TRUST BUT VERIFY: SRI LANKA ANNOUNCES IDP FREEDOM

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 COLOMBO 001062 SIPDIS DEPARTMENT FOR SCA/INSB E.O. 12958: DECL: 11/23/2019 TAGS: PGOV PREL PREF PHUM PTER EAID MOPS CE SUBJECT: TRUST BUT VERIFY: SRI LANKA ANNOUNCES IDP FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT BUT INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY AWAITS PROOF REF: COLOMBO 1051 COLOMBO 00001062 001.2 OF 002 Classified By: CHARGE D'AFFAIRES VALERIE C. FOWLER. REASONS: 1.4 (B, D ) ¶1. (C) SUMMARY: On November 21, 2009, the Government of Sri Lanka (GSL) announced its intention to increase freedom of movement for internally displaced persons (IDPs) living in camps in northern Sri Lanka. While specifics are unclear, it appears that as of December 1, IDPs will be able to leave the camps temporarily by registering their departures at the gate. Permanent departures will require the address of a host family. The GSL also promised to double IDP stipends and reiterated its plan to empty the camps by the end of January 2010. Post welcomes the shift in camp policy but cautions that only its implementation will provide a true measure of progress made. END SUMMARY. GSL ANNOUNCES "TOTAL" FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT -------------- ¶2. (U) On November 21, 2009, Basil Rajapaksa, Senior Presidential Advisor and Chief of the President's Task Force for Rehabilitation and Resettlement, announced the GSL's intention to increase freedom of movement for internally displaced persons ( IDPs) held in camps. The announcement came during Rajapaksa's visit to Manik Farm, Sri Lanka's largest camp, located in Vavuniya district in the north. According to a GSL statement released that day, IDPs would have "total" freedom of movement as of December 1, 2009; IDP stipends would be increased from Rs 25,000 (about $219) to Rs 50,000 (about $438) as of December 15, 2009, and all IDPs would be resettled by January 31, 2010. UNHCR REPORTS ON PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION -------------- ¶3. (SBU) The UN Secretary General welcomed the GSL's decision in a public statement and urged the GSL to continue to work with the UN and other humanitarian partners and the IDPs themselves on improving the returns process and providing assistance and services. UNHCR-Sri Lanka saw the development as a positive sign but cautioned that it was not yet clear how the new policies would be implemented. UNHCR reported that the Sri Lankan military around the camps seemed intent to allow movement from the camp, provided that IDPs register their departures at the gate. There has not been any indication that IDPs would also have to leave a family member behind, as was practiced in some areas in the past. There is yet no guidance on how long an IDP would be able to stay outside the camp with intent to return. IDPs who wished to leave the camp permanently could do so by providing a host family address. It is not yet clear whether or how host families will be vetted under the new system. UNHCR funds the current IDP stipend of Rs 25,000 to returnees. It is unknown how the GSL will double that amount, as UNHCR is not providing additional support. ¶4. (SBU) While the GSL statement committed to emptying the camps by January 31, 2010, UNHCR reported that the GSL may maintain space in the camp for those who cannot return. UNHCR judged that up to 60,000 people, mainly from the heavily mined eastern Kilinochchi and Mullaitivu provinces, would be unable for return for up to two years. The GSL had indicated that it might designate Zones Zero and One in the camp for this population while their home districts were de-mined. Provided that the camps become open, UNHCR would be willing to assist with upgrading and maintaining these zones as semi-permanent camps. If the residual population exceeded those zones' 40,000-person capacity, UNHCR would consider building additional shelter. COLOMBO 00001062 002.2 OF 002 COMMENT -------------- ¶5. (C) The GSL announcement is a welcome step, but only implementation will reveal how serious the GSL is about true freedom of movement. The statement comes in the wake of the USG's recent indication to the GSL that it would redirect aid if camps remained closed by March 2010. DFID and ECHO had taken similar positions. This quiet, coordinated approach, alongside international advocacy efforts, may have encouraged the GSL to change its policies. With elections fast-approaching, the GSL also may be seeking to build credibility by delivering on its promises, but there are no guarantees. Post will maintain quiet pressure to hold the GSL to its word and will continue to monitor the situation. Regarding the emptying of the camps, Post assesses this as unrealistic. According to a November 18 GSL report, nearly 135,000 people remain in camps ) returning this entire population in just over two months to areas not yet de-mined is not feasible or desirable. Even Brigadier General Ranasinghe (deputy to Competent Authority Maj Gen Gunaratne) predicted during PDAS Witten's visit to Manik Farm on November 13 that 70,000 people would still remain in the camp at the end of January (reftel). These people, and the humanitarian aid organizations which care for them, will need continued USG support. FOWLER