Col R Hariharan
| 31-3-2019 | Courtesy: South Asia Security Trends, April 2019 | www.security-risks.com |
Sri Lanka buys more
time at UNHRC
The decision of President Maithripala Sirisena and Prime
Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe to bury their political hatchet, at least
temporarily, appears to have helped Sri Lanka to gain two more years to fulfil its commitment made at UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) to
promote accountability and human rights in 2015. The 40thsession of the human rights body
unanimously adopted a new resolution 40/L.1 granting Sri Lanka two more years,
for a second time.
Sri Lanka co-sponsored the new resolution, just as it did in
2015, as a tactical ploy to avoid a divisive vote in the UN forum and to gain a
breather till 2021. However, the resolution is a strong reminder that the
international community is not satisfied with the progress made by Sri Lanka to
bring transitional justice to the victims of internal conflict, even ten years
after the end of the Eelam.
The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet’s
report placed at the 40th session, appreciated Sri Lanka’s
commitment to implement Human Rights Council resolution 30/1. But it also said
Sri Lanka needed to be more consistent, comprehensive and accelerated.
The High Commissioner noted that there had been minimal progress on
accountability and said the continuing impunity risks fuelling communal or ethnic
violence and instability. She pointed to the continuing allegations of torture
and other human rights violations by security forces, including sexual violence
were troublesome. Ms Bechelet called for effective, transparent and independent
investigations by the government as well as measures to prevent and end such
practices.
Signifiantly, she also touched upon the political schism within
the government hampering the implementation of the Resolution. She said the
lack of a common vision among the country’s highest leadership and deadlock on
these important issues “has a damaging impact” on victims from all ethnic and
religious groups and on
society.
She was so true, if we consider the differences between
the President and the PM on the government strategy at the UNHRC session aired
in public space before the session. Playing the Sinhala nationalist card, President
Sirisena had said he was considering of withdrawing Sri Lanka from its commitment
to the Resolution, an action former president Mahinda Rajapaksa had wanted.
President Sirisena even came up with strange idea of sending a separate
delegation to the UNHRC Session, in addition to the official one!
Apparently the President changed his mind after unconfirmed
reports indicated the Rajapaksas had decided on fielding former defence
secretary Gotabaya Rajapakse as the presidential candidate. On top of it, the
Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP), unofficially led by Mahinda Rajapaksa, made
it clear that it would not ally with the President’s Sri Lanka Freedom Party
(SLFP) in the presidential election. It would contest the election on its own
with SLPP nominee. So it made sense for President Sirisena to mend fences
with PM Wickremesinghe at least for the time being, to work out his strategy to
contest next presidential election. But since then, the President seems to be
having second thoughts.
However, the wording of the unanimously adopted resolution
showed that Sri Lanka continues to enjoy international credibility despite the
tardy progress it had made so far. In order to retain it, by 2021 Sri Lanka has
to complete three requirements which are potential landmines at home. These
are: establishing an internationally credible judicial mechanism with a special
counsel to investigate allegations of violations and abuses of human rights,
instituting credible judicial process to include independent judicial
institutions and lastly, evolve a viable reconciliation process.
Foreign Minister Tilak Marapana explained Sri Lanka’s reservations
in his speech after the passing of the Resolution 40/L1 on the key issues
indicating Sri Lanka was in no hurry to “bring the issue to a closure.” He said Sri Lanka should be encouraged and
assisted in finding innovative and viable local mechanisms and processes which
incorporates international best practices, ….only then, it will be able to
bring closure to these events, which would “enjoy the confidence of victims and
society at large.” In other words, Sri Lanka cannot adhere to a time bound
implementation process.
However, since then the President has distanced himself from the
government’s co-sponsorship of a resolution at the UNHRC. In a
speech on March 27, he said Sri Lanka’s consent to the resolution was without
his knowledge or that of the foreign minister. He said the action resulted from
“wrong decisions by sections of the government.” The president was responsible
for the foreign affairs of the country, not anyone else, he added.
In the continuing confused political scene, Sri Lanka rulers’
priorities appear to be far from international expectations on accountability
and human right issues.
Col R Hariharan, a retired MI officer, served as the head
of Intelligence of the Indian Peace Keeping Force in Sri Lanka from 1987 to 90.
He is associated with the Chennai Centre for China Studies, South Asia Analysis
Group and the International Law and Strategic Analysis Institute, Chennai.
E-mail: haridirect@gmail.com Blog: http://col.hariharan.
No comments:
Post a Comment