Tsunami One Year On – Reality Check

by Amrit Muttukumaru, December 24, 2005

“There is no doubt that mainly due to the UN’s cavalier attitude and lack of responsibility in approaching its custodian role, there is an appalling lack of coordination and accountability. It is indeed ironic that the UN itself accepts the fact that the majority of the victims of the Tsunami continue to suffer under deplorable conditions one year after the tragedy. It, of course, does not admit its share of the blame for this state of affairs, although the UN is the worldwide custodian for the effective utilization of the Tsunami billions with transparency and accountability. Its custodian role is also reflected in the high profile appointment of former President Bill Clinton by Secretary-General Kofi Annan as UN ‘Special Envoy for Tsunami Recovery.’ Clinton's three ‘whistle stop’ visits to the country, each of them spanning less than 24 hours with most of the time in Colombo, with only cursory visits to two or three ‘stage managed’ Tsunami-affected locations, cannot be anything other than mere gimmicks.”

It is now one long year since the most devastating natural disaster in living memory visited this country on the day after Christmas last year. Apart from the immense destruction and damage to property, homes, livelihoods and infrastructure, it resulted in the death of more than 35,000 persons, most of them women and children, with more than 20,000 being injured and hundreds of thousands displaced and affected.

There is no consensus on the number of houses that have been destroyed and damaged, with varying figures being trotted out even by the same agency at different times, with further confusion on the split between those in the buffer zone and outside it.

Sri Lanka, which is the second worst affected after Indonesia from the fallout from the Asian Tsunami, has benefited immensely from the unprecedented worldwide response that has possibly made it the most high profile current global issue. Even Hurricane ‘Katrina’ and the ‘Kashmir’ earthquake have failed to evoke the same emotional response.

Sri Lanka’s share of the staggering US$12 Billion donated and pledged, amounts to US$ 3 Billion. The recipients of this, apart from the governments concerned, are UN agencies, INGOs, local NGOs and individuals. The major share of these funds have gone to INGOs. A large number of International NGOs descended on this country after the Tsunami, with numerous new local NGOs continuing to be established. The International Federation of the Red Cross (IFRC) alone is said to have received a mammoth US$ 2.1 Billion, of which its Sri Lanka operations has been allotted US$ 375 Million. A request to give a figure for ‘administration’ expenses of the IFRC in Sri Lanka was reportedly turned down by Tony Maryon, Head of the IFRC Delegation to Sri Lanka.

The donors include countries, multilateral agencies and, most importantly, tens of thousands of emotionally driven persons, inclusive of children from the richer countries, who have dug deep into their savings to mitigate the sufferings of these hapless people. The least that these donors will demand is some assurance that their precious contributions reach those affected with the minimum 'leakage.'

The focus of this article will precisely be to ascertain as to whether the victims of the Tsunami in Sri Lanka have really benefited commensurate with the generosity of these donors. Of particular interest will be to examine how the UN, which has been tasked with the responsibility of being the worldwide custodian for its transparent and efficient utilization, has fulfilled its obligation.

It also needs to be emphasized that, sadly, the country still does not have a mechanism to equitably share the massive resources pledged between the worst affected NorthEast and the rest of the country.

Official Claims
The reality on the ground largely belies claims by government agencies, such as TAFREN –‘Task Force to Rebuild the Nation’, TAFOR – ‘Task Force for Relief,’ Miguel Bermeo - UN Resident Coordinator in Sri Lanka, Jan Egeland - UN Under Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and even former President Bill Clinton – UN ‘Special Envoy for Tsunami Recovery.’ This is particularly with reference to providing transitional and permanent homes and livelihoods.

For example, Mano Tittawella – Chairman, TAFREN, in his ‘Background Papers to the SL Development Forum 2005,’ asserts that the “Guiding Principles” of TAFREN include: “Consultation and Communication, Transparency and Zero Tolerance of Corruption, Accountability and good governance and Coordination and efficiency.” Tilak Ranaviraja – Chairman, TAFOR, has insensitively stated that he could “definitely say that even these temporary shelters have provided better accommodation….than the houses in which they lived before the Tsunami,” while Miguel Bermeo – UN Resident Coordinator for Sri Lanka, is reported to have said that “what has been accomplished is remarkable” in regard to transitional shelters. The disconnect with reality held by these officials has been endorsed by Jan Egeland – UN Under- Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs, with his statement that what has been achieved especially in regard to ‘transitional’ shelters is “a remarkable endeavour”! Even former President Bill Clinton, who is the UN ‘Special Envoy for Tsunami Recovery,’ is reported to have “applauded progress made to date, including….the commitment of governments to develop transparent, on-line financial tracking systems and common indicators to track the recovery effort” at a meeting he convened in Washington, D.C. in late September.

We will now examine what independent observers of varied backgrounds have to say about the ground reality in regard to the delivery of assistance to the victims of the Tsunami through the prudent utilization of the Tsunami billions that have come into this country.

Ground Reality
The Auditor-General has referred, amongst others, to glaring deficiencies in the management of Tsunami funds, irregularities inclusive of pilferage in the clearing of donor items at the airport/harbour, incompetence, and serious shortcomings in the construction of houses. It was determined that, of the foreign funds amounting to US$ 1.169 Billion, only 13.5% had been utilized for relief and reconstruction. He has also referred to the utter confusion in the payment of the LKR 5000/= monthly allowance to affected families by pointing out that “from January to May 2005 six different circulars were released for the payment of allowance of LKR.5000.” Hence, is it any wonder that reportedly no more than 3 payments have been made since the Tsunami, with even some unaffected families being beneficiaries? To date TAFREN, which is supposed to coordinate and ensure accountability of the entire Tsunami relief and reconstruction process in the country, has so far not responded to the findings of the Auditor-General in spite of requests from the media.

Quite evidently, the absence of effective coordination has been a conspicuous feature of the response to the Tsunami in this country. The coordination is so miserable that Nicola Brennan, in her article to commemorate nine months after the Tsunami, observes that “some have received boats, but no nets. Others have received nets, but no boats. Many complain that the boats given are of such poor quality that they are unable to take them out into the ocean for fear they will fall apart…”! In regard to ‘transitional’ housing she comments that “many victims of the tsunami in the south and south-west of the country continue to live in make-shift tents and inadequate temporary houses without a proper plan for future rehabilitation.”

If this is the plight of those in the south, the situation in the worse affected northeast must indeed be dire, in the absence of even a rudimentary mechanism to deliver the aid received.

Dumeetha Luthra, BBC Correspondent in Sri Lanka, in her article titled: ‘Sri Lanka’s Slow Tsunami Response,’ giving an example of the quality of ‘transitional’ housing, writes that “In the Patharajagama camp, the transitional shelters are an example of how a knee-jerk and unplanned response to relief has left more than 300 people living in dire conditions.” She describes a specific dwelling in this camp (No. 72) as follows: “It's a sweltering tin box. The walls and the roof of its one room, the size of a garden shed, are made from corrugated metal sheets.”

A group of concerned citizens, who have established websites to monitor the recovery efforts under an organization named ‘Recover Lanka,’ have observed that “six months after the devastation, the relief, recovery and reconstruction in Sri Lanka is below our lowest expectations.”

International aid organization Oxfam states that only “5,000 out of 78,000 homes for Sri Lanka’s Tsunami victims will have been completed by the end of 2005.” Quite in contrast it further states that in Indonesia’s Aceh Province “by the end of 2005 around one-quarter of the people in need will be in new permanent homes.”

Refugees International – an American NGO, states that “ten months after the devastating Tsunami last year, about 800,000 people directly affected by the disaster face tremendous uncertainty. The transition to the phase of long-term recovery is lagging.” In regard to ‘transitional’ housing it asserts “small units with tin roofs are practically ovens in the blazing tropical sun….wood units are experiencing termite infestations, creating dust that is causing respiratory problems….the fear is that the monsoon season in the east will create secondary displacement due to the poor quality and location of some of the shelters.” With reference to livelihoods it states “anomalies were abound along the southern and eastern coastline. Some fishermen were getting six boats and selling them off, yet most fishermen had yet to receive a single boat; some fishermen have boats, but no nets or motors. “

An international pressure group, ‘Tourism Concern,’ asserts that “local people are not always being given a voice, with business leaders dominating the reconstruction plans….the ‘Task Force to Rebuild the Nation’ (TAFREN) is headed up by an extra-governmental body of ten members, six of whom are involved in the country’s tourism industry.” It goes on to state that “luxury tourism is being promoted at the expense of sustainable tourism that will benefit local people and their environment.”

The joint report of October 2005 of Sri Lanka’s Institute of Policy Studies and the ADB Institute based in Japan titled “Post-Tsunami Recovery : Issues and Challenges in Sri Lanka” confirms the belief that there are indeed serious problems relating to coordination, delivery, scope of the assistance, transparency and accountability.

UN’s Custodian Role
As will be crystal clear from the foregoing that the UN, which is the worldwide custodian for the effective utilization of these massive donor funds with transparency and accountability, has largely reneged on this responsibility. Not only has it failed to ensure transparency and accountablity among the Sri Lankan government agencies concerned, particularly TAFREN and TAFOR, and within the NGO sector both local and foreign, but more shockingly the UN’s own accountability is far from satisfactory. Its own website grandiosely titled “Indian Ocean Earthquake - Tsunami Flash Appeal: Expenditure Tracking” does many things other than ‘Expenditure Tracking’! It merely gives lump sums for glaringly ill-defined ‘project’ expenditure with no attempt for even a rudimentary breakdown of expenditure.

The Sarvodaya website, while being studious in giving copious donor information, fights shy of giving any meaningful breakdown of expenditure. Even the much hyped TAFREN ‘Development Assistance Database’ (DAD) website set up with UNDP assistance is no better. This seems to be a feature in other organizations as well.

No wonder there are serious allegations of corruption, inefficiency and a lack of coordination at government, INGO, NGO and UN agency levels, which include plausible charges that administrative and personnel costs account for the lion's share of project costs. The public are not even aware officially of the exact distribution of these donor funds between these different entities, particularly that of the NGO sector.

An outrageous case of irregularity at the UNDP office in Colombo is with reference to the UNDP calling for 'Expressions of Interest' (EOI) for the supply of 13 large Refrigerated Trucks for Tsunami relief. The advertisement concerned, published in the Daily News of 9 July 2005 (Saturday) stipulates that the EOIs must be received "no later than Monday 11 July 2005"! The deadline for "Bid Submission" is given as 13 July 2005! Could this be the tip of the iceberg of irregularities in the handling of Tsunami funds by the UN itself?

There is another case of irregularity involving an international NGO where an ‘Invitation to Tender’ for 220 outboard engines specified a specific brand required! Why is it that suddenly nothing is being heard of the UN’s initial grandiose plans to audit the utilization of the Tsunami Billions worldwide?

Conclusion
There is no doubt that, mainly due to the UN’s cavalier attitude and lack of responsibility in approaching its custodian role, there is an appalling lack of coordination and accountability in distributing the Tsunami billions. It is indeed ironic that the UN itself accepts the fact that the majority of the victims of the Tsunami continue to suffer under deplorable conditions one year after the tragedy. It of course does not admit its share of the blame for this state of affairs, although the UN is the worldwide custodian for the effective utilization of the Tsunami Billions with transparency and accountability.

Its custodian role is also reflected in the high profile appointment of former President Bill Clinton by Secretary-General, Kofi Annan as UN ‘Special Envoy for Tsunami Recovery.’ Clinton's three ‘whistle stop’ visits to the country, each of them spanning less than 24 hours, with most of the time in Colombo, with only cursory visits to two or three ‘stage managed’ Tsunami affected locations, cannot be anything other than mere gimmicks!

This is what Miloon Kothari of the UN Commission on Human Rights and Dr. Walter Kalin – Representative of the UN Secretary-General on the Human Rights of the Internally Displaced Persons, say in a joint statement:

“One year after the Indian Ocean Tsunami wreaked havoc on the lives and livelihoods of hundreds of thousands of people across several countries, relief and rehabilitation efforts regrettably continue to prove inadequate. Large numbers of survivors remain forced to live in substandard conditions that fail to meet criteria for adequate housing and living conditions dictated by international human rights standards….There is an urgent need to develop mechanisms that ensure transparency and accountability…”

Need we say more !!

The lack of transparency and accountability in the relief and reconstruction effort has all the elements to eventually snowball into a scandal far worse than the UN’s sordid Iraqi ‘Oil-for-Food’ programme. It is hoped that this same charade is not re-enacted in the response to the ‘Kashmir’ earthquake tragedy, which has the potential to be another ‘gravy train’!