National security is multi faceted and human rights are also encompassed within this concept...!!!

National Security and Human Rights------------By Nirmala Chandrahasan

The notion of ‘National Security’ is generally regarded as being in conflict with Human Rights. I would like to express a different view. National security is multi faceted and human rights are also encompassed within this concept. The security of the nation which has to be protected is not only the physical security of the people and the state from internal armed attack or external aggression but also the way of life of the people expressed in the democratic freedoms and the human /fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution.

In a war situation the notion of national security takes on the connotation of defending the State from the threat of armed force or attacks directed against it, either from internal sources or from third states. In this context it may be required to restrict or curtail some of the human rights in the larger interest. Article 15(7) of the Constitution takes note of this type of situation inter alia, and provides that the Fundamental (human) Rights contained in articles 12,13(1) ,13(2) and 14 shall be subject to such restrictions as may be prescribed by law in the interests of national security, public order and the protection of public health and morality or for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others, or for meeting the just requirements of the general welfare of a democratic society.

It will be noted that the threat perception is not confined to armed attack. Public health, morality the rights and freedoms of others, welfare of a democratic society are all matters which are given equal importance. Threats to the nation can be in the form of epidemics affecting health, or threats to the democratic way of life of the people. These would all come within the notion of national security where these considerations have to be protected some of the human rights i.e. rights of equality before the law, freedom from arbitrary arrest detention and punishment, freedom of speech, assembly, association and movement may be restricted. However the section does not cover articles 10 and 11, i.e. freedom of thought, conscience and religion and the prohibition against torture. These rights cannot be derogated from in any circumstances.

It will be noted that Article 4 of the ICCPR,( International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights) states that "in time of public emergency which threatens the life of the nation……the States parties to the Covenant may take measures derogating from their obligations under the present covenant to the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation provided that such measures shall not be inconsistent with their obligations under international law, and do not involve discrimination solely on the ground of race, colour, sex, language, religion or social origin". Furthermore no derogations from articles 6,7,8 11,15,16 and 18 may be made. These articles include the right to life, freedom from torture and slavery. Hence it is clear that article 15(7) of our constitution when taken in consonance with the international human rights instruments which as stated in the ‘Bangalore principles’ provide important guidelines in cases concerning fundamental rights and freedoms, may provide for derogations to the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation.

Where as presently obtains the armed conflict is over, national security focuses once again on protecting the democratic way of life of the nation and the rights of the citizens enshrined in the Constitution. For it is these rights that constitute the security of the people and it is these rights which the state has to protect. Thus the right to freedom of conscience and right to practice one’s religion, equality before the law and non discrimination on grounds of race, religion, caste, sex etc, as well as freedom from arbitrary arrest, detention and punishment, and the rights of freedom of speech, assembly, association, lawful occupation, movement and of choosing ones residence within Sri Lanka are all rights which have to be secured. They must be applicable to all the people without discrimination Hence the rights of the internally displaced persons to movement within the country, employment, freedom from arrest and detention etc must be safeguarded by the state just as much as much as it safeguards the rights of other citizen of the country.

It is not only the political rights of the citizen that must be protected; their economic well being must also be protected. Hence the people have to be protected against corruption, waste, misappropriation of public funds and misuse of public funds. It must also be recognized that custodians of public order who do not maintain law and order are also endangering the national security of the citizens. Furthermore national security is best maintained where the rulers i.e. the bureaucracy and the political class are aware of and show concern for and solidarity with, the sufferings of the people. In neighbouring India the Congress President Sonia Gandhi has directed the Congress MPs and Ministers to show solidarity with the farmers of the country who were suffering due to the unprecedented drought by taking austerity measures. Congress MPs have been asked to donate 25% of their salaries towards drought relief measures, and ministers and bureaucrats have been asked to give up staying in expensive hotels and to travel economy class. Even the corporate sector is being asked to cut unnecessary expenditure and the huge salaries paid to CEOs of companies. These are measures which could be followed by politicians in Sri Lanka too, where the masses are suffering from the high cost of living. On the other hand those politicians who follow the attitude encapsulated in the purported remark of Queen Marie Antoinette that "if the populace does not have bread let them eat cake", might keep in mind the disastrous consequences of this attitude for the monarchy in France.

To conclude I would like to quote from an American case where an agency of the State claimed to be acting on the basis of national defense. The court said "the concept of national defense cannot be deemed to be an end in itself. Implicit in the concept of national defense is the notion of defending those values which set this nation apart."

Similarly we may say of Sri Lanka one of the oldest democracies in Asia that implicit in the notion of national security is the notion of defending those values i.e. the human rights enshrined in the Constitution and the democratic way of life, which the people of the country consider as part of their heritage.

www island.lk