Media Defence is delighted to announce that we have been awarded a grant by Hivos. As part of the Digital Defenders Partnership, Hivos is supporting us with a €90,000 funding for 2021.
The Digital Defenders Partnership (DDP) was initiated in 2012 by the Freedom Online Coalition and is managed by Hivos. It takes a rights-based approach, focusing on core principles such as human rights and internet freedom, inclusivity and diversity, trust and confidentially, do-no-harm and mentorship and partnership. DDP’s mission is to provide a holistic response to digital threats and create resilient and sustainable networks of support to human rights defenders.
“We are thrilled to receive this funding from the DDP programme, and to continue our partnership with Hivos. This past year has really emphasised the importance of reliable, independent media, especially online, and the increasing threats that these media face. This grant will enable us to expand and deepen our support, defending more journalists around the world. We are very grateful to HIVOS for their commitment to our work in protecting freedom of expression.” Alinda Vermeer, acting CEO at Media Defence.
Hivos says: “DDP is committed to taking a holistic approach to protecting civil society in the context of threats to human rights and internet freedom. In addition to the direct emergency support and accompaniment in the face of digital violence, it is vital that they have access to legal support and expertise when confronted with criminalisation or laws which pose a threat to their freedom of expression or digital rights. In this regard we are delighted to continue our partnership with Media Defence.”
To read more about our 2020-2024 strategy, please click here.
If you are a journalist, citizen journalist or independent media organisation in need of support, please click here.
If you would like to donate or support our work, please click here.
Recent News
Former Colombian Intelligence Director Convicted for Torture of Journalist Claudia Duque
Leer en español On August 24th, José Miguel Narváez was convicted for the aggravated and prolonged psychological torture of journalist Claudia Julieta Duque. Narváez was the Deputy Director of the now disbanded Colombian secret police, the Administrative Department of Security (DAS), who subjected Duque to over two decades of relentless persecution. The verdict delivered by […]
Ex director de inteligencia colombiano condenado por torturar a la periodista Claudia Duque
Read in English El 24 de agosto, José Miguel Narváez fue condenado por tortura psicológica agravada y prolongada de la periodista Claudia Julieta Duque. Narváez llegó a ser subdirector de la ahora disuelta policía secreta colombiana, el Departamento Administrativo de Seguridad (DAS), que sometió a Duque a casi una década de implacable persecución. La sentencia […]
14 Years After The Diappearance Of Journalist Prageeth Ekneligoda, His Family Continue The Fight For Answers
On 24 January 2010, just two days before a crucial presidential election in Sri Lanka, journalist Prageeth Ekneligoda disappeared. Since then, his wife, Sandya Ekneligoda, has tirelessly fought for a thorough investigation and for those responsible to be brought to justice. Yet, to date, no effective investigation has been carried out and no perpetrators have been held accountable. For 14 years, Sandya and her two sons have lived in uncertainty, hoping for Prageeth’s return with no resolution in sight. Throughout this prolonged ordeal, Sandya has faced persistent intimidation, threats and harassment for her efforts.
Prageeth, a well-known critic of the government, was last seen in the suburbs of Colombo, Sri Lanka’s capital. As a cartoonist and columnist for the news website Lanka e News, he used his platform to expose corruption and speak out against abuses of power. His disappearance happened during a period of when widespread violence against journalists was recorded. From 2005 to 2015, dozens of journalists were murdered, assaulted, or disappeared, often in connection with their coverage of Sri Lanka’s 26-year civil war.
Initial Obstacles and Legal Efforts
Soon after Prageeth’s disappearance, Sandya encountered resistance from the authorities. In February 2010, after the police refused to register her missing person’s report, Sandya took legal action by filing a habeas corpus petition before the Sri Lankan Court of Appeal. Her petition requested that the authorities produce her husband in court. In response, the Court of Appeal directed a lower court, the Homagama Magistrate Court, to investigate the matter and report back.
Over the next few years, the Colombo Crime Division carried out a slow-moving inquiry that yielded no results. Meanwhile, government officials made baseless claims in 2011 and 2013, alleging that Prageeth was living abroad. These assertions were later discredited, and no substantial evidence was ever produced to support them.
Breakthroughs and Setbacks in the Investigation
In 2015, after a political shift ousted the Mahinda Rajapaksa administration, the investigation into Prageeth’s disappearance was revitalised and transferred to the Gang and Robberies Unit of the Criminal Investigations Department (CID). Witnesses came forward with testimonies indicating that Prageeth had been seen in an army camp after his abduction. The CID investigation found that a military intelligence unit was responsible for Prageeth’s disappearance and likely death and reported that the military failed to provide the necessary information to conduct a comprehensive investigation.
In November 2019, after more than 300 hearings, the Attorney General indicted nine military intelligence officers before the Colombo High Court on several charges related to Prageeth’s disappearance.
Political Interference and Continued Struggle
Despite this apparent progress, the path to justice has been repeatedly obstructed by political interference. Only days after the first hearing in the criminal case before Colombo High Court was held, Gotabaya Rajapaksa, the former President’s brother and also former defence secretary, was elected president. Under Gotabaya’s administration, a Commission of Inquiry into Political Victimisation was established. Human Rights Watch criticised the commission, suggesting it was aimed at derailing investigations into the president’s relatives and allies.
All nine accused military intelligence officers filed complaints with the Commission, which ultimately recommended their acquittal of all charges, further delaying the case and denying justice to Prageeth’s family.
The trial remains ongoing despite many challenges, from retracted witness statements, and repeated delays in hearings to changes in judges. Additionally, the CID officer who has led the investigation into Prageeth’s disappearance has reportedly received death threats and fled the country.
A widespread issue
Prageeth’s disappearance is not an isolated event, but emblematic of a broader pattern of enforced disappearances that has affected Sri Lanka for decades. The country ranks among the highest in the world for enforced disappearances, with estimates suggesting that between 60,000 and 100,000 people have vanished since the late 1980s. These disappearances have been used as a tool to instil fear, suppress dissent, and maintain control.
Despite criminalising enforced disappearances in 2018, the Sri Lankan government’s efforts to aid affected families and uncover the truth have been criticised for their inconsistency and inefficacy.
The anguish of enforced disappearance extends far beyond the immediate act of abduction. For families like the Ekneligodas, the emotional toll is profound, leaving them in a state of constant uncertainty. Additionally, while men are most often the victims of enforced disappearances, it is frequently women who lead the search for truth after a loved one disappears. According to Amnesty International, women often face additional risks of persecution and violence while fighting for answers, as well as economic hardship due to the loss of their families’ primary earners.
The stories of individuals like Sandya and Prageeth highlight the urgent need for accountability and transparency. Addressing these abuses is essential to protecting human rights, including freedom of expression, and ensuring that those who seek justice are not silenced.
We recognise the strength and resilience of families who continue to search for their loved ones. Their courage is a powerful reminder to stand with them and to ensure their voices are heard and their demands for justice are met.
Media Defence is proud to support Sandya Ekneligoda’s legal efforts.