Blowing the Whistle

A Sri Lankan refugee family in Hong Kong pays for being Edward Snowden’s ‘guardian angels’

The people who sheltered the whistleblower while he was on the run are now looking for protection.

They had never imagined that a knock at their door one late summer night in 2013 would trigger a dramatic chain of events that would rewrite the course of their lives. Four years on, facing daily threats and the imminent fear of deportation, Sri Lankan national Supun Kellapatha and his partner Nadeeka Nonis say they have no regrets about opening the door. They were glad they welcomed a tall, nervous-looking American man into their tiny apartment.

The stranger at the door that night was the whistleblower Edward Snowden – a former US intelligence contractor who leaked thousands of classified government files to journalists from a hotel room in Hong Kong. For two weeks after that leak in June 2013, Snowden was untraceable. As American intelligence agencies launched a global manhunt, the most wanted dissident in the world quietly shunted between the homes of three refugee families in the most impoverished, cramped, filthy, neglected ghettos of Hong Kong before he boarded a plane for Moscow.

Now, the people who sheltered Snowden are themselves looking for protection. As their home countries allegedly try to get them extradited back and remaining in Hong Kong becomes unfeasible, the families are seeking asylum in Canada with the help of Robert Tibbo, the Hong Kong-based human rights lawyer who brought Snowden to Supun’s door that night. Tibbo also represents the refugees.

“We put Ed where no one would look – in a netherworld with people who have an instinct to protect,” said Tibbo. He was confident this group of people, who had so much to lose if Snowden was caught in their midst, would not betray him or his high-profile client.

They did not.

The refugees – Kellapatha, Nonis and their two children; Ajith Puspakumara, a former soldier also from Sri Lanka; and Vanessa Rodel and her daughter, who are from the Philippines – kept their word and their silence, until the 2016 Oliver Stone movie Snowden revealed where the fugitive hid when he went underground in Hong Kong. It was impossible to keep their names a secret anymore.

Unwitting public figures now, they remain guarded when they speak about Snowden, insisting they had no idea who he was when they took him in. What they did know was that like them, he too was a refugee – an anxious man outside his home country, looking for shelter.

For two weeks June 2013, Edward Snowden was untraceable, while he shunted between the homes of three refugee families in Hong Kong.
For two weeks June 2013, Edward Snowden was untraceable, while he shunted between the homes of three refugee families in Hong Kong.

“Early the next morning, so early that it was still dark, he asked me to go and buy the newspaper,” recalled Kellapatha “I didn’t even look at it till I came back and gave it to him. Then when I saw it, I was shocked.” He looked at the photograph on the front page of The South China Morning Post and asked his houseguest, “Edward, is this you?” To which the stranger replied, “Yes, it’s me.”

“I told him, don’t worry, you are safe,” Kellapatha said.

Kellapatha gave him the only mattress in his two-room apartment that’s no bigger than 125 square feet, while his family slept on the floor. Concerned about what to feed a westerner, Kellapatha bought him spaghetti and burgers from McDonald’s with money provided by Tibbo. He needn’t have worried – what Snowden enjoyed most was Nonis’s homemade chicken curry and daal. “And cake,” Nonis said, as a rare smile breaks out on her face at the memory. “He loves sweets very much.”

Kellapatha and Nonis are both refugees who fled persecution and torture in Sri Lanka. Kellapatha, 32, came to Hong Kong in 2005 to escape political harassment – he says he was ill-treated and tortured by people connected to the political opposition. Nadeeka, who is 33, came in 2007. She is a former seamstress who fled Sri Lanka after years of repeated rape at the hands of a politically powerful man. The couple did not know each other in their homeland. They met in Hong Kong and now have two children together. Their five-year-old daughter and infant son – plus Rodel’s daughter – are stateless because all three children were born in Hong Kong while their parents’ case for asylum is pending.

It could take several years for the Hong Kong government to take a call on their asylum applications. A successful outcome is unlikely, though. Out of the nearly 9,000 refugee claims made since 2009, Hong Kong has approved just 52. That’s an acceptance rate of less than one per cent.

While Hong Kong is not a signatory to the United Nations’ Refugee Convention, it is still bound by A Court of Final Appeal ruling – it must screen asylum seekers to determine if they risk persecution. If they are at risk, they are referred to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees for resettlement to a third country.

Supun Kellapatha and Nadeeka Nonis are both refugees who fled persecution and torture in Sri Lanka. Credit: Snowden's Guardians/Facebook.com
Supun Kellapatha and Nadeeka Nonis are both refugees who fled persecution and torture in Sri Lanka. Credit: Snowden's Guardians/Facebook.com

According to Tibbo, the refugees who sheltered Snowden are running out of time. Since their names were made public, life hasn’t been the same for any of them. He says they are being targeted by both Sri Lankan officials and the Hong Kong government because of their role in Snowden’s great escape. Sri Lankan officials, he claims, have even harassed the relatives of the asylum-seeking families at home, demanding to know their whereabouts in Hong Kong.

“It’s a matter of life and death,” said Tibbo. He claims he has evidence that Sri Lankan police officials came to Hong Kong to try and track down the refugees – an allegation Sri Lanka denies. If the refugees are forced to return home, they say they fear they will face a violent future.

Here in Hong Kong, they keep a low profile. “We don’t go anywhere, we don’t talk to anyone,” Kellapatha said. “I tell my daughter, you have no friends, we have no friends.”

Neither their daughter, nor Rodel’s little girl, has gone to school since November because the refugees say the International Social Services, the government agency responsible for the welfare of asylum seekers, has withdrawn financial assistance, leaving the refugees with barely enough money for tuition fees or for basic food, clothes and transport in one of the most expensive cities in the world.

They cannot fend for themselves because Hong Kong does not allow asylum seekers to work, study, volunteer or even beg while they wait for the government to determine their status – a process that could take over a decade.

“We have to take our children everywhere we go,” Nonis said. “It’s like having a pet. They just sit, eat and sleep. What kind of childhood is this?” She looks at her five-year-old who has fallen asleep curled up on an office chair in Tibbo’s office.

Play

All three families currently live in “safe houses” organised by their lawyers. They are desperate to get out.

Tibbo is collaborating with three Canadian lawyers who formed a non-profit organisation called For the Refugees to support these families. On March 10, they announced they have officially petitioned Canada to accept these asylum seekers.

On the same day, the families got a big show of support from their grateful houseguest. Snowden tweeted: “The families that sheltered me have formally filed for asylum in Canada. Let us pray Canada protects them in kind.”

Meanwhile, they are living off funds – approximately $100,000 collected by various crowd-funding efforts online.

None of “Snowden’s angels”, as they have come to be known, say they regret risking their lives to shelter him.

“When he left, he hugged us,” said Nonis. “We wanted him to stay forever.”

“I don’t have regrets for helping him,” Kellapatha said. “He told me whatever he did, he did it for the right thing.”

Support our journalism by subscribing to Scroll+ here. We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in.
Sponsored Content BY 

Do you really need to use that plastic straw?

The hazards of single-use plastic items, and what to use instead.

In June 2018, a distressed whale in Thailand made headlines around the world. After an autopsy it’s cause of death was determined to be more than 80 plastic bags it had ingested. The pictures caused great concern and brought into focus the urgency of the fight against single-use plastic. This term refers to use-and-throw plastic products that are designed for one-time use, such as takeaway spoons and forks, polythene bags styrofoam cups etc. In its report on single-use plastics, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has described how single-use plastics have a far-reaching impact in the environment.

Dense quantity of plastic litter means sights such as the distressed whale in Thailand aren’t uncommon. Plastic products have been found in the airways and stomachs of hundreds of marine and land species. Plastic bags, especially, confuse turtles who mistake them for jellyfish - their food. They can even exacerbate health crises, such as a malarial outbreak, by clogging sewers and creating ideal conditions for vector-borne diseases to thrive. In 1988, poor drainage made worse by plastic clogging contributed to the devastating Bangladesh floods in which two-thirds of the country was submerged.

Plastic litter can, moreover, cause physiological harm. Burning plastic waste for cooking fuel and in open air pits releases harmful gases in the air, contributing to poor air quality especially in poorer countries where these practices are common. But plastic needn’t even be burned to cause physiological harm. The toxic chemical additives in the manufacturing process of plastics remain in animal tissue, which is then consumed by humans. These highly toxic and carcinogenic substances (benzene, styrene etc.) can cause damage to nervous systems, lungs and reproductive organs.

The European Commission recently released a list of top 10 single-use plastic items that it plans to ban in the near future. These items are ubiquitous as trash across the world’s beaches, even the pristine, seemingly untouched ones. Some of them, such as styrofoam cups, take up to a 1,000 years to photodegrade (the breakdown of substances by exposure to UV and infrared rays from sunlight), disintegrating into microplastics, another health hazard.

More than 60 countries have introduced levies and bans to discourage the use of single-use plastics. Morocco and Rwanda have emerged as inspiring success stories of such policies. Rwanda, in fact, is now among the cleanest countries on Earth. In India, Maharashtra became the 18th state to effect a ban on disposable plastic items in March 2018. Now India plans to replicate the decision on a national level, aiming to eliminate single-use plastics entirely by 2022. While government efforts are important to encourage industries to redesign their production methods, individuals too can take steps to minimise their consumption, and littering, of single-use plastics. Most of these actions are low on effort, but can cause a significant reduction in plastic waste in the environment, if the return of Olive Ridley turtles to a Mumbai beach are anything to go by.

To know more about the single-use plastics problem, visit Planet or Plastic portal, National Geographic’s multi-year effort to raise awareness about the global plastic trash crisis. From microplastics in cosmetics to haunting art on plastic pollution, Planet or Plastic is a comprehensive resource on the problem. You can take the pledge to reduce your use of single-use plastics, here.

This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of National Geographic, and not by the Scroll editorial team.