The inside story of the pardon of Marcus Garvey

The inside story of the pardon of Marcus Garvey

Garvey in August 1924. (Library of Congress)

 

President Joe Biden pardoned him posthumously, more than 100 years after the conviction of Garvey, a champion for the liberation of people of African descent around the world.

KINGSTON, Jamaica — The quest for a U.S. presidential pardon for revolutionary Black nationalist leader Marcus Mosiah Garvey began more than 100 years ago, immediately after Garvey was convicted on racially motivated charges of mail fraud filed by the U.S. government.

On July 1, 1923, two months after his conviction, more than 2,000 people gathered in a mass protest meeting at Liberty Hall in New York. During the meeting, a speaker read a letter Garvey had written from jail:

“I have been ‘framed up’ and sacrificed because of prejudice and the political and organization designs of my enemies. I believe that when my cause is properly presented to the higher and responsible officials of our government they will see that justice is done, and that they will not hesitate in upholding the sacred principles of the Constitution.”

By DeNeen L. Brown

Over the succeeding decades, dozens of lawyers, attorneys general, prime ministers, members of Congress, historians, justice activists and Garvey’s descendants sent requests to U.S. presidents to grant a pardon and to Congress to grant an exoneration.

Many of the requests were met with cold silence. Finally, in the waning hours of his administration, President Joe Biden granted a posthumous pardon for Garvey.

The news reverberated around the world. In Jamaica, where Garvey is the first national hero, and his portrait is painted on schoolhouse walls, Prime Minister Andrew Holness called the pardon a “first step toward the total exoneration and expungement of this historical injustice.”

The road to Garvey’s presidential pardon is a story of tireless activism by human rights leaders, Garvey’s descendants and members of Congress, some of whom died before they could see their efforts come to fruition.

Marcus Garvey was born on Aug. 17, 1887, in St. Ann’s Bay, Jamaica. In 1914, he founded the Universal Negro Improvement Association. Two years later, he traveled to the United States where his speeches advocating Black pride were electrifying. The Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. once said Garvey “was the first man of color in the history of the United States to lead and develop a mass movement. He was the first man on a mass scale and level to give Negroes a sense of dignity and destiny.”

Garvey’s rising movement made him a target of J. Edgar Hoover, then a lawyer in the Justice Department who would rise to become FBI director. The FBI later acknowledged it targeted Garvey to find reasons to “deport him as an undesirable alien.” Hoover pursued him with a vengeance, as Garvey delivered speeches against the backdrop of race massacres in East St. Louis, Houston and Tulsa.

Garvey advocated for Black economic independence, opening businesses including the Negro Factories Corporation, the Universal Steam Laundry, Liberty Grocery Stores, the Negro World newspaper and the Black Star Line shipping and passenger company to facilitate the travel of Black people to Africa.

“It was the audacity of founding the Black Star Line that drew the attention of federal investigators,” Anthony T. Pierce, a partner at the law firm Akin Gump, told The Washington Post in 2021. “And ultimately, the company’s financial downfall led to Garvey’s prosecution for mail fraud in a trial replete with reversible errors and questionable evidence.”

When, in 1921, Garvey’s company told stockholders it would buy two more ships, a newspaper published an investigation claiming the U.S. Commerce Department had no record of those ships. A year later, Garvey and three business associates were indicted on charges of “conspiracy to use the mails in furtherance of a scheme to defraud,” records show.

On June 21, 1923, Garvey was convicted of mail fraud, fined $1,000 and sentenced to five years imprisonment. The three other defendants were acquitted.

Millions of Garvey’s followers gathered a petition demanding his release. They wrote to President Calvin Coolidge, requesting a presidential pardon. Because of this massive outpouring of concern, on Nov. 18, 1927, Coolidge commuted Garvey’s sentence.

Nine of the 12 White jurors who voted to convict Garvey supported the commutation. Garvey was released from prison and deported to Jamaica. He later traveled to London, where he died in June 1940.

After Garvey’s death, his followers continued to fight for justice. The movement picked up steam after the Congressional Black Caucus was founded in 1971.

“Efforts to clear Garvey’s name have persisted for decades,” Rep. Yvette D. Clarke (D-New York) said in a statement in December, noting that then-Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Michigan) convened the House Judiciary Committee in 1987 to hear evidence to exonerate Garvey. Among those who testified were Garvey’s sons. Then-Rep. Charles B. Rangel (D-New York) testified: “Mr. Hoover, in his role as director of investigations on ‘Negro Activities,’ became obsessed with extinguishing the flames of the man who had become known as the ‘Negro Moses.’”

Beginning in 1987, Rangel introduced congressional resolutions demanding justice. In 2023, Clarke and Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Georgia) introduced legislation calling for Garvey’s exoneration.

Last December, Clarke and 20 members of Congress wrote a letter to Biden urging Garvey’s exoneration.

Pierce, an attorney for Garvey’s family, began working with Garvey’s son Julius W. Garvey in 2008, at the end of the George W. Bush administration. He filed requests for presidential pardons from President Barack Obama.

Also that year, Justin Hansford, now a Howard University professor of law and executive director of the Thurgood Marshall Civil Rights Center, began working on Garvey’s pardon request. In 2024, Hansford published the book “Jailing a Rainbow: The Unjust Trial and Conviction of Marcus Garvey.”

Obama didn’t grant a pardon.

In 2019, Roger Stone, an adviser to President Donald Trump, said he sought a pardon for Garvey. The request went unanswered.

The case for Garvey’s pardon seemed airtight and powerful. Still, it was unclear why the requests had encountered rejections.

“There were long-term obstacles thrown at us,” Hansford told The Post. The big question among those working on the pardon request was, why the obstacles?

Then in the final days of Biden’s administration, Hansford was told why.

“This time around, we had relationships in the White House,” he said. Some were long-term colleagues and classmates. Hansford, who had been elected to the United Nations Permanent Forum on People of African Descent, was often called to the White House for meetings where he ran into former colleagues. That provided opportunities to press the case for Garvey.

Marcus Garvey during a parade in Harlem in 1922. (AP)

“They told me what the holds were,” Hansford recalled. “One said they think Garvey is antisemitic.”

With that information, Hansford called Julius Garvey. He rebutted the claim, pointing out the history of Marcus Garvey’s relationships with the Jewish community in Jamaica. Julius Garvey put Hansford in touch with family members of Marcus Garvey’s lifelong friend, Lewis Joseph Ashenheim, a prominent Jewish lawyer in Jamaica.

Time was of the essence. On Jan. 5, Hansford called Ashenheim’s great-grandniece, Lynda Edwards, an author and screenwriter of a film about Garvey and Ashenheim.

“Justin said to me the reason they are turning down a pardon is because they think Marcus Garvey was antisemitic,” Edwards told The Post. “I said we can prove that is not true.”

They were surprised that was the reason blocking the pardon. “It was an affront and an injustice,” Edwards said.

Hansford asked Edwards whether her family would be willing to write a letter to the White House. She called her brother, who told her to call their cousin Michael Ashenheim, the great-grandson of Lewis Ashenheim, who lives in England.

“We gave ourselves 24 hours to get the letter done,” Edwards said. “We knew Biden would be out of office within two weeks.”

They wrote through the night, using research done for the film.

Their letter dated Jan. 6 reads in part: “My cousin, Michael Ashenheim, and I, Lynda Edwards, are writing to address the widespread misunderstanding that Marcus Garvey was an anti-Semite. We firmly believe this false characterization should not hinder his deserving a posthumous pardon. The judgment against his character is based on misconceptions we seek to correct.”

They gave examples of Garvey’s speeches about the Jewish struggle. They explained that after Garvey returned to Jamaica, Lewis Ashenheim successfully represented him in a case brought to the Supreme Court in Jamaica.

“A historic court battle ensued, bringing together Marcus Garvey and Lewis Ashenheim, a Jew and one of Jamaica’s most influential lawyers,” they wrote.

Ashenheim won the case. He and Garvey became lifelong friends. Garvey supported Ashenheim when he entered politics in Jamaica.

Edwards and Ashenheim said they did not hear directly from the White House. But they were elated to hear the news that Biden had finally signed Garvey’s pardon.

A number of people impressed upon Biden “why he needed to do this. There were demonstrations in Delaware,” said Julius Garvey, 93. “We were happy it happened.”

Added Pierce, the family’s lawyer: “It took too long, but we are glad it came.”⍐

Musk aides gain access to sensitive Treasury Department payment system

 Musk aides gain access to sensitive Treasury Department payment system

The access — granted by Scott Bessent, Trump’s newly confirmed treasury secretary — comes after the ousting of the agency’s top career official.

Elon Musk walks through the Capitol complex with his son on his shoulders during meetings about the
“Department of Government Efficiency” in December. Musk allies now have access to sensitive payment
systems run by the Treasury Department. (Maansi Srivastava for The Washington Post)

By Jeff Stein The Washington Post 01-02-2025

Billionaire Elon Musk’s deputies have gained access to a sensitive Treasury Department system responsible for trillions of dollars in U.S. government payments after the administration ousted a top career official at the department, according to three people who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe government deliberations.

On Friday, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent approved access to the Treasury’s payments system for a team led by Tom Krause, a Silicon Valley executive working in concert with Musk’s “Department of Government Efficiency,” the people said.

David A. Lebryk, who served in nonpolitical roles at Treasury for several decades and had been the acting secretary before Bessent’s confirmation, had refused to turn over access to Musk’s surrogates, people familiar with the situation told The Washington Post. Trump officials placed Lebryk on administrative leave, and then he announced his retirement Friday in an email to colleagues.

Spokespeople for Treasury and DOGE declined to comment.

The sensitive systems, run by the Bureau of the Fiscal Service, control the flow of more than $6 trillion annually. Tens of millions of people across the country rely on the systems. They are responsible for paying Social Security and Medicare benefits, salaries for federal personnel, payments to government contractors and grant recipients, and tax refunds, among tens of thousands of other functions.

Typically, only a small group of career employees control the payment systems, and former officials have said it is extremely unusual for anyone connected to political appointees to access them.

Musk has sought to exert sweeping control over the inner workings of the U.S. government, installing longtime surrogates at several agencies, including the Office of Personnel Management, which essentially handles federal human resources, and the General Services Administration, which manages real estate. DOGE is now housed in a White House office formerly known as the U.S. Digital Service but now called the U.S. DOGE Service and has broad visibility into technology across the government.

The New York Times was first to report that Musk’s deputies had gained control of the systems.

Democrats have strongly criticized the idea of giving Musk surrogates access to the payment systems.

“To put it bluntly, these payment systems simply cannot fail, and any politically motivated meddling in them risks severe damage to our country and the economy,” Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Oregon) said in a letter to Bessent on Friday. “I can think of no good reason why political operators who have demonstrated a blatant disregard for the law would need access to these sensitive, mission-critical systems.”⍐

Trump signs order imposing tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China

Trump signs order imposing tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China

It’s the first official action of the president’s second-term trade war.

President Donald J Trump at the White House
on Tuesday, Jan. 21, 2025 in Washington, DC.
(Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)

By David J. Lynch, Mary Beth Sheridan and Amanda Coletta

The Washington Post 01-02-2025

President Donald Trump on Saturday imposed tariffs on imports from Canada, Mexico and China, the nation’s three largest trading partners, invoking emergency economic powers in a high-stakes bid to compel them to crack down on illegal immigration and drugs reaching the United States.

Get a curated selection of 10 of our best stories in your inbox every weekend.

The president signed three executive orders establishing the measures, the first official actions of his second-term trade war, according to a White House official who briefed reporters.

They drew immediate opposition from business and labor groups, who warned of profound upheaval throughout the economy.

Effective Tuesday at 12:01 a.m. Eastern time, American importers will pay a new 25-percent tax on goods from Canada and Mexico and a 10-percent levy on products from China, the president said. Most products from Canada and Mexico currently face no tariffs, under a trade deal Trump signed during his first term, while many Chinese goods incur taxes of up to 25 percent. The new tariffs are in addition to those fees.

Energy products, including crude oil from Canada, will suffer a 10 percent charge.

If any of the three countries retaliate with their own tariffs on U.S. goods — as is likely — the president threatened to increase the applicable tariff rate in response

“A Nation without borders is not a nation at all. I will not stand by and allow our sovereignty to be eroded, our laws to be trampled, our citizens to be endangered, or our borders to be disrespected anymore,” the president wrote.

The president complained that Chinese fentanyl shipments are making their way to the United States via Mexico and Canada. He criticized the Chinese government for failing to fulfill its promises to reduce fentanyl output. And in remarkably blunt and almost hostile terms, he assailed two of the closest U.S. allies for their role in facilitating the drug trade.

Canada’s failure to take tougher action against fentanyl operations, he said, constituted an “unusual and extraordinary threat” while the Mexican government maintained “an intolerable alliance” with the drug cartels in that country.

The tariffs will remain in place until the president determines that Canada “has taken adequate steps to alleviate this public health crisis.”

The president also suspended de minimis rules for Canada that allow small packages valued at less than $800 to enter the United States on a duty-free basis.

Representatives of business and labor were quick to voice their concerns.

“The USW has long called for systemic reform of our broken trade system, but lashing out at key allies like Canada is not the way forward,” said David McCall, president of the United Steelworkers union. “These tariffs don’t just hurt Canada. They threaten the stability of industries on both sides of the border.”

The sweeping presidential actions were welcomed, however, by longtime critics of U.S. trade policies that concentrated on removing barriers to cross-border commerce

“President Trump’s decision to impose universal tariffs is a bold and necessary step toward reversing decades of failed trade policies and rebuilding America’s manufacturing and agricultural industries,” said Zach Mottl, chairman of the Coalition for a Prosperous America.

Today’s actions focused on Trump’s concerns about illegal immigration and drugs flowing across U.S. borders. But his complaints about Canada and Mexico are far broader.

In the past, he also has lashed out over the large U.S. trade deficits with each country. Steep U.S. tariffs are aimed at incentivizing manufacturers to make their products in the United States with American workers rather than ship them here from aboard.

Many economists are skeptical about prospects for success. In Trump’s first term, factory employment rose by 462,000 before flatlining in the year before the pandemic.

For the typical American household, the tariffs will mean a loss of about $1,200 in annual purchasing power, according to the Budget Lab at Yale University, a nonpartisan research center.

American companies and consumers purchased about $1.3 trillion worth of merchandise from those three countries, including food, electronics, cars and car parts, and clothing, according to the Census Bureau.

Trump’s abrupt imposition of steep tariffs on goods moving across U.S. borders threatens significant disruption for regional supply chains that have become deeply intertwined over the past three decades. The auto industry in particular could soon be plunged into enormous upheaval.

There is no provision in the president’s orders for companies to seek an exemption from the tariffs for items that are unavailable from suppliers outside of North America, according to the White House official, who spoke under on condition of anonymity to share details on the orders.

Apart from the tariffs’ economic impact, Trump’s action is notable for calling into question one of the signature achievements of his first term in office: the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA).

By placing tariffs on Canada and Mexico, Trump is effectively ripping up that deal, which replaced the North American Free Trade Act (NAFTA) and took effect less than five years ago. Trump initially proclaimed his NAFTA rewrite “the most modern, up-to-date, and balanced trade agreement in the history of our country.”

The agreement included a provision for the three countries to review the deal on July 1, 2026, make recommendations for its improvement or begin a 10-year countdown to ending the pact. Today’s tariffs may be just a negotiating tactic, designed to wring concessions over border controls from Mexico and Canada, many Wall Street analysts believe.

But if they are wrong and the tariffs become permanent fixtures, “it would practically implode the USCMA trade deal,” economist Wilson Ferrarezi of TS Lombard wrote in a client note Friday.

Ken Salazar, who served as U.S. ambassador to Mexico under President Joe Biden, wrote on the social media site X that the tariffs “threaten billions in trade, weaken national security, and won’t solve the fentanyl or migration crises.”

Trump campaigned on a promise to impose the stiffest trade barriers since the 1930s. He first spoke of the measures he announced today on the first full day of his second term before expanding his tariff plans Friday to include the European Union as well as specific goods such as semiconductors, pharmaceuticals, steel, cement and oil and gas.

The president’s announcement Saturday capped a prolonged administration debate. At issue were the legal rationale for tariff action; the timing; potential exemptions; and measure of success, according to two people familiar with the deliberations who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

Since USMCA went into effect, U.S. trade with Mexico has grown especially fast.

U.S. reliance on Mexico as a source of imports has increased over the past several years. Through November 2024, almost 16 percent of the $3 trillion in merchandise that the United States purchased from other countries came from Mexican factories, according to Census Bureau data.

In 2017, before Trump’s first tariffs on Chinese products began reshaping global supply chains, around 13 percent of imports came from Mexico.

IBC Bank in Laredo, Texas, which specializes in servicing cross-border commerce has seen its assets grow by more than $3 billion or 27 percent since the new agreement took effect.

From his office window, Gerald Schwebel, the bank’s executive vice president, can see the steady flow of trucks carrying goods back and forth between the United States and Mexico, little more than five miles away. On the other side of the bank’s headquarters, freight trains belonging to the Canadian Pacific Kansas City Railway haul grain, lumber, fuel, chemicals, steel, cement, cars, food and appliances along a corridor that links the three nations.

Before NAFTA took effect in 1994, the unemployment rate in Laredo topped 10 percent. It’s hovered around 4 percent for the last few years, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

“Laredo is a prime example of the benefits of North-South trade as a result of USMCA and NAFTA,” said Schwebel.

Indeed, jobs in the city — home to the nation’s largest inland port — have grown slightly faster than the national average since the new trade deal was implemented.

In other respects, USMCA has been less impressive.

Robert E. Lighthizer, Trump’s first-term trade negotiator, designed the deal to promote more domestic manufacturing than its predecessor.

Tougher “rules of origin” required 40 percent of passenger cars to contain parts produced by workers making an hourly wage of at least $16, far more than Mexican factories pay.

The most recent International Trade Commission assessment in 2023 found, however, that the new rules “had a negligible impact on GDP and aggregate employment in the U.S. economy.”

In the treaty’s first two-and-a-half years, only 35 new jobs in U.S. vehicle production were created, the ITC said.

For Trump administration officials, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio, a key concern is the growing presence in Mexico of Chinese manufacturers. Many are there to serve Mexican customers. But U.S. officials worry that some Chinese company, especially makers of electric vehicles, may hope to use Mexico as a tariff-free backdoor to the U.S. market.

As the first North American trade war begins, some analysts say Mexico and Canada stand to lose more than the United States. The impact on those economies of a three-way tariff conflict could be several times larger than in the United States, which is much less dependent on trade, according to an analysis by S&P Global Ratings.

Mexican manufacturers in the auto and electrical equipment sectors could see significant output declines once tariffs take hold, according to a S&P Global Ratings analysis.

In Canada, the biggest losers are likely to be makers of paper products, rubber and plastics.⍐

 இந்தியக் கடற் கொள்ளை

    

SL defends legality of operations amid India protest

30 January 2025 DARSHANA SANJEEWA BALASURIYA    

Colombo, January 30 (Daily Mirror) - While defending the legality of the Sri Lanka Navy's conduct amid strong protests with Sri Lanka over an incident of firing by the Sri Lankan Navy, Defence Secretary Air Vice Marshal (Rtd) Sampath Thuyacontha said that Sri Lanka will continue to search vessels entering its waters, regardless of their country of origin, in accordance with legal protocols to prevent illegal activities.

He made these remarks after India lodged a strong protest on Tuesday following an incident in which the Sri Lankan Navy opened fire during the apprehension of 13 Indian fishermen near Delft Island in the early hours of January 28.

The Indian Ministry of External Affairs said Sri Lanka’s acting High Commissioner was called into the foreign office to lodge the protest. “Our High Commission in Colombo has also raised the matter with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Sri Lankan government,” the Indian Ministry of External Affairs said.

In a media briefing, the Defence Secretary explained that the Sri Lankan Navy conducts round-the-clock operations to combat illegal trafficking, human smuggling, illegal fishing, drug smuggling, and weapons smuggling in Sri Lankan waters.

He said that these searches are carried out in a legal manner, and reiterated that there will be no confrontations if the respective parties allow Sri Lankan authorities to perform their duties.

He also pointed out that the Sri Lankan Navy had recently seized a significant drug haul during its continuous operations.

“We have to search any vessel entering Sri Lankan waters, irrespective of the vessels country of origin. As a respected Navy, we are carrying out these searches legally. We can assure that there will be no confrontation if parties permit us to conduct our searches,” Thuyacontha said, stressing that such incidents have been rare in recent times.

Meanwhile, the Sri Lanka Navy's Commander said that initial investigations revealed the two Indian fishermen who were injured during the apprehension of a fishing boat near Kankesanthurai (KKS) were wounded by an accidental discharge of a Navy officer’s firearm. The Navy had launched a special operation on January 27 to disperse a group of Indian fishing boats caught poaching in Sri Lankan waters near Valvettithurai, Jaffna.

During the operation, the Navy seized an Indian fishing boat that had continued operating in Sri Lankan waters, engaging in illegal fishing.

The Commander explained that the Navy had attempted to board the vessel, but the Indian crew resisted and tried to assault naval personnel, even attempting to seize a firearm. In the process, an accidental shot was fired, resulting in minor injuries to two fishermen.

Following the incident, the Navy administered first aid to the injured fishermen and promptly transferred them to the Jaffna Teaching Hospital for further treatment.

The Navy Commander reaffirmed that the Sri Lanka Navy will continue its regular operations to uphold the security of Sri Lankan waters, operating professionally and in accordance with existing regulations.

The Navy will also strengthen its efforts to prevent the use of Sri Lankan waters for illegal activities, the Commander assured.⍐

Court hears evidence from three LTTE cadres

Court hears evidence from three LTTE cadres

By

 Hansi Nanayakkara

 -

January 29, 2025

The evidentiary hearing against three LTTE cadres, who aided and abetted an LTTE female cadre in carrying out a suicide attack on former Army Commander Sarath Fonseka, took place before High Court Judge Navaratne Marasinghe yesterday (28).

The Attorney General filed indictments against Selvarasa Kirubakaran alias Moris Sanmugalingam, Suriyakumar and Thambaiyah Prakash alias Dhanush with 230 counts.

Senior Deputy Solicitor General Lakmali Karunanayake led the evidence and the Court fixed further hearing for today (29). The Court ordered the Terrorist Investigation Division that the next witness, who is reported to be in an unhealthy condition, be produced in Court today even providing her with transport.       

An Army Sergeant and two Corporals died in the suicide attack by LTTE carder Durgha on 25 January 2006, that targeted the then Army Commander Fonseka in front of the Army Headquarters, in which the Commander suffered severe injuries.

Attorneys-at-Law Suranga Bandara, Asthika Devendra and several others appeared for the Defence. ⍐

Indian fishermen injured due to accidental firearm discharge: SLN chief

 

Indian fishermen injured due to accidental firearm discharge: SLN chief

January 29, 2025   01:47 pm

The Commander of the Sri Lanka Navy says that according to initial investigations, the two Indian fishermen who were injured when the Sri Lanka Navy apprehended an India fishing boat poaching off Kankesanthurai (KKS) have been wounded due to the accidental discharge of a firearm of a Navy personnel.

Speaking during a press conference at the Defence Ministry today (29), Vice Admiral Kanchana Banagoda stated that naval personnel had boarded an Indian fishing trawler that was in Sri Lankan waters due to a suspicion after it did not respond to instructions to leave the area.

However, as a navy officer and a sailor were heading towards the pilothouse of the trawler, the Indian nationals onboard had surrounded them and assaulted the navy personnel while attempting to disarm them, the navy chief said. 

He added that when they had attempted to grab the firearm it had accidentally discharged causing minor injuries to two Indian nationals who were immediately rushed to receive medical attention. 

“There had been a discharge of weapon. However, the weapon discharge is at a lower angle. Initial investigations have confirmed that it was an accidental discharge when considering the angle of the bullet’s trajectory,” Vice Admiral Banagoda clarified. 

India on Tuesday lodged a strong protest with Sri Lanka over an incident of firing by the Sri Lankan Navy during the apprehension of 13 Indian fishermen in the proximity of Delft Island in the early hours of last morning (28).

The Indian Ministry of External Affairs said Sri Lanka’s acting High Commissioner was called into the foreign office to lodge the protest. “Our High Commission in Colombo has also raised the matter with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Sri Lankan government,” the Indian Ministry of External Affairs said.

In the incident, out of the 13 fishermen who were on board the fishing vessel, two sustained serious injuries and are currently receiving treatment at the Jaffna Teaching Hospital. Three other fishermen received minor injuries and have been treated for the same. Indian Consulate Officials in Jaffna have visited the injured fishermen at the hospital to seek their welfare and are extending all possible assistance to the fishermen and their families.

“The Government of India has always emphasised the need to treat issues pertaining to fishermen in a humane and humanitarian manner, keeping in mind livelihood concerns. The use of force is not acceptable under any circumstances whatsoever. Existing understandings between the two Governments in this regard must be strictly observed,” the Indian MEA said.

Meanwhile, the Sri Lanka Navy has issued a statement regarding the incident in question stating that the Northern Naval Command observed a cluster of Indian fishing boats poaching in the Sri Lankan waters off Valvettithurai, Jaffna in the dark hours of Monday (27 Jan). 

Subsequently, the Northern Naval Command mounted a special operation to send away those fishing boats from the island waters, deploying naval craft, it said. 

During this operation, the Navy seized an Indian fishing boat that continued to remain in Sri Lankan waters, while marshalling illegal fishing activities and collecting the fishing harvest. The operation also led to the apprehension of 13 Indian fishermen aboard the fishing boat.

The Sri Lanka Navy said its boarding team was compelled to conduct noncompliance boarding as the Indian fishing boat continued to maneuver aggressively, without complying with the Navy’s lawful orders and its duty, during the process of taking the boat into custody. 

“On this occasion, the Indian fishermen have acted aggressively, maneuvering their fishing boat in a hostile manner and behaving confrontationally with the Navy. However, while boarding the fishing boat, in accordance with the authority vested in the Navy, the Indian fishermen, as an organized group, have attempted to assault naval personnel and made an attempt to snatch a firearm from a naval officer, endangering the lives of the naval personnel.” 

In the process, an accidental fire has taken place, causing slight injuries to two Indian fishermen, the SLN said.

Following the incident, the Navy provided initial first aid to the two injured fishermen and promptly transferred them to the Jaffna Teaching Hospital for further treatment. The hospital has confirmed that their condition is stable. 

Meanwhile, the Navy lodged a complaint with the Kankesanthurai Police regarding the incident.

The seized Indian fishing boat and remaining fishermen were brought to the Kankasanthurai harbour last morning and they were handed over to the Mailadi Fisheries Inspector for onward legal action, the statement said.

The thirteen Indian fishermen, who were arrested by the Sri Lanka Navy yesterday (28) for illegally entering Sri Lankan waters off Kankesanthurai, were remanded until February 10 by the Mallakam Magistrate today.

Two fishermen from the group, who were reportedly injured, are currently hospitalized.

துப்பாக்கிச் சூட்டுக்கு இலக்கான இந்திய மீனவர்கள் குறித்து கடற்படை விளக்கம்

January 29, 2025  

காங்கேசன்துறை கடற்பரப்பில் சட்டவிரோத மீன்பிடி நடவடிக்கைகளில் ஈடுபட்டிருந்த போது கடற்படையினரால் கைது செய்யப்பட்ட இரண்டு இந்திய மீனவர்கள் துப்பாக்கிச் சூட்டுக்கு இலக்கானமை, எதிர்பாராத விதமாக துப்பாக்கி இயங்கியதால் என கடற்படை இன்று (29) உறுதிப்படுத்தியது.

இந்த சம்பவம் தொடர்பான முதற்கட்ட விசாரணையைத் தொடர்ந்து இந்த விடயம் தெரியவந்ததாக கடற்படைத் தளபதி வைஸ் அட்மிரல் காஞ்சன பானகொட தெரிவித்தார்.

இதற்கிடையில், கடற்படையினரால் கைது செய்யப்பட்ட 13 இந்திய மீனவர்களும் மல்லாகம் நீதவானிடம் ஆஜர்படுத்தப்பட்ட பின்னர் பெப்ரவரி மாதம் 10 ஆம் திகதி வரை விளக்கமறியலில் வைக்கப்பட்டுள்ளனர்.

காங்கேசன்துறை கடற்பரப்பில் இந்திய மீனவர்கள் குழுவொன்று சட்டவிரோத மீன்பிடி நடவடிக்கைகளில் ஈடுபடுவதாக கிடைத்த தகவலின் அடிப்படையில், கடற்படை குழுவினர் கடந்த 27 ஆம் திகதி இரவு அவர்களை கைது செய்தனர்.

Rise up soon to save the rising rice crisis

தென்னிலங்கை விவசாயி

Rise up soon to save the rising rice crisis

By Ceylon Today -January 29, 2025 

The recent warnings from small and medium-scale rice mill owners about the potential rise in rice prices—possibly exceeding Rs 300 per kg – highlight the deepening agricultural crisis in Sri Lanka. The price of paddy has recently surged to between Rs 140 and Rs 170 per kg, pushing up production costs for mill owners and farmers alike. The Government has offered Odapana loans to small and medium-scale paddy mill owners to purchase wet paddy at Rs 95 per kg and dry paddy at Rs 115. However, these measures have not been enough to alleviate the crisis. Many farmers, frustrated by delays in the government’s announcement of a guaranteed paddy price, have opted to sell their harvest to private buyers who offer up to Rs 170 per kg.

This shift in the market has led to alarming increases in rice prices. In many shops, rice shortages have become a growing issue, with the only varieties available being local Basmati rice, priced between Rs 250 and Rs 270 per kg. This steep rise in rice prices is a threat to food security, especially for the poorer households who rely on rice as a staple food. A decline in production since 2022, disruptions in the distribution chain, rising inflation, and market manipulation by large producers are thought to be factors for the shortage. And with that, as prices soar, rice has become unaffordable for many, prompting calls for stronger government intervention to regulate prices and ensure proper distribution of rice which is the nation’s staple food.

What we’re witnessing is more than just a temporary shortage. It’s a sign of how fragile Sri Lanka’s agricultural system has become. Once known as the ‘Granary of the East’, the country now finds itself dependent on imports to meet rice demand. In December last year, Sri Lanka imported 70,000 tons of rice from India to address what officials called an ‘artificial shortage’. This shift represents a stark departure from the country’s previous self-sufficiency in rice.  Although the government has taken some steps, like importing rice and pledging to take action against traders accused of hoarding, these actions have been largely reactive. The agricultural sector has faced years of neglect, leaving it vulnerable to both internal policy failures and external pressures.

This crisis calls for the urgent need for structural changes in the agricultural industry. In many developed countries, farmers are valued and financially secure, but in Sri Lanka, they remain among the poorest. The disparity becomes even more glaring when considering the vast tracts of unused paddy land across the country. The lack of youth involvement in farming is a critical issue. Many young Sri Lankans are encouraged to pursue Degrees in fields unrelated to Agriculture, leaving most of them either unemployed or working in low-paying jobs such as driving tuk-tuk or leaving abroad for menial work.

In contrast, farming in many developed nations is not only respected but also profitable, with solid support systems in place to ensure the sector’s growth. Sri Lanka, on the other hand, does not promote agriculture as a career, and as a result, the agricultural workforce is ageing, and production is on the decline. To address this, the government must shift the narrative and actively encourage youth to pursue careers in agriculture. Offering incentives, training, and subsidies could make farming a viable and attractive profession. Agricultural education should be a priority, and young people should be equipped with the tools they need to succeed in the sector.

Beyond that, the Government must prioritise sustainable farming practices and modern agricultural technology to boost production, reduce the country’s reliance on imports, and help Sri Lanka return to its previous self-sufficiency in rice. Encouraging youth involvement in farming is a key step in revitalising the agricultural sector, which could address both food security and economic challenges in the long run.

As Sri Lanka faces the ongoing rice crisis, it’s clear that superficial solutions won’t be enough. The root causes need to be tackled head-on. Only by building a thriving agricultural sector can Sri Lanka hope for a future where rice and other basic foods are both affordable and readily available for all its citizens. But can we afford to wait for change, or will we find ourselves eternally dependent on imports for the foreseeable future?

Standing up to a bullying US President

 Daily Mirror 29 January 2025 

US President Donald Trump is back in the White House and is creating a monstrous cacophony of noise. He is so-to-say, upsetting the ‘apple cart of the ordinary man and woman on the street in lands as far away from the US as in little Sri Lanka. 

In addition to the noise the present US President is threatening all nations, small and large to fall in line with US diktat or else…? One of the first acts in his second term as president, was to call a temporary halt to all US aid programmes worldwide. These programmes cover a wide range from relief measures to development assistance, support for civil rights protection, education and technology to health and medical assistance.

Under agreements signed in 2022, Lanka also receives military assistance in terms of military training, military technology, intelligence, special training in counter-terrorism, and direct monetary assistance for military development.

The US is also our country’s biggest export destination -valued at approximately $3.52 billion. The next biggest being India at $ 1.12 billion, the UK at $ 1.04 billion, Germany at $ 881 million and Italy at $662 million. The US is therefore a very important market for our country. But can we afford to offend the new president?

It is understandable therefore, why President Dissanayake before he was elected to power, visited the US and was seen on stage bedecked with US and Lankan flags. The reason - we cannot afford to annoy the US- especially when despite claims to the contrary, regarding state of bankruptcy, our external debt stands at a whopping US $ 56.6 billion. 

Even worse, the Hamilton Reserve Bank -which holds a big chunk of one of Lanka’s now-defaulted bonds- has been suing for immediate repayment. The demand hangs like ‘the swords of Damocles’ over our collective heads. It is only a US court order which has paused Hamilton’s demand for immediate repayment.  

We all know how fast this situation can change in the event administration decides to back the claims of Hamilton Bank in the event of government ruffling the US President’s feathers. 

Just days ago, President Trump imposed economic sanctions on Columbia after the Columbian president refused to accept two flights carrying deported  migrants to land in Columbia. Hours later the Columbian president was forced to agree to accept the migrants including those arriving on US military aircraft - “without limitation or delay” to avoid ‘a looming trade war with the US’.

On another front, on Saturday, Trump called for the clearing of Gaza of its Palestinian residents -the victims of Israel’s genocidal attacks. 

Over forty-six thousand Palestinians including approximately 17 thousand children have been killed in Israeli attacks on the civilian population. According to the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), more than 85 percent of Gaza’s 2.3 million people have been displaced by Israeli ground and air offensive. Al Jazeera reported that at least 346 schools have been destroyed or damaged. 

Yet Trump is calling on Egypt and Jordan to take in these displaced people. Not demanding Israel pay reparations or be charged before the International Criminal Courts (ICC) for Crimes against Humanity.

Lanka has always backed justice for Palestine and condemned Israel’s genocidal policies against Palestinians. Our present government, before it came to power were strong defenders of Palestinian rights.

Will our present government -which organised rallies world-wide- protesting Israeli atrocities in Palestine prior to coming into power- now stand against an even greater injustice the present US President is attempting to foist on the people of Palestine? Or will they cave in, casting principles aside?

The new US President (Trump) is also threatening to forcibly take over the Panama Canal. He is demanding Canada give up its independence and become the 51st US state. Additionally he demands that Greenland should become part of the US. 

It will take a huge balancing act to negotiate the acquiescence demanded by the new US regime of all countries big and small. A number of countries have entered the BRICS-led initiative. Does our NPP-led government have the backbone to stand up to unjust US demands? Or, will we, like the Columbian regime, fold up like a pack of cards? ⍐