18 September 2021 01:58 am Views - 831
However, the pace of the UN system in this regard has not been swift as they expect. 12 years after the end of the war, and six years after the report of an investigation conducted by the UNHRC claimed that serious human rights violations have been committed by the armed forces and the LTTE during the war, it was only last March the UNHRC decided through a resolution to collect information and evidence about human rights allegedly violated in the country.
“My Office’s work to implement the accountability-related aspects of Resolution 46/1 has begun, pending recruitment of a start-up team. We have developed an information and evidence repository with nearly 120,000 individual items already held by the UN, and we will initiate as much information-gathering as possible this year,” she said.
The Tamil Diaspora might use this opportunity to prosecute various people in various countries. It is not clear whether the Sri Lankan authorities have any plan to contribute to the information gathering against the LTTE leaders in other countries and initiate legal proceedings against them
She urged Member States to ensure the budget process provides the necessary support so that her Office can fully implement this work and requested the Council members to “continue paying close attention to developments in Sri Lanka, and to seek credible progress in advancing reconciliation, accountability and human rights.”
Hence, there is still a long way to go for something drastic to happen, if any. However, the resolutions passed and reports issued in the successive years during the past 12 years have been pestering the Sri Lankan leaders in power, through allegations which are being accumulated every six months.
Tamil political parties wanted the alleged human rights violations in Sri Lanka be referred to the International Criminal Court (ICC) through the UN Security Council. However, Sri Lanka’s friendly countries that have veto power in the Security Council might scuttle those efforts
Besides, the European Union (EU) too has teamed up with the UN human rights body with a resolution having been adopted in its Parliament on June 10, this year, based on the same Resolution 46/1 of the UNHRC. Despite the UNHRC process seemingly not being a threat to the country or to its political and military leaders in the near future, the European resolution is something like the Sword of Damocles hanging over the head. It threatens to further drain the foreign reserves which already have severely hit by the COVID-19 related issues, by removing the GSP+ concessions to Sri Lanka.
Bachelet during her oral update on Monday listed the actions taken by the government after the last session of the UNHRC which might violate human rights of the people. “In March, new ‘de-radicalisation’ regulations were issued that permit arbitrary administrative detention of individuals for up to two years without trial. I note that the Supreme Court has issued an interim stay order on their enforcement while it considers fundamental rights petitions to challenge the decree” she said. She included in her list the Emergency Regulations issued on August 30 which she said are very broad and may further expand the role of the military in civilian functions, Attorney General’s decision not to proceed with charges against former Navy Commander Wasantha Karannagoda in the case of the enforced disappearances of 11 men in 2008 and 2009, recent deaths in police custody and President’s recent pardon of former MP, Duminda Silva, who was convicted for killing Bharatha Lakshman Premachandra in 2011, which she claimed risks eroding confidence in the rule of law and judicial process.
The European resolution is something like the Sword of Damocles hanging over the head. It threatens to further drain the foreign reserves which already have severely hit by the COVID-19 related issues, by removing the GSP+ concessions to Sri Lanka
Finally, she states “Against this backdrop, my Office’s work to implement the accountability -related aspects of Resolution 46/1 has begun.” The resolution provides for the establishment of a central database at the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) where information and evidence of human rights abuses in Sri Lanka can be stored and analyzed. This international mechanism will serve to support future trials of Sri Lankans accused of rights abuses in foreign countries and support victims of atrocities in their quest for justice.
The budgetary estimate provided to the Council by the OHCHR indicated that setting up the database would cost US$ 2.8 million over an 18-month period. Bachelet on Monday urged Member States to ensure the budget process provides the necessary support so that her Office can fully implement this work. In March, the OHCHR had estimated it will require 12 personnel to staff the mechanism, including three legal advisors, two analysts, two investigators/human rights officers, an information officer and an evidence officer, two juries-linguists, one victim support officer and one programme assistant. The budget estimate also makes provision for a high-level human rights officer for enhanced monitoring to the human rights situation in Sri Lanka.
However, according to analysts, the real test of the effectiveness of the resolution will rely largely on the commitment of UN member states to pursue justice against alleged Sri Lankan perpetrators. Amnesty International also said following the passage of the resolution “While the resolution was an important first step, the real impact will rely on UN member states using it as a basis for concrete action. Yet, the Tamil Diaspora might use this opportunity to prosecute various people in various countries. It is not clear whether the Sri Lankan authorities have any plan to contribute to the information gathering against the LTTE leaders in other countries and initiate legal proceedings against them.
Tamil political parties wanted the alleged human rights violations in Sri Lanka be referred to the International Criminal Court (ICC) through the UN Security Council. However, Sri Lanka’s friendly countries that have veto power in the Security Council might scuttle those efforts.
Unlike the UNHRC process, the EU’s reaction to the Sri Lankan human rights situation seems to be swift, as we witnessed in 2010 when the GSP+ concessions were withdrawn in response to Sri Lanka’s failure to meet the conditions laid down by the EU. A delegation from EU is scheduled to visit the country on September 27 to discuss the GSP+ issue this time, but the gap between the two parties’ stands on human rights issues is too wide.