Showdown in Geneva Part 2
Diplomatic sources said yesterday that the resolution would be co-sponsored by a number of countries, each from a geographical region. A draft now circulated by the United States mission in Geneva is going through a number of modifications. This is how the draft text stood by last evening: "Sri Lanka HRC19 Resolution Draft Elements
"Guided by the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Human Rights, and other relevant instruments,
"Reaffirming that States must ensure that any measure taken to combat terrorism complies with their obligations under international law, in particular international human rights, refugee and humanitarian law, as applicable,
"Noting the Report of Sri Lanka's Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) and its findings and recommendations, and acknowledging its possible contribution to Sri Lanka's national reconciliation process.
"Welcoming the constructive recommendations contained in the LLRC report, including the need to credibly investigate widespread allegations of extra judicial killings and enforced disappearances, de-militarize the north of Sri Lanka, implement impartial land dispute resolution mechanisms, re-evaluate detention policies, strengthen formerly independent civil institutions, reach a political settlement involving devolution of power to the provinces, promote and protect the right of freedom of expression for all, and enact rule of law reforms.
"Expressing concern that the LLRC report does not adequately address serious allegations of violations of international law, and expressing serious disappointment that the Government of Sri Lanka has not fulfilled its relevant legal obligations and stated commitment to initiate credible and independent investigations and prosecutions of those responsible for such violations,
"1, Calls on the government of Sri Lanka to implement the constructive recommendations in the LLRC report and additionally to take immediate steps to fulfil its relevant legal obligations and stated commitment to address serious allegations of violations of international law by initiating credible and independent investigations and prosecutions of those responsible for such violations,
"2. Requests that the Government of Sri Lanka present a comprehensive action plan before the 20th session of the Human Rights Council detailing the steps the Government has taken and will take to implement the LLRC recommendations and also to address alleged violations of international law,
"3. Encourages the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and relevant special mandate holders to provide, and the Government of Sri Lanka to accept, advice and technical assistance on implementing those steps."
Sri Lanka figured prominently at Thursday's news briefing at the
Department of State in Washington DC.
Excerpts:
QUESTION: On Sri Lanka, the Government has called for protests over what it says is the U.S. position on the UN Human Rights Council. That's with regard to the events of 2009, the end of the civil war. Does the U.S. have anything to say either about Sri Lanka's call for protests over this, or more broadly, about the U.S. position on the UN Human Rights Council?
MR. TONER: We think we've been very consistent in our dialogue with the Government of Sri Lanka regarding the issue of reconciliation and accountability. We long publicly supported the idea of the Government of Sri Lanka having the time and space for this domestic Lessons Learned and Reconciliation Commission to carry out its work, and believed that an action plan would be announced when that report was made public. And then subsequent to the report's publication, we wanted the Government of Sri Lanka to follow up on some of the recommendations from the report.
Again, we welcome the Lessons Learned and Reconciliation Commission's report. It was a Sri Lankan undertaking, which includes many strong recommendations that, when implemented, could help improve and contribute to genuine reconciliation and strengthening of democratic institutions and practices in Sri Lanka. But to date, frankly, we've not seen a detailed action plan from the Government of Sri Lanka on how it's going to implement these recommendations. So I think we still encourage the Government of Sri Lanka to move forward to take concrete steps on this implementation plan. And at the same time, we're working with our partners in Geneva on a resolution within the UNHRC that calls for actions on important steps towards reconciliation. But I think our goal ultimately is the same here: We want to see these recommendations implemented and so that they can help lead towards reconciliation.
QUESTION: Just following up, on the Human Rights Council, in previous years, it's fallen short regarding Sri Lanka. Is there - how concerted is the effort by the United States? Is there a desire to really pass something in the Human Rights Council on -
TONER: Well, we wouldn't be pursuing it if there wasn't a desire. We're also - obviously continue to be engaged with the Sri Lankan Government. But we've long said that we would support local efforts and want to see local efforts to address these issues, but we would also engage international mechanisms if appropriate.
In addition, Amb Donahoe's statement on UNHRC session does include this language: Another priority for the U.S. this session is to support a process of real reconciliation inSri Lanka. Many thousands of Sri Lankan civilians died or suffered other violations in the final weeks of the long-running civil war in 2009. To date there has been no complete accounting of those deaths or other violations and no pursuit of accountability for them.
We believe that real reconciliation must be based on accountability, not impunity, and that the people of Sri Lanka must have confidence that their government will in fact implement the needed reforms and recommendations as promised. To this end, the United States is supporting a resolution that provides an opportunity for the government of Sri Lanka to describe what it intends to do to implement the LLRC's recommendations and to take further steps toward accountability.
We have encouraged the government of Sri Lanka to engage with the Human Rights Council to make progress in these areas and we continue to work with the Sri Lankan leadership on a bilateral basis to move forward with the necessary reforms that can serve as a secure basis for lasting peace.
Although the government decided that the LLRC report would not be tabled at the sessions starting tomorrow, the US-backed resolution is based entirely on it. This is on the basis that copies of the report were handed over by the Ministry of External Affairs to countries with which Sri Lanka has diplomatic representation. Moreover, Sri Lanka delegation leader, Minister Mahinda Samarasinghe told the 18th UNHRC sessions in Geneva in September last year that, ".......Currently, the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) is inquiring into the conflict and its causes and is evolving recommendations to ensure that such a situation never arises again in Sri Lanka. It is critical to wait for that body to finish its deliberations and come up with its conclusions in due time. Rushing these processes unduly may compromise the effectiveness of the implementation of the eventual recommendations. The persons engaged in the Commission are highly regarded professionals. They should be given time and space to come up with their findings and recommendations. We have briefed our friends in Geneva and elsewhere of the interim recommendation made by the LLRC and the measures taken by the Inter-Agency Committee to implement them without delay........
"......I look forward to the LLRC coming forward with creative, forward thinking and workable recommendations that we can implement with a view to buttressing our common values and ideals and celebrating our rich socio-ethnic makeup......
Either wittingly or unwittingly, as Minister Samarasinghe points out, foreign governments have been briefed on the interim recommendations of the LLRC. Naturally, the question therefore is why not the recommendations in the final report? Was this not a poor reflection of the conduct of Sri Lanka's foreign policy? Here is an instance where a public pronouncement has been made at the UNHRC last year that the LLRC "is inquiring into the conflict and its causes." There is also an acknowledgement that "we have briefed our friends in Geneva and elsewhere of the interim recommendation made by the LLRC…" And suddenly, the government decides that "our friends" should not know of the findings in the final report when they meet in Geneva.
Besides calling upon the Sri Lanka Government to implement some of the salient recommendations in the LLRC report, the resolution says, "additionally to take measures to fulfil its relevant legal obligations and stated commitment to address serious allegations of violations of international law by initiating credible and independent investigations and prosecutions of those responsible for such violations…." Whilst asking the government to present a "road map" for implementation of the LLRC report, the resolution places a time bar for it. It wants "a comprehensive action plan" before the 20th UNHRC sessions in Geneva in September this year. What happens if such an action plan is not presented?
Diplomatic sources point out that such a move would pave the way for a harsher resolution for action against Sri Lanka. This is besides unilateral action by some western countries. Another significant element is the last paragraph in the resolution which calls upon the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and "relevant special mandate holders to provide, and the Government of Sri Lanka to accept, advice and technical assistance on implementing those steps." Such a move, the Sunday Times learnt would allow UN special rapporteurs dealing with torture or war crimes, among others, to visit Sri Lanka to offer advice and technical assistance.
Whilst most of the fallout from the resolution being adopted would be clear, there are also areas which cannot be discerned immediately. If it is passed, it becomes incumbent on the government to pay heed to what would constitute a UNHRC resolution. If it chooses to ignore, besides inviting retaliatory moves collectively from the Council, the government also runs the risk of unilateral action by individual countries. It is in this backdrop that the government is taking up the official position that it is implementing the recommendations of the LLRC, though a road map is not necessary. Among the action taken, the Sri Lanka delegation to Geneva has been mandated to tell the Council, that domestic inquiries by the three different armed forces into complaints of possible attacks on civilians were under way.
Attorney General Eva Wanasundera is to brief them on cases her department plans to institute on the basis of representations made by those who appeared before the LLRC. S.B. Divaratne, Secretary to the Presidential Task Force for Resettlement, Development and Security, is also on hand to advise the Sri Lanka delegation on various measures adopted after the military defeat of Tiger guerrillas in May 2009.
However, in marked contrast to these measures, the protest rallies being planned by the government against the United States and its allies backing the resolution bring a new dimension. The mood was reflected by Fisheries Minister Rajitha Senaratne, who is in the forefront with some of his ministerial colleagues arranging these protests. Main among them is Minister Weerawansa who is both anti-UN and anti-West. Senaratne told the Sunday Times "The government has decided to have demonstrations in 150 towns in the country on Monday.
The main idea is to show solidarity with President Rajapaksa and to protest against other countries interfering in the internal matters of our country. We have invited all trade unions to take part in the demonstrations. In addition, in seven of the provinces (except north and east) there will be seven main meetings attended by the Ministers where speeches will be made to extend support to the government and condemn external interferences. We want to show the international community the backing the government and the President has from the people of this country. All levels of politicians including local council members will be involved in the demonstrations".
There is little doubt that the UPFA government is in an unassailable position with a two thirds majority in Parliament. Its strength is further bolstered by a weak opposition. Whether there is a demonstration or not, its firm grip on power remains, notwithstanding some public discontent over the fuel price hike that has led to a cascading increase in prices of a number of products and services. However, the demonstrations which will rouse considerable public sentiment against the US and its allies could trigger off reactions. This is particularly if a hate campaign against the west intensifies. Whether that would harm or help Sri Lanka remains the critical question. The answers of course would come only in the weeks and months after such events
Special thanks to The Times India
http://www.sundaytimes.lk/120226/Columns/political.html
Page 1
Page 2
| 
|
All comments and messages are approved by people and self promotional links or unacceptable comments are denied.
robinhood February 27, 2012 9:06 am (Pacific time)
Dear shiva. Seems like you are very kind hearted for LTTE. The best tamil leaders were merderded by LTTE. I can give list. You are talking of 40000 tamil people were killed in the final battle. Did you watched the final clips. If army are killing tamils why they are ran away. This is the first time i saw people whom they call themselves freedom fighters kill own tamil people. from LTTE. . Seems like nobody sees any human rights abuses done by LTTE from 1983 for 30 years?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_attacks_attributed_to_the_LTTE
Editor: That is hard to follow, for our readers, the Tamil people were killed by the Sinhalese Buddhist government. There are Tamil people who committed crimes and there are endless Sinhala people who did not, but the war was between the govt and the LTTE, you make it sound like a suicide-fest, it was hardly that, it was Genocide.
Shiva February 27, 2012 1:38 am (Pacific time)
The genocide of Tamils that culminated in the mass murder of over 40000 civilians in May 2009 was well planned ahead by Mahinda Rajapakse (MR) as early as the latter part of 2008. The American ambassador Robert Blake (at the time President Obama was newly elected to office), Japan the European Union, Norway and India would have been quite aware of it as they had provided military help and advice regarding the on coming military onslaught on the LTTE. Having well equipped themselves with heavy and weapons of mass destruction the Sinhalese were waiting for a lame excuse to tear away the five year old Peace Agreement between the LTTE and the government against all international protocol and start a war. It is important to note that peace agreement was brokered by Norway and the other aid giving nations, EU, Japan, USA in 2002. Mavilaru water Tank dispute in the East was the trigger. Mahinda Rajapakse sent about 40000 of its armed forces against the de-facto/de-jure government of the LTTE that had reigned in Vanni for nearly two decades. The whole world knew about it. The war started was a communal war from the start as the victims of the war were 100 % ethnic Tamils. It was the brain child of a chauvinistic regime-a military solution for a political problem that was at equilibrium by military balance of both parties. The battle ground chosen was the Traditional Homeland (TH) of the Tamils of North and East. Hence the fight was in reality not against the LTTE as the government had been telling the world. The fact was that there were only 8000 tiger cadres and such a small number would have been easily apprehended through military tactics by the army without a war that destroyed the basic human rights of an entire Tamil population. They demolished an entire civilization of the Vanni Tamils. The war was therefore indirectly directed to scorch the earth and the Tamil inhabitants, which supported the LTTE government, even at the cost of a genocide crime. As shown by the blue arrows in the diagram of Vanni in Northern Sri-Lanka below the army surrounded LTTE de-jure government strong hold of Vanni with 40000 soldiers and gave no chance for the 400000 Tamil civilians inhabitants (mono-ethnic) to escape from the oncoming war. There were shelling, cannon firing, aerial bombarding etc in all three directions in order to drive the citizens and the LTTE towards Mullivaikal in Nandhikadal lagoon in the Eastern coast. They were herded from one ‘No Fire Zone (NFZ) to another until they reached the third one in Mullivaikal where the ultimate genocide of 40000 civilians in a sense were executed. These no fire zones were unilaterally declared by the Sinhala government to entice the civilian to enter the zone with the hope of safety which in fact turned out to be an all fire zone as history recorded it. Article 1 of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG), adopted by Resolution 260 (III) A of the United Nations General Assembly on 9 December 1948 states that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law and that the UN member states who are signatories will protect those subjected to genocide and punish the perpetrators. Logically Sri-Lanka should be prosecuted for genocide. This is how Human Rights Watch a non governmental organisation charity recorded the treachery of the Sri-Lankan Sinhala government in January 2009 . “Many of the civilian deaths reported in the past month have occurred in an area that the Sri Lankan government has declared to be a “safe zone.” On January 21, the Sri Lankan armed forces unilaterally declared a 35-square-kilometer “safe zone” for civilians north of the A35 road between Udayarkattu junction and the Manjal Palam (Yellow Bridge) in Mullativu district. The Sri Lankan Air Force dropped leaflets appealing to civilians to move into the safe zone as soon as possible. During the next days, several thousand people gathered in a large playground located just north of the A35 in the safe zone. The playground also functioned as a food distribution center for the local government agent (GA) and international organizations. Several people located in or around the GA food distribution center told Human Rights Watch that, despite the army declaration of a safe zone in the area, the area was subjected to heavy shelling from SLA positions in the period January 22-29, which killed and injured hundreds of people”.
Bob Townley February 27, 2012 1:34 am (Pacific time)
This is just the funniest thing ..:) SriLanka terror government organizes protest marches to evade independent inquiry into war crimes.
Nathan February 27, 2012 1:22 am (Pacific time)
The Rajapakse regime’s propagandists who are in fact self-serving political opportunists such as some commentators here co epitomize the cynical use of the post-colonial critical discourse of “victim hood” during colonial times to justify post-colonial majoritarian racism against minorities – Christians and Tamils in Lanka – while sounding politically correct. They are skilfully playing the “victim” abroad while Rajapaksa Government brutalizing minorities, the opposition and free press, at “home” in Sri Lanka! After all it is the Rajapakse regime’s sovereign right to suppress opposition, killed minorities and and do ethnic cleansing in the Tamils Homelands !!!! Rajapaksa pretends that he and Lanka are still oppressed by Europe and US (60 years after independence and 30 years of bloody civil war organized by “native” politicians and their henchman in Lanka), in order to defend and justify a racist, corrupt, intellectually and morally bankrupt regime that continues oppressing the people it claims to have liberated. Post-colonial Lanka is a story of how the narrative of post-colonial victimhood becomes a legitimacy strategy to occupy and kill the opposition and an excuse to militarize a country.
Sinhalese Man February 26, 2012 8:59 pm (Pacific time)
You can count me out of the "Island-wide Protests". What more do they prove than that only we Sinhalese matter. Not many in the world will read this lengthy (by today's standards, where few uncommitted men in the street are prepared to read more than 300 words)article. We tend to get lost in all the details here. But the Elders have come out with a statement by Bishop Tutu and Mary Robinson. Please, "our Leaders" - think of us, the common people; you are to be congratulated on defeating the Tigers, and for the constructive LLRC Report. But it is true that there is a lack of accountability. Rousing mass hysteria is not going to solve problems. The need for morality, ethics,accountability, and simple decency has to be recognised by us Sinhalese.
[Return to Top]©2025 Salem-News.com. All opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Salem-News.com.