(We refer to our earlier statement on this dispute which may be found at http://www.ahrchk.net/statements/mainfile.php/2007statements/1136/. We are in receipt of a reply (by email) from a subsidiary company of the Elsuma Group in Switzerland. We reproduce below this correspondence and our reply to the same.)
The text of the email from CCS Elsuma Switzerland:
Thomas Kaiser CEO, CCS Group, Werkstrasse 36, 3250 Lyss, Switzerland Tel: 41 32 387 94 11, Fax: 41 32 385 14 34, EmailThomas.Kaiser@formtest.ch
Dear Mr. Jeong Ho Moon
We refer to your various letters concerning the current situation of our subsidiary CCS Elsuma (PVT) Ltd in Sri Lanka.
In Europe, before publication such a story of this importance, the author usually investigate in respectable way at the parties involved. Due to the fact, that in our case this hasn t happen yet, we can t seriously answer your recriminations.
Gladly we expect you in Switzerland to explain you the case from our point of view. We will naturally plan to have the Director of CCS Elsuma (PVT() Ltd. present. Please inform us about your travel schedule to arrange your stay as convenient as possible.
Yours sincerely
Thomas Kaiser
The reply from the Asian Human Rights Commission
Mr. Thomas Kaiser
CCS Elsuma AG. Switzerland
Werkstrasse 36,
3250 Lyss,
Switzerland
Dear Mr. Kaiser,
Re: Your email regarding the Sri Lankan subsidiary of CSS Elsuma
Thank you for your email to us regarding our correspondence with your president.
Although you have written from a subsidiary company (Formatest) we assume that you are doing so on behalf of the president of the CSS Elsuma Group, Mr. Stephan Schindler.
In your email you state that In Europe, before publication such a story of this importance, the author usually investigate in respectable way at the parties involved. I can assure you in Asia in general and in Sri Lanka too, the investigations are conducted thoroughly and carefully. We have looked into the version of your subsidiary company in Sri Lanka by examining the papers filed by the company at the district court of Negombo, Sri Lanka on the issue. We do not have any reason to think that those papers do not represent the position of your subsidiary. To think so would amount to presuming that your subsidiary has not revealed everything that it ought to reveal to a court, which it is has an obligation to do.
Thus, your claim that there has been no serious investigation on our part does not seem to be a product of any serious thought on your part. You have dismissed the facts we have placed before as not deserving of serious answers without properly considering that the facts we have placed before you are based on the authentic documents of your subsidiary itself. The facts are also the result of the examination of all the documents relating to a long standing dispute between the workmen and their management. As the problem has been addressed before the Commissioner of Labour and the Board of Investment (BOI) in Sri Lanka there exists considerable documentation by which it is possible to obtain an objective view of all the facts. If the facts are wrong your subsidiary is in a position to dispute them.
You say, Gladly we expect you in Switzerland to explain you the case from our point of view. The better course we would suggest is for representatives for your company to visit Sri Lanka and to meet with the workers and the workers council (Savaka Sabava) elected after agreement with your subsidiary company with the intervention of Commissioner of Labour and the Board of Investment. In fact, such a meeting would reveal to you matters that we have to regrettably think that the management of your subsidiary in Sri Lanka has suppressed. It is just common sense that this being a dispute between workmen and management it would be your duty to listen to both sides. Since the workers council was constituted legitimately you should also listen to them. Our role in this matter has been to bring to your notice the total picture. That is what the managers of your subsidiary say and what the workmen and their council say. If you want our further intervention on the matter we will gladly participate in such a meeting between you, the management and the workman. Since the earlier discussion has taken place in the presence of the Commissioner of Labour and the Board of Investment it would also appropriate on your part to involve these local authorities on such a discussion. Both these authorities are aware of this dispute. In this manner all parties concerned can better inform themselves of the total picture of this case.
It would serve little purpose for us to visit Switzerland since to hear your point of view since anything you tell us will simply be what the management of the subsidiary in Sri Lanka has told you. What this management has said, we already know. Thus, there is no new information to gain by making a visit to Switzerland. However, if you wish to visit Hong Kong we would be quite willing to discuss all the matter with you and to show you all the material on which we based our judgement. That said we would, however, say that the most appropriate action for you is to visit Sri Lanka and meet your management and your workers.
There is also another group of persons who would like to meet you in Sri Lanka. Those are the legitimate civil society organisations in Sri Lanka which your management has thought it fit to harass. These organisations would like to tell you their part of the story directly. And it would be useful for you to know this since the civil society organisations in Sri Lanka will discuss the harassment meted out to them organisations quite openly. That is a discussion that neither your management nor yourself, or anyone else for that matter, has a right to stop or the capacity to do so.
Our interest as an international human rights organisation is on the matters of principle involved. We have placed before you all the facts we have in our possession. We are quite willing to consider any fact that is not yet known to us. For this purpose modern communications exists for you as much as it does for us. There is the telephone also and our numbers are given above. If you care to talk to us and reveal anything that you deem we do not know, we will be grateful for such information. As we have placed these facts publicly in Sri Lanka and outside whatever information you care to provide us that may contradict our position will also be placed by us before the public. We give you that assurance. We do not want to suppress any factual information.
I just have to add that it is regrettable that you mentioned that in Europe there would have been investigation before publication, thereby implying a slur on how things happen in Asia and Sri Lanka. I do not want to go so far as to say that this sounds rather racist; however, I do record my objections to your references mentioned above.
Since you are trying to make a distinction between how things happen in Europe, Asia and Sri Lanka may I ask, is it a European habit not to consult workers and to ignore the workers councils that are legitimately elected? In Europe do you dismiss a worker who happens to be the president of a workers council after he submits proposal to the management on the basis of the workers council. In Europe do you also go against civil society organisations that extend support to workers? Our reading of European history does not support any such view of Europe. Perhaps it is your company that is not living by the traditions that Europe has developed over centuries in dealing with workmen and allowing the local management to harass the workmen. We are quite confident that if what your management is doing in Sri Lanka was attempted in Europe, your company would be faced with massive problems, not only of the law but also about ethics and morality.
It is your company that is breaking the best traditions of the European companies while you are out of Europe and are dealing in a county of the third world. What would constitute gross exploitation in Europe is allowed to be done to the workmen of the third world. The style of your email alone suggests that. What happens to the workmen of a third world country, you do not take seriously. You want them and their representatives and sympathizers to come to Europe to discuss such matters. Do you not see a crass disrespect for the human being involved in this issue on your part? Do you expect us to take you seriously if you behave in this manner?
We hope that you will be fair by the workmen who work for you in Sri Lanka and take the trouble to listen to their version of the events. That also will be better for your own benefit.
We look forward to hearing from you in due course.
Thank you.
Yours sincerely,
MOON Jeong ho
Programme Officer
Urgent Appeals
