The Long Journey Toward HomeReport of the PWRDF Delegation to India and Sri Lanka

March 10-23, 2012

IntroductionSince 1984 PWRDF has partnered with the Organization for Eelam Refugees Rehabilitation (OfERR) that accompanies the approximately 100,000 Sri Lankan refugees1 who fled the civil war in their country and sought refuge in the southern Indian state of Tamil Nadu. OfERR was established “by the refugees, for the refugees” to address their community development needs and to prepare and equip the refugees to eventually return to their homeland.

Over the years PWRDF has supported a range of integrated community development projects that OfERR has implemented in the 113 refugee camps scattered throughout the state. With the opening of an office in Sri Lanka in 2004 OfERR was able to reach out to communities impacted by the Asian

1 Approximately 70,000 refugees live in the camps with an additional 30,000 scattered in Tamil Nadu’s urban centres. OfERR works primarily with the refugees in the camps.

1

Tsunami in both countries to offer relief and rehabilitation support, and to work with the many Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) in Sri Lanka. PWRDF has also supported OfERR’s Sri Lankan work.

Since the end of the civil war in 2009 the refugees have been actively exploring when and how they might return from India to Sri Lanka. As the key civil society organization representing the refugees, OfERR is coordinating the many facets of this complex and challenging process, everything from negotiating with the Indian and Sri Lankan governments, to working with the Government of Sri Lanka and refugees to obtain the required identity documents, to preparing for the actual return trips from India to the island nation, to working with the communities and in the areas of Sri Lanka to which the refugees will return.

In consultation with OfERR, PWRDF determined that a delegation to “accompany” this process of return would be an important part of our commitment to this long-term partnership. As well, it was identified by the PWRDF board of directors and staff as an important aspect of the organization’s 2012-2015 Strategic Plan. The delegation was conceived as an opportunity to educate the PWRDF constituency and to carry out advocacy with the Canadian government on the issues facing the refugees and the return process.

With these objectives in mind, the delegation was comprised of representatives of PWRDF’s various volunteer networks and staff:

Adele Finney – Executive Director and Delegation Leader Maureen Lawrence – Board of Directors Member Janet Dench – Past-president of the Board of Directors and Executive Director of the Canadian

Council for Refugees Carolyn Vanderlip – Refugee Coordinator, Diocese of Niagara Rev. Scott Macleod – Refugee Coordinator, Diocese of British Columbia Frances Stewart – Diocesan Representative, Diocese of Brandon Cody McKay – Youth Council Member Christine Hills – Public Engagement Program Officer

2

Suzanne Rumsey – Public Engagement Program Coordinator

Delegation Itinerary and ActivitiesThe delegation visited from March 10-23, 2012, travelling first to India and then Sri Lanka.

IndiaThe delegation was warmly welcomed at the OfERR offices in the Tamil Nadu state capital, Chennai, by OfERR founder and chief functionary, Mr. S.C. Chandrahasan and OfERR staff. After a series of orientation meetings the delegation travelled by train to Tiruchirapalli (Trichy) and then by road to Valavanthankottai and Pudupatti Refugee camps where members were able to meet with and hear from the refugees. The visits also provided an opportunity to see first-hand the conditions that the refugees have experienced living in the camps, some of them for almost three decades. A meeting with representatives from many other camps at the OfERR offices in Trichy provided further insights and perspectives about camp life and the return process.

Upon returning to Chennai the delegation visited OfERR’s Nallayan Farm just outside the city. The farm serves as an agricultural training centre and meeting venue. There, members were given a tour of the farm’s flagship “product”, spirulina, a nutrient-rich algae, now grown and used as a nutritional supplement in a number of the refugee camps. In 2003, PWRDF provided funding for the establishment of this growing project.

3

At the farm the delegation, together with a representative of the Canadian High Commission, Therresa de Haan, met with a large group of refugees from several camps throughout the state. Facilitated by Mr. Chandrahasan, the meeting discussed post-war conditions and the peace process in Sri Lanka, the opportunities and challenges facing the refugees as they try to determine their future in Sri Lanka, India or elsewhere, and the role of Canada in contributing to creating conditions in Sri Lanka that would enable a viable return process. A meeting between Ms. de Haan and the delegation followed.

Sri LankaAfter final meetings with the OfERR leadership in Chennai the delegation flew to the Sri Lankan capital, Colombo, where we were welcomed by OfERR-Ceylon director, Sinnathamby Sooriyakumari (Sooriya) and her staff. From Colombo, members travelled by road northeast into the former conflict zone to the port city of Trincomalee. There the delegation met with OfERR

field staff and visited the Kumprupiddy Resettled Community and OfERR demonstration farm. During our time in the Trincomalee area we visited several other resettled communities of former IDPs and one of the four IDP camps that still exist.

From Trincomalee we travelled northwest to Vavuniya where further discussion with OfERR staff was followed by visits to the IDP and refugee return communities of Maragalamtalai and Ganashaparun in Kannady District. As was the case with the visits to the refugee camps in India, these visits enabled the delegation to speak with former refugees and IDPs and to see first-hand the conditions under which they are now living. A meeting with returned refugees and IDPs at the OfERR offices in Vavuniya provided further testimony.

The delegation’s time in Sri Lanka concluded with two days of meetings in Colombo with staff at the Anglican Diocese of Colombo; Mr. Michael Zwack, head of the United Nations High Commission for Refugees in Sri Lanka; Mr. Bruce Levy, Canadian High Commissioner to Sri Lanka; and members of a Canadian Parliamentary delegation: MP Chris Alexander, MP Rick Dykstra, Senator Vernon White, and Foreign Affairs representative, Peter Light. Meetings with Mr. Chandrahasan, Sooriya, OfERR staff members and OfERR consultant, Malcolm Rogers, book-ended these official meetings.

4

Departing from Colombo on March 22, the delegation travelled home via Chennai and Brussels, arriving back in Canada on March 23.

Key Observations

Community Organization as a Development Tool: For three decades OfERR has played a central role in the lives of the 70,000 refugees living in camps in the southern Indian state of Tamil Nadu. While OfERR’s work has focused on meeting basic needs of food security, education and health, the organization has also sought to prepare and equip the refugees for an eventual return to Sri Lanka. It has done so through community organizing including the establishment of Self-Help Groups (SHGs) whose membership is made up largely of women, through advocacy work with both the Indian and Sri Lankan governments, and through seeking higher education for Tamil young people. The delegation saw evidence of the positive results of this long-term work among OfERR’s young, capable staff members, the returned refugees we met in Sri Lanka, and the recognition by the UNHCR and the Canadian government of OfERR as an important stakeholder in the refugee return process.

The Choices Facing the Refugees : Although the civil war, which caused the Tamils to flee to India, has officially ended, Michael Zwack, head of the UNHCR in Sri Lanka noted that, “Displacement is not ended by decree. It has to be real and viable.” Delegation members were struck by the extent to which the root causes of the civil war – economic marginalization, social and cultural discrimination and political persecution – have not been addressed in Sri Lanka. In other words, the conditions that would end displacement are not yet “real and viable.” At the same time opportunities and future options for the refugees in India are also limited and the refugees expressed feeling pressured by the Sri Lankan government and the international community to return soon or “miss the boat.” Faced with these two difficult choices, migration elsewhere, including to Canada was raised by the refugees with whom the delegation met on a number of occasions. Young refugees in particular, who were born in India and who have no memory of Sri Lanka, find these choices especially challenging.

“Return, but not now”: The refugees in India consistently spoke about what they sought upon return: housing, land, livelihoods, education, health care and personal safety. However at the time of the delegation’s visit the refugees did not believe that those needs would be met. This belief was confirmed by the delegation’s observations of the situation on the ground in northern Sri Lanka, as well as our discussions with OfERR staff, returned refugees and IDPs and the UNHCR.

5

In addition to the practical needs facing the refugees, issues of personal safety and security leave many refugees questioning the viability of a return. Though the war is formally ended, its battlegrounds in the north and east of Sri Lanka remain heavily militarized. Caution and even fear was evident among those we met. Concerns were expressed to the delegation about the lack of substantive progress in the peace process. The delegation’s visit coincided with a vote on Sri Lanka at the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC). This resulted in heightened tensions among the refugees in India, and for people the delegation met in Sri Lanka. In Tamil Nadu during the period just before the vote, refugees were re-traumatized when a BBC documentary was aired on war crimes that took place during the final period of the war.

Key Messages and Recommendations:

Creating the Conditions Conducive for Return: The refugees were clear that they “don’t want to miss the boat”, but that the return process needs to be about more than resuming the ferry service between India and Sri Lanka, although this was identified as a necessary practical step to enable the return process. The process must be about creating the conditions in Sri Lanka that can enable them to return to a secure and assured future.

“Holistic rehabilitation” is required that is both material – housing, health care, education and livelihoods – and psycho-social. Reconstruction of both infrastructure AND the social fabric, including the just resolution of land claims, in the north and east is needed for both the returning refugees and those who were internally displaced by the war.

Of equal importance is the need for the Government of Sri Lanka to address the root causes of the civil war including the economic marginalization, social and cultural discrimination and political persecution of the Tamil minority.

The heavy military presence in the north and east continues to be a key source of insecurity. The delegation supports the refugees’ clear call for demilitarization: “The biggest contribution the government could make to the return process would be to withdraw the military from the north

6

and east.” A viable demobilization of some of the 100,000 soldiers still in uniform is also essential.

“Space” for civil society organizations to operate in the north and east unhindered by the military is an essential component of rebuilding the social fabric of the region. Continued support by international governments and donors for those organizations is also needed.

If return to Sri Lanka is not possible for some refugees now or in the future, greater access to rights, including a path to citizenship, should be made available to them by the Indian government.

Canada’s Role: In its meetings with Canadian officials, the delegation advocated that the Sri Lankan government must take responsibility for creating the conditions for a just peace and for return, and that the international community had a role to encourage and support that. On numerous occasions Canada’s own federal system of government, official bilingualism and commitment to multiculturalism were held up by the OfERR leadership as examples of what a nation could be. Canada was also praised for its welcome of Sri Lankans who over the years had sought refuge in Canada.

Canada was encouraged to continue to seek ways not only to serve as a model, but also to actively participate in international efforts to move the peace and reconciliation process forward in Sri Lanka, a key aspect of which is the return of Tamil refugees to their homeland.

Specifically, OfERR sought support and official recognition of its role in the return by the Indian and Sri Lankan governments and by the UNHCR.

PWRDF’s support for the Long Journey Home: The delegation was clearly asked by OfERR to “send a message to Anglicans in Canada that their financial support has been well-utilized to build, to train and to develop leadership so that it can blossom when [the refugees] are back.”

Members were also asked to convey an expression of hope that PWRDF’s long-term accompaniment would continue as the refugees prepared for return with all its possibilities and uncertainties.

Finally, members were asked to share the stories of those we met; stories of struggle and hope and the long journey toward home.

7

Follow-up Actions – A PostscriptSince returning to Canada all members of the delegation have actively sought opportunities to make presentations locally, at national gatherings of PWRDF’s various networks, and at venues beyond the church, to tell the story of the OfERR and the Sri Lankan refugees.

PWRDF continues to support the work of OfERR and, as of the writing of this report (February 2013), is preparing to participate in a roundtable meeting between OfERR and its partners where next steps in the return process will be discussed.

8