UN apprised of Sri Lanka s human rights situation

  • 28 Mar 2008 02:54:51 GMT

    Killing of 18 aid workers? Such thing never happened dude. Tell me where it happened, if it ever.

  • 28 Mar 2008 04:57:42 GMT

    Most of these discussions are for their purposes only. They do not touch the person on ground. Wonder how many of the Ambassadors and Representatives know the difference between racial differentiation and racial discrimination?

    Today, I asked the Head of Human Resources of SriLankan Airlines as follows:

    [Dear Ms Dahanayake,

    Thank you for your email.

    Given that you advertised that recruitment would be on merit basis, I would appreciate objectively verifiable outcomes of your assessment of my application - so I would know that there has been no unjust discrimination. I seek to advise you that this would be included in my report to the United Nations.

    Regards

    Gaja Lakshmi Paramasivam

    ----- Original Message -----

    From: Rangika Bolonne

    To: gajalakshmi_param@bigpond.com

    Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 10:40 PM

    Subject: POSITION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

    Dear Ms. Paramasivam,

    We write in response to your curriculum vitae indicating your interest in applying for the position of Chief Executive Officer at SriLankan Airlines Ltd.

    We certainly are impressed with your application, however we regret to inform that you are not amongst the shortlisted applicants for the above position.

    Whilst thanking you for your confidence and interest shown in joining SriLankan Airlines, we take this opportunity to wish you the very best in all endeavours of the future.

    Yours sincerely

    For SriLankan Airlines Ltd.,]

    The letter from Sri Lanka, to the UN regarding reality for us - would be of value to the real seeker:

    [AUSTRALIAN TAMIL MANAGEMENT SERVICE

    The Hon Ban Ki-moon

    Secretary General

    United Nations

    New York

    USA

    13 March 2008

    Dear Mr. Ban Ki-moon,

    RACISM & DISCRIMINATION OBSTACLES TO DEVELOPMENT

    I read in yesterday s Junior Star. the weekly English supplementary of Thinakkural a Tamil Newspaper in Sri Lanka, your message about Racial Discrimination being a hindrance to Development. Is it or is it not? To find the answer, we need to go to the root meaning of discrimination and feel the power of natural divisions.

    Differentiation causes lateral separation. There is nothing wrong with this and in fact, at the physical level this differentiation is needed to calculate the real value of a group s work and hence Mothers Day . The moment we arrange the separated groups vertically, allocating hierarchical positions, Discrimination has taken place. So long as there is no status difference it is only differentiation contributing to Diversity and not discrimination. This is why where there has been physical expression and action, there is a need to demonstrate Equal status on all factors of unlawful discrimination including race where at least one person involved is of a minority group.

    There is nothing wrong with discrimination and therefore hierarchical positioning so long as one is not aware of the difference due to the above agreed anti discrimination factors including race, or one has consciously and expressly equalized the status on the basis of those specific factors. Equal status consciously differentiates by keeping the vertical difference at zero level. Subjective force is a natural force and needs to be channeled to become force of diversity and hence the opposition in parliament. It would be counter productive to kill diversity to promote commonness as happened to us Australians through the Stolen Generation. Hence the need to equalize where there is natural separation. This is also the basis of devolution of power from program to project.

    The higher positioning of the UN Secretary General above the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights is based on this subjective force due to belief and faith that the position is higher. In a just system of democracy, the Commissioner for Human Rights would rank higher than the Secretary General in issues relating to Human Rights. Whether this is the case with your current users of the positions we the International Public do not know.

    Essential to such democratic leadership is the requirement to consciously and expressly separate Human Rights from other functions of the UN so that the outcomes produced by the Human Rights division are Universally Transparent and are open to assessment and evaluation by any genuine investor seeking to identify with the United Nations Human Rights Values. Until this is done or this happens , Human Rights is a subjectively managed essential service of the UN and is part of its core operation as Health, Education and Security are in many countries. We call them inner budget units in our Public Accounting system. Human Rights in member countries, likewise, is subjective as part of the government, until the above objectively measurable outcomes are established.

    In my country Australia, the Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission, kept dismissing my complaints of unlawful racial discrimination due to this lack of independence from the Executive Government. The stated basis was that I had not produced objective evidence that the actions that caused me injury were motivated by race . To my mind, effects are equally sufficient as cause in the objective world. The President of the Commission used Section 46 PH (1) of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Act which authorizes use of discretionary powers by the President. Discretionary powers are subjective and require genuine belief. When explanations are given including lack of objective evidence the power used is no longer discretionary power and the use of such explanations automatically disqualify the President from using Section 46PH (1). The Commission needed objectively measurable criteria to explain their decision to terminate. The lack of such measures establishes that the Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission is a part of the core government under the subjective leadership of the Attorney General who reports to the Prime Minister. Hence the Doctrine of Separation of Powers is not being practiced by the Australian Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission. It is therefore immoral of them to seek an individual to produce objectively measurable evidence against its masters / parents from whom the Commission is yet to become independent. I tried to educate the Commission on how to become independent, through a job application for a senior position. I am yet to receive any evidence that someone who needs that wisdom has learnt.

    Through the use of Section 46PH (1), the Commission was declaring that it did not have objectively measurable criteria for terminating complaints and therefore the facility for us the users of the system - to assess and identify with the work of the Commission through the system of democracy and self governance. By requiring me to produce objective evidence of why I was positioned at a lower level than the person who caused the injury, the Commission was placing a far higher threshold for me to participate in the decision-making than the CEO / President. It is this inquiry into why, that reveals the basis of Discrimination if not objectively then subjectively from mind to mind. When participation in this inquiry process is blocked, the Commission s officers also do not have opportunity to form a subjective value through Due Process. Due Process is the path that facilitates subjective assessment and is essential where no objective evidence has been produced by users of power. This process will inform the participants whether race was a factor in hierarchical positioning. Due Process is the flow of Common Values established by our predecessors who had the experience. By respecting Due Process we are paying our royalties to all those who contributed to those Common Values which due to time and space differences become Common principles to those who did not directly participate in the experiences that produced those common values.

    As an individual without official power, I could produce evidence as to why through objectively measurable records produced by the person who positioned me at the lower level to punish me and cause me injury. What happened could be produced through independent objectively measurable evidence. Why something happened is subjective and the closer the person producing the evidence is to the decision maker the less objective and universal it is. Where the officer who causes the injury/ punishment at the physical level is required to practice Equal Opportunity principles and therefore the Elimination of race from the discriminatory process or equalization where it is part of the administrative calculation, the absence of evidence as to why by the user of Power is adequate proof of guilt. This failure to produce evidence often is due to negligence of one s democratic duty. Negligence has the effect of Racial Discrimination where the victim is conscious of racial separation.

    As per Section 9 of the Australian Racial Discrimination Act 1975, it is unlawful to require someone to do something that has the purpose or effect of denial of opportunities on Equal footing, on the basis of race, As per my Hindu mind, purpose means cause current and active thinking by the person carrying out the act. Effect means karma it happens due to our past which is a natural part of our subconscious mind. This is commonly called fate by the lay person. The system of karma is the system of cause and effect. The moment we recognize effect, the person using Power has the responsibility to actively and expressly override the subconscious memory due to past history and show that this has been done. The best way to do this is to show the active use of merit basis through objectively measurable criteria / rules..

    The New South Wales Police kept describing me as a Sri Lankan national despite my strong protests that I was Australian . Most if not all, of the officers do not, even now, think that they are wrong in doing this. The courts have thus far not ruled them wrong establishing that to the judiciary also, I am not Australian. The American-Australian Vice Chancellor of the University of New South Wales (UNSW), who reported me to the Police, for peaceful assembly, also through the representation in court declared that my Sri Lankan qualification / Chartered Accountancy was not considered at least equal to the Australian degree as is required by Equal Opportunity principles in areas where he did not have calculated values. This was recorded publicly despite the Recruitment Guide of the University specifically stating that the merit of overseas qualifications was not to be questioned by the recruiting panel.

    Where one does not follow current policy one needs strong personal karma for the right thing to happen through Natural Justice. This natural path of an individual could be overridden only for higher common purpose if causers of punishment and injury are not to receive their return karma through Natural Justice Acts of God. The American-Australian Vice Chancellor obviously did not because he happened to be prematurely terminated from his position after complaints of racial discrimination from migrant students who went quickly to the media, unlike me who followed Due Process every step of the way often with excruciating waiting pain. This Vice Chancellor symbolizes also America s failure to eliminate Racial Discrimination even in its institutions of Higher Education.

    Did the massacre of Sharpeville which caused us to specifically remember through 21 March, which significantly happens to be Good Friday this year, the need to eliminate Racial Discrimination happen as an effect of past karma or was it caused actively as new investment in divided governance? Through Article 5 of the International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination, participating States, including America and Australia, have guaranteed Equal Footing before bodies administering Justice. Yet, even today, our Police actively use race to describe and relate to a person. By describing me as Sri Lankan the users of Power were separating me from Australians including themselves. By punishing me without transparent merit basis they were discriminating on the basis of my ethnic origins and racial looks as Indian Black. Differentiation becomes Discrimination when the person using power from a higher position is not conscious of specific merit basis. Once lack of merit basis is proven racial discrimination is automatically proven in a country that has been historically labeled to have suffered from racial superiority.

    Sharpeville action at the physical level was commenced through Peaceful assembly meaning there was no physical violence to punish on Common Law basis. Were the actions of those who exercised power the armed forces caused by active thinking and positioning on the basis of race or did it happen to be on the basis of race?

    As per rulings of the Australian Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission, Government and Judiciary the punishments I received which included imprisonment with the threat of enforced medication whist in custody and whilst under the supervision of NSW Probation & Parole Services were not due to my race. Their inability to point to objectively measurable merit basis of the actions of users of power is proof of their lack of investment in the Elimination of Racial Discrimination by users of power including themselves. In other words, Elimination of Racial Discrimination is merely theory which brings them priority status in international forums such as yours.

    I learnt yesterday, through your news report that the Hon Louise Arbour is leaving her position as UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. Ms Arbour is reported to have made special mention of Sri Lanka as a country that needs specific attention regarding Human Rights violations. I identified with this outcome as return for my investment in the position of UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, through my regular bottom up feed back reports directly to Ms Arbour. Ms Arbour did not respond to me indicating that she did not recognize me as being equal or higher in status to warrant a direct response. But because I was genuine and because Ms Arbour did not actively block my participation, I feel that my genuine work contributed to this special attention to Sri Lanka. In other words, that position becomes a facility , to use which, I paid through my experiences and my reports about those experiences. as in user pays system.

    The demonstration in Sharpeville on 21 March 1960 was the parallel of my reports. I was reported to the Police by the University of NSW which used the name (not substance) of Inclosed Lands Protection Act 1901 . Given that there was no evidence of any violence on my part i.e. that it was a peaceful assembly of one person the only lawful reason why I could be reported, charged, tried and punished was due to not being an owner . Given that the University of NSW is a Public institution, the only lawful reason for such action through law enforcement agencies would have been if I were not an Australian national. The Police and the University of NSW genuinely and naturally considered me to be Sri Lankan based on the fact that I was born and educated in Sri Lanka. They both failed to consciously and expressly override this natural assessment largely on the basis of the history of the country I was born in which is no longer my history for legal purposes. This history was reinforced by my current looks (I was wearing sari on the three occasions when I was listed as Sri Lankan in court administrative records). As opposed to that natural assessment is my own subjective assessment according to which I am a citizen of United Nations i.e. one who is conscious of the issue before local environments including national borders and bindings. As per objectively measurable records I am legally Australian which is all the data Police and the University of NSW were required to use in administrative records and assessment.

    I symbolize the fact that if a user of the UN s power contained in the laws of Equal Opportunity in general and racial equality in particular, dares to exercise that power through peaceful assembly, which is the demonstrated value of our actual investment in laws and principles such a demonstrator would be severely punished even today 48 years after the Sharpeville tragedy which caused the birth of the International Convention on the Elimination on All Forms of Racial Discrimination by even the leading members of the UN America & Australia. The death of my memory of my investment in the issue is a worse tragedy for democracy than physical death of hundreds and thousands of innocent, non-investors. In other words, how is one to relate and prioritize between physical and mental death? Physical death is the primary tool of measure for those who are bound by local environments including race, electorate and nation. At the level of United Nations, priority needs to be given to investors in issue even if the victim was a fraction of the physical individual because the issue includes all investors globally and therefore is taken as at least 50 percent of the global participants. The boundaries of UN States are the boundaries of the investment in the issue.

    The author of the article in Junior Star published by Northern Publications at 336, K.K.S. Road, Jaffna, Sri Lanka, states Laws on the books haven t always translated into improved conditions on ground and numerous countries have yet to formulate and implement effective anti-discrimination policies. In fact, 42 years after it was adopted, the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination still falls well short of universal ratification.

    None of the Senior Federal Court Judges who heard my complaints of unlawful racial discrimination demonstrated genuine investment in the Convention. The only judge to demonstrate genuine investment in Equal Opportunity issue including through this Convention is Federal Magistrate the Hon Smith who is currently hearing the complaint against the NSW Police. When the State of NSW applied for summary dismissal, Magistrate Smith ruled that the matter would go to trial and this was a first time for me after all the summary dismissals for which I am facing mounting legal bills from the respondents. That is financial threat for daring to uphold fundamental human rights.

    The judge with negative investment is Justice Brian Tamberlin who heard the application by David Hicks around the same time he heard my complaint against the University of NSW. The decisions under the same set of rules were different in favour of Mr. Hicks who confessed to having physically participated in the war against governments whilst the judgment in my matter was against me who has actively contributed to the issue of Prevention of Terrorism . This resulted in armed officers breaking into our home and removing family assets in addition to blocking through writ the release of equity funds in our home unit. The threats keep coming from the State of NSW as well as the UNSW who use the likes of Justice Tamberlin for their purposes. Yes, we do live under threat of forced entry by armed officers in Australia also. The difference between Australia and Sri Lanka is that the former is covered by its leadership status as facilitated by you. In Sri Lanka also, if the Tamil Tigers had not dared to question the government through the government s chosen language of physical enforcement the death would have been covered up by the individual victims as is currently the case in Western countries such as America and Australia.

    The author of the article states Each and every one of us must also make a stand we must disavow discriminatory and intolerant acts in our personal lives and speak out forcefully against them in the public sphere. Given the connection between racism and development, these actions should be seen as an integral part of local and National efforts to achieve the Millennium Development Goals b y 2015.

    To me racial equality happened largely due to my family investing in higher education and therefore the use of merit basis which is our most firm path to Universal values. As I stated during the special event to mark the achievements of the People of Sangarathai-Thunaivi- in Northern Sri Lanka where Miss Vijitha Maruthalingam has achieved 3A s (topmost grade) to enter University all without electricity or running water at home - we start off with Common Principles work in Common through Due Process and produce Common Values which automatically connect us. I believe that my inclusion of myself and all those who identify with me naturally on the basis of our family Vairavar-Kali temple has helped this village (previously disenfranchised on the basis of caste) to emerge with new energy because they feel they are not alone.

    Where we do not have Objective measures to calculate from zero base, we need subjective examples from amongst us with whom we naturally identify. Then the essence of their work is naturally and commonly shared with us. We do not need calculations.

    As a temporary measure, local boundaries become necessary to develop this natural identity especially amongst those who have not invested in higher education with global standards. Racial segregation becomes necessary where race is the highest local factor. It is not different to gender separation in traditional Hindu & Muslim communities. Where the status of individuals of a group that is obviously different to another and that differentiating factor does not have a functional purpose segregation of the groups is necessary to maintain the dignity of the individual which to my mind is the fundamental purpose of democracy. Under the system of Democracy, these groups including on the basis of country, are required to be considered to be equal / common, until proven/established otherwise.

    So, Mr. Ban Ki-moon, do you consider yourself to be equal to Mr. Shankar the chairman of the Thunaivi Development Centre who looks far less educated than you? If you feel a part of the most disenfranchised group in your physical birth environment your natural group as decided by the Mother of all Justice systems the system of Natural Justice / karma you will automatically feel connected to Shankar. This feeling will manifest through intermediaries from various environments who also feel connected to their roots. That is the power of Nature - it connects naturally and without any current effort on our part. That is commonly called the power of Love / Truth.

    We need our natural groupings where we do not have free access to higher facilities towards global connections. This is the reason why Tamils seek separate State in Sri Lanka. They do not feel self-governed due to long years of separation at the mental level. The value of this natural grouping on the basis of common culture is demonstrated by Tamil Nadu in India which makes rich contribution to Central Governance. In fact, we need this Natural Grouping for displaced Tamils all over the world until they participate directly and/or through their children and others they identify with naturally in the governance of the countries they are making their home. It is not unlawful for me to be officially called Tamil in Australia but it is unlawful for me to be officially described as Indian and listed as Sri Lankan national in Australia. What matters officially is the lawful description. In Australia even at the official level we have not eliminated the dysfunctional differentiation on the basis of country. It is this dysfunctional factor that often leads to unjust and unlawful discrimination to damage current work done by minority groups.

    Where at least one party is conscious of race, there is mandatory requirement (as per the just system of democracy) for the user of power to demonstrate racial equality. When I waited to see the Vice Chancellor of UNSW, I was demonstrating my investment in Equal Opportunity in general. Since I had already taken the Vice Chancellor to the Supreme Court of NSW on the basis of Unlawful Racial Discrimination, I had already demonstrated that I had overridden any feelings and/or thoughts of inferiority as Sri Lankan. In fact, I firmly claimed through my direct experience that Sri Lankan chartered accountancy was above the level of the Australian professional accountants I worked with. In the name of democracy I added my extra credit to Australian side and told myself that we were generally equal.

    The largest obstacle to development through use of Natural Forces is pretence that we are one when we are not. Where majority in a group feel that they are separate from the group that forms government we need conscious and express differentiation through which we have Equal Administrative Power as the Central Administration. The additional powers of the Central Body must flow from their wisdom which flows as facility and not as administration. Hence it is important to have wise people in Central Governance so they do not become lower in position than the devolved units. In administration they are seen to be equal until proven otherwise. In Management, Central Administrators who are like senior parents maturing into grandparents, need to have wisdom that is freely shared with all genuine investors. It would be unlawful to block this natural participation and hence the actions of the Vice Chancellor of the University of NSW and the Police were unlawful. I was merely sharing my wisdom by just being there and personifying my discoveries. As our Tamil Saint Yoga Swami (pictured above) said Be Still Summa Iru. That is the power of Nature. It is open to all genuine investors. When it is not, it is no longer nature.

    Central Management is the Program, whilst Devolved Management is the Project. The latter has to be self balancing through current measures whilst the former needs to symbolize the total investment through Common Values, People and Cash in that order of priority. Those driven by cash need to devolve themselves to project level.

    The issues for which power is devolved need to be special to that Devolved unit / State. If your position is Program then the position of UN High Commissioner for Human Rights is the Project.

    Division and Separation on the basis of race is the parallel of your division on the basis of member states. But at the administrative level, your separations are indicated through issues and not countries and hence UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.

    As a citizen of UN, I urge you to recognize and uphold the status of individuals who have actually practiced racial equality often by foregoing their benefits earned through merit system. That is the only solution known to me in a world where majority feel either superior or inferior on the basis of race. As per my Australian experiences the ratio of inequality between white and black Australians is 1:26. In common words, a Black needs to make 26 times the sacrifice and/or effort of a White to Eliminate Racial Discrimination in a western country.

    The greatest force of development is nature. It is important to harness this natural power appropriately through natural boundaries . Recognizing these natural boundaries is most important where you do not have administrative control. Development then would be bottom up and would lead to self governance through the individual using his/her inner justice system which is Universal due to the Truth / Love / God within each and every one of us.

    Yours sincerely

    Gaja Lakshmi Paramasivam

    Chief Executive Officer

    CC: All Concerned - including UN Anti-Discrimination Unit, OHCHR

    Palais Wilson, Geneva, Switzerland Email: adusecretariat@ohchr.org]

  • 28 Mar 2008 12:36:52 GMT

    Gaja

    very very impressive read.... But do you think it will have the desired effect on the Gen Sec?

  • 28 Mar 2008 13:07:33 GMT

    Gaja,

    I am glad to learn that your letters to Louise Arbour were possibly effective.

    RK

  • 29 Mar 2008 04:36:51 GMT

    Moby,

    [very very impressive read.... But do you think it will have the desired effect on the Gen Sec?]

    Thank you deeply for appreciating. I do not desire any particular effect from the occupier of that position. If I get any - it would be a bonus. But by genuinely sharing, I have made investment in that position and I will use it to help the needy. That is a natural authority. This is why in every situation we must do what we can any way we can without damaging someone else`s genuine work. When our feelings are genuine - the right outcomes will `happen`. I have seen my work produce such results many times. Often it is not endorsed by those in positions of authority. Then I know that their investment in that issue is less than mine. It is our participation that really gives us the experience and the belief. Belief is the source of confidence.

    Thank you again

    love

    gaja

  • 29 Mar 2008 04:38:46 GMT

    RealKaruna,

    [I am glad to learn that your letters to Louise Arbour were possibly effective. ]

    Thank you. I believe they were. Below is a letter to Australian Human Rights Commission. I have included my Batticaloa experience in it. You being RK - might find it useful

    love

    gaja

    [AUSTRALIAN TAMIL MANAGEMENT SERVICE

    Ms Karen Toohey

    Director, Complaint Handling

    Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission

    29 March 2008

    Your Ref: 206998 FD/LT

    Dear Ms Toohey,

    RACIAL DISCRIMINATION COMPLAINTS AGAINST MR. JAMES MATTSON & NSW SHERIFF S OFFICERS

    Thank you for your letter dated 25 February 2008 in relation to my complaints against Mr. Mattson and NSW Sheriff s officers.

    You state in your letter `there is no relationship that exists between yourself and Mr. Mattson under which you are able to make a complaint under the SDA or RDA. Therefore this Commission is not the appropriate body to assist you .`

    As an active user of the Services required to be provided by the Commission, it is my determination that the administrative functions of the Commission are primarily directed by the Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission Act. I ask you to please provide the specific section of this Act that allows you the authority to reject my above complaints. As per my determination, SDA and RDA are secondary for this specific purpose of administering your work.

    Your statement about absence of relationship between myself and Mr. Mattson, confirms that you also effectively do not consider me to be Australian but Sri Lankan. Mr. Mattson was representing the University of NSW when he questioned me about my finances in a public area of the court. Given that you have not expressed any beliefs (subjective evidence) or determination (objective evidence) to doubt this, to my mind, the only reason why Mr. Mattson and I are considered to not have relationship would be if you also do not consider me to be lawfully Australian. Your refusal to accept my complaint is therefore as per my determination, in breach of Section 9 of the RDA. Even if you claim that the purpose was not to discriminate on the basis of my race, the effect is to discriminate on the basis of race which is natural for majority Australians. It is naturally unlawful. By failing to actively use the merit basis you acted in breach of RDA. Merit basis is the best medicine for unlawful and unjust discrimination. The slower you are in applying the merit basis the greater the risk of using racial discrimination with those who seem ethnic.

    Ms. Toohey, I have just returned from Sri Lanka where I have successfully taken groups in North and East to govern themselves through objective measures. The group in North was suffering due to caste based discrimination whilst the group in East was suffering from alienation as Veddhas the parallels of our Aborigines. I became parts of these groups and had the experience with them. This is what I find lacking in your work. The only experience that you seem to have had is through the authorities which is racially tainted. It s your inheritance through government channels. Experience gives us beliefs. Decisions without belief are for purpose or have the effect of trade and / or slavery. Decisions without the experience are purely for grades. The country and the issue do not benefit from them in real terms. Where you do not have the direct experience, it is important to have the experience through someone who has had the direct experience or strictly limit yourself to objectively measurable work and decisions and consciously exclude all subjective thinking and more importantly from making decisions using discretionary powers. Unless you consciously choose to identify with the victims, you would naturally relate through the experience of your predecessors and the government and hence any unspecified subjective decision is bound to be strongly infected by racial discrimination. Subjective decisions based on participation are clear of unlawful discrimination. On that basis you have the duty to take my side and not that of the respondents who avoid you. In other words, I am more of Human Rights & Equal Opportunity family than any of the respondents against whom I complained. Yet you decided in their favour and against me.

    In terms of relationship / nationality the moment the State recognized me as a Sri Lankan national the matter was raised to International level and I was entitled to international facilities and standards. If the State chose to keep it local it ought to have ensured that the matter was kept local as a security issue or ought to have appealed to me by including me as part of their family. Once differentiation was done on the basis of my nationality with no attempts having been made by the UNSW (represented by Mr. Mattson) or the State of NSW (represented by the Sheriff s officers) to bring me under the Common umbrella as themselves either as University, State or Nation I am entitled to Objectively measurable assessments. You have failed to respect this basic entitlement under the system of democracy.

    You state further ` In relation to the Sheriff officers entering your home and taking your possessions it appears that they were acting in accordance with a court order and not because of your racial background. We are unable to investigate matters that occur in direct compliance with a court order. Therefore this Commission is not the appropriate body to assist you with this matter. `

    That to my mind, is the parallel of saying that a soldier is not responsible at all for killing in combat. In your previous decisions you exempted the Judiciary which means the commanders are also not responsible. In other words, according to you, I am the only one responsible for my suffering and loss. When you exempt the soldier you promote abuse of power at the physical level. When you exempt the commander, you promote abuse at the mental level which is less visible and hence more dangerous. You have exempted both levels in relation to my complaints and hence effectively you are saying in action that I have acted unlawfully to punish myself. This is the effect of your assessments and determinations.

    During my recent visit to Batticaloa, in Eastern Sri Lanka, I was very disturbed by the visible presence of the political group called TMVP (Thamil Makkal Viduthalai Pulligal) a group that broke away from the LTTE which is proscribed by the UN as a terrorist group. I was questioned by a guy who was not in uniform but had the apparent endorsement of the Defence Forces. I asked him as to why he was not in uniform? To my educated mind, if he was an officer he ought to have been in uniform when publicly displaying his authority to question me. He demonstrated his disapproval of my visit to Jaffna and asked me questions as if going to Jaffna was a crime. I said that Jaffna was my birthplace and that I felt natural in going there whenever I felt like it. I questioned him as to why he was not in uniform. I said if he was spying he ought to do so confidentially and if he sought to raise his status by questioning me openly then he ought to be in uniform. Likewise the UNSW Security Officer. I noticed that on the following two occasions when I was arrested, the officers were in uniform. I took credit for the progressive change.

    The above TMVP guy asked me when I had arrived in the country. I said 26 February. He looked at me and then pointed to the stamp that read 25 Feb. I knew that it was the Malaysian stamp whilst I was transiting and noticed the Sri Lankan stamp further below. Had I pointed that out to him he was likely to have reacted as violently as Sergeant Grech of Maroubra Police, who reacted harshly to my expressions of higher intellect over the Vice Chancellor of UNSW and in this instance in that remote part of the world, the outcome was likely to be a bullet through my head with charges of terrorism due to their interpretations of my activities and associations confirmed now by the criminal charges by Australian authorities based on their interpretations of my actions. Thanks to your group I am fully exposed to these risks because I do not have the protection of law officers, that I have earned. At that point in time in Batticaloa, I told myself that more people stood to gain by me living than dying in that remote part with no one knowing what happened or who pulled the trigger and whether they pulled the trigger out of calculated moves to protect the people or to show their superior power over nobodies like myself. Hence I said to the TMVP guy I arrived at midnight, and the scheduled time of arrival was 26th morning. He seemed happy that he had shown his administrative skills to me an International Tamil. He let me go. I knew it was a close call. I heard many reports of killings in the families known to me families that are now part of my life after Tsunami experience. The Police, like you are now tending to, no longer take complaints. TMVP like the corrupt lawyers including Mr. Mattson, inform the people but without anyone being wiser as to why or who? To the loved ones it then feels as if they on behalf of the dead are responsible. I recently received reports that the UN Secretary General has said PAST INJUSTICES SHOULD SPUR BATTLE AGAINST MODERN FORMS OF SLAVERY . Some of them are in Australia and are being supported by your group. One who has genuinely practiced the law ought to be facilitated to feel free to express her Truth without fear of punishment or loss of earned benefits. How can we Australians have higher status to help Sri Lankans when we continue to suffer from racial discrimination and slavery? If we are to use discretionary powers or subjective assessments we need to have had the experience. Otherwise we have to limit ourselves to objective measures irrespective of how they affect our history.

    Ms Toohey, as discussed in the attached letter to the Secretary General of the United Nations the Sharpeville massacre which caused the birth of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination happened due to peaceful assembly against racial discrimination. I was also legally protesting against racial discrimination by the UNSW Administrators led by the Vice Chancellor when I was arrested and for which I am now paying legal costs incurred in hiring Mr. James Mattson and for which the officers broke into my home and removed property. If all these actions were without subjective influence I would agree that they were merely following court orders. Such decision would then demonstrate independent balance that I had earned that punishment. If you are therefore able to show the connection between my action and the actions of the officers who punished me then you do have the lawful reason to reject my complaint. In other words, by rejecting my complaint you are stating that you are of the belief that I have earned that punishment and loss. It is for this reason that the system of democracy promotes project based management as opposed to program based management. Projects have to be self balancing. Otherwise they are programs with high degree of subjective and discretionary components. Likewise organizations such as yours which are still not able to balance locally on the basis of the core purpose for which you exist your objects clause. You are therefore dependent on the government and are strongly influenced by its subjective forces. Likewise the NSW Police who were not able to balance the matter through Security issue and the UNSW which was not able to balance the matter through Higher Education issue. Effectively you are all part of the inner government representing the State and Commonwealth. Hence your natural inclinations to rule me wrong / reject me.

    As per your assessment of my complaint which fits well within the borders of the Sharpeville Assembly in 1960, complaints from the Sharpeville victims also would have been rejected by you, on the basis that it was done for security reasons. They would therefore not qualify under Racial Discrimination legislation. Hence to my mind are the obstacles within your organization. The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination confirms the failure of authorities such as yours to take timely action to establish racial equality in a country that differentiates naturally on the basis of race. Where there is differentiation, there is lateral distance and hence it is important to produce objectively measurable outcomes of each side s work. You have failed to facilitate this but have dismissed my complaints on the basis that they were lacking such objective evidence. The Sharpeville victims also did not have evidence that the authorities who punished them were racially motivated. Where there is insufficient objective evidence and there is natural differentiation on the basis of race, disability etc,. it is a natural effect that majority influence would prevail and where that majority influence happens to be due to racial differentiation, then racial discrimination has happened through majority vote.

    Where there is no evidence of differentiation on anti discrimination factors recognized by either side, the matter is legitimately a common law matter. This is why many migrants who seem to have no difficulty working within the UNSW (as was pointed out during investigations) do not qualify to be heard under Equal Opportunity laws. They have made themselves common for whatever reason. I, like the peaceful protestors of Sharpeville, did actively protest against what I believed to be unlawful racial discrimination. Hence you do have the responsibility to hear me under Equal Opportunity principles rather than common law principles. Anti Discrimination legislations make up for past weaknesses which gave higher status on the basis of these factors which under the system of democracy has become unlawful. By rejecting my complaint you are effectively blocking my the path to redemption from past excesses, development and progress. The UN Secretary General needs to address this issue first from within the HREOC family before calling on wider public to make a contribution to his system. It is by genuinely seeking to contribute that I now stand punished severely by those within his circles. The message from me to your circle is if you cannot effectively manage through these modern forms of administration please do not create a separate identity on that basis. Let time take care of the past excesses.

    Ms Toohey, whether you investigate or not, unlawful racial discrimination did happen and in some instances it was actively caused. Given that I have invested more than you in HR&EO issues, I no longer need your endorsement. I use you as a facility and the work I do to bring the experiences to you and through you to the Public, beyond time and natural borders is the price I pay for using that facility. I did take these matters up through common law first but by distancing me the respondents were saying to me that these matters were beyond the scope of common law administration. Likewise the HREOC. Hence your direction indicating that the redemption may lie with some other body is false and counter productive. It confirms avoidance of responsibility.

    As per my determination, the UN s accusation that Racial Discrimination is an obstacle to Development applies to the HREOC each time it fails to use objectively measurable processes to determine the merit of an action or when it effectively takes the side of the party with lesser contribution to the issue of Human Rights and Equal Opportunity. All actions have these elements also. Where they are tested for Equal Opportunity compliance, the need to test for the Human Rights compliance is reduced automatically. Given that you have subjectively ruled that there is no unlawful discrimination in the actions of these persons against whom I have complained, you have the responsibility to test them for Human Rights violations.

    Yours sincerely

    Gaja Lakshmi Paramasivam

    Chief Executive Officer

    CC: All Concerned - including The Hon Ban Ki-moon, Secretary General, United Nations

    UN Anti-Discrimination Unit, OHCHR

    Palais Wilson, Geneva, Switzerland Email: adusecretariat@ohchr.org]

  • 29 Mar 2008 07:05:12 GMT

    Dear Gaja,

    You are only succeeding in giving Tamils in general a bad name. Does what you are doing help the Eelam cause in any way or is it only for your own self validation that you right these letters? Is what you have represented in your letters and postings grievous wrongs done against you personally or Tamils as a ethnic identity?

    Young lady, you seriously over-estimate your own self-importance in this world that we temporarily live in.

    Love,

    Vishnu.

  • 29 Mar 2008 07:45:43 GMT

    Dear Vishnu,

    [You are only succeeding in giving Tamils in general a bad name.]

    Why? by challenging westerners to do the right thing? Every genuine Tamil will be happy that I do so with dignity of my higher education.

    [Does what you are doing help the Eelam cause in any way or is it only for your own self validation that you right these letters?]

    It is based on my personal experience and institutional thinking. Anyone who identifies with me will automatically benefit from this work. If that promotes the Eelam cause - then that would go towards solving Sri Lanka`s ethnic problem.

    [Is what you have represented in your letters and postings grievous wrongs done against you personally or Tamils as a ethnic identity? ]

    Every legitimate experience has to be on personal basis. It gets raised to the group level when the persons participating in the experience are bound by institutional and group values. I believe therefore that every experience I have contributes to independence for minorities - be it on racial basis or other basis. If you specialise in Tamils then to you that group would be Tamil. To me it is racial minorities all over the world - because I have invested in international standards.

    [Young lady, you seriously over-estimate your own self-importance in this world that we temporarily live in.]

    My work when done with feeling is beyond the boundaries of this temporary world. They come with me forever.

    love

    gaja

  • 30 Mar 2008 05:22:30 GMT

    [My work when done with feeling is beyond the boundaries of this temporary world. They come with me forever. ]

    gaja,

    That is a wonderful spiritual insight.

    RK

  • 30 Mar 2008 05:32:32 GMT

    Thank you RK. I believe through my own experiences that what we do for ourselves is what gives us belief, confidence and independence. We then become `natural` with the system and therefore do not fear the system or feel dependent on the system. It does take much sacrifice but that is a small price to pay for lasting inner harmony.

    My family and community were concerned over my visit to North Eastern Sri Lanka. But I felt that I belonged and hence did not feel anxiety. I had the experiences like ordinary folks - especially Tamils. I therefore know where their real needs are - as mine would be under those circumstances. Jaffna needs common focus and Batticaloa needs people.

    love

    gaja