriation. Although the provisions do not apply to foreign agencies, there is concern that the government measure represents the shape of things to come.
The amendment, introduced in 1995, was not passed at the time, after agencies condemned it as a violation of freedom of association. The Bill was retained on the parliamentary Order Paper and rushed through Parliament during the absence of the main opposition United National Party (UNP) which began a month-long boycott of the legislature on 3 March accusing the government of abusing democratic rights and unleashing violence against opponents. Sources say President Chandrika Kumaratunge is unhappy over the law which had been passed without consultation with her.
Rohan Edrisinha of Colombo’s Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) says the law is a dangerous tool in government’s hands to control independent associations. The CPA’s challenge over the constitutionality of the law was dismissed by the Supreme Court on the ground that it has no power to review legislation.