Sri Lanka once again finds itself under the scrutiny of the international community as the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNOHCHR) unveiled its latest report on the country’s HR record. Released last month (8 August), the advance, unedited document A/HRC/60/21 was prepared in accordance with the HR Council (HRC) Resolution 57/1 and examines developments since October of last year. The report arrives at a critical moment for the island nation, following pledges of reform by a newly-elected leadership that has promised to chart a path away from the repressive tendencies of the past.
The OHCHR acknowledges that Sri Lanka’s leadership has signaled a break from entrenched patterns, raising expectations among citizens, survivors, and the international community alike. Yet, the report is cautious, stressing that these gestures of change remain at the level of promises rather than a coherent plan of action. Progress is fragile, the report warns, and without a firm roadmap, the nation risks drifting once more into the familiar cycle of impunity and disappointment. More than just a technical review, the report is a stark reminder that Sri Lanka’s political transition will be judged not by rhetoric but by the ability to deliver justice, accountability, and reconciliation.
Reformist promises and the fragile path ahead
The OHCHR begins its assessment by crediting the Sri Lankan Government with a willingness to acknowledge the failures of the past. It highlights speeches by the country’s new leadership that promise a clean break from decades of authoritarian excesses, corruption, and neglect of HR. Such pronouncements have ignited cautious optimism among observers who see the possibility of a fresh start. However, the UN cautions against mistaking words for substance. The report makes clear that commitments alone cannot rebuild public trust or address the legacy of past abuses. Without a concrete action plan to operationalise reforms, Sri Lanka risks repeating a familiar pattern: lofty promises followed by weak or selective implementation. The concern is that reformist rhetoric, while politically expedient, may ultimately be reduced to symbolic gestures that do little to confront structural impunity.
The tension between opportunity and risk frames the narrative of the report. For the UN, this moment represents both a historic opening and a potential dead end. Sri Lanka’s leadership stands at the edge of either meaningful change or another cycle of broken promises. The burden of proof now lies firmly with the Government, which must translate rhetoric into institutional and legislative reforms.
Accountability as the core imperative
At the heart of the UN’s findings is the issue of accountability. The report stresses that without justice for past violations, including allegations of war crimes, enforced disappearances, and systemic repression, reconciliation cannot be achieved. For decades, victims have been denied justice, and institutions tasked with investigating abuses have too often been hamstrung by political interference or outright neglect. The OHCHR urges the Government to empower domestic courts to take up cases of international crimes. Such prosecutions would not only deliver justice but also restore confidence in the rule of law. Yet, the report recognises that Sri Lanka’s Judiciary has historically struggled with independence and impartiality. To address this gap, it calls on the international community to consider mechanisms such as universal jurisdiction, where foreign courts may prosecute grave crimes committed elsewhere when national systems fail.
Equally striking is the report’s suggestion of targeted sanctions, asset freezes and travel bans against individuals credibly accused of severe HR abuses. These measures, the UN argues, would apply real pressure on perpetrators while signaling international resolve. The report’s underlying message is clear: accountability is non-negotiable. Justice for victims must remain at the centre of Sri Lanka’s transition, and without it, reconciliation will remain an illusion.
Institutional weakness and the need for reform
The report also highlights the systemic flaws within Sri Lanka’s political and legal institutions. The OHCHR identifies weak judicial independence, the over-concentration of power in the Executive, and the continued reliance on draconian laws such as the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act as amended (PTA) as obstacles to reform. Far from ensuring national security, such measures perpetuate repression and fuel distrust among marginalised communities. Institutional recalibration, according to the UN, is essential. Transforming the Judiciary into an independent body capable of delivering justice, reforming the security sector to prevent abuses, and amending constitutional provisions that enable unchecked power are all necessary steps. These reforms, the report stresses, are not merely technical but foundational to long-term stability. Without them, Sri Lanka risks remaining a State where impunity is the norm and citizens lack faith in governance.
The call for reform also extends to transparency and oversight. Independent commissions must be empowered to investigate corruption and abuse without political interference. Accountability mechanisms must be strengthened, not hollowed out. Unless institutions are reshaped to serve the people rather than political elites, no amount of international support or pressure will succeed in altering Sri Lanka’s trajectory.
Int’l and domestic responses
The OHCHR pledges to remain engaged, with commitments to monitor, document, and publicly report on Sri Lanka’s progress. This reflects a recognition that international pressure has historically been one of the few tools that has compelled the Sri Lankan authorities to engage with accountability frameworks. By keeping Sri Lanka on the HRC’s agenda, the UN hopes to ensure that momentum for reform does not dissipate. However, domestic responses to the report reveal a divided society. Civil society organisations have welcomed the UN’s findings, arguing that it validates their long-standing demands for justice and transparency. Certain media outlets have emphasised UN High Commissioner for HR Volker Türk’s description of this period as a “historic opportunity” to right past wrongs. Survivors of conflict-related abuses too have seen the report as a rare moment when their grievances receive international recognition.
Yet, opposition to the UN’s involvement remains strong. Nationalist factions and critics within Sri Lanka argue that international scrutiny undermines sovereignty. They accuse the UN of applying double standards, focusing on past abuses while failing to recognise present challenges. The Government itself has sent mixed signals, on the one hand promising reform, and on the other, continuing practices such as detentions under the PTA. These contradictions underscore the report’s central warning: without coherence and sincerity, Sri Lanka risks undermining its own reformist image.
The burden of history and the road ahead
The UN situates Sri Lanka’s current challenges within its troubled history. Repeated efforts at reconciliation from the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission to the Office on Missing Persons have either faltered or failed altogether. Resolution 30/1, once hailed as a breakthrough, was never meaningfully implemented. These failures have left deep scars on communities, fostering mistrust in both the State and the international community. Against this backdrop, the latest pledges of reform are met with skepticism, with many fearing that history will repeat itself. The OHCHR warns of two immediate risks: stagnation and backsliding. Stagnation would see reforms remain on paper, leaving impunity intact while providing the illusion of progress. Backsliding would occur if entrenched interests, emboldened by weak oversight, actively dismantle even the modest gains achieved. Both risks, the UN stresses, must be resisted through vigilance from the civil society, accountability from the Legislature, and pressure and support from the international community.
Ultimately, the report is not just an indictment but a roadmap. It challenges Sri Lanka to seize a rare moment of global attention and domestic transition. The opportunity to establish a society grounded in justice, equality, and reconciliation is within reach, but it demands political courage and vision. Without decisive action, Sri Lanka risks sinking further into the cycle of impunity and repression that has defined much of its post-Independence history. The burden of history is heavy, but the choice now lies with Sri Lanka’s leaders and people: to confront the past and build a just future, or to let yet another opportunity slip away.
(The writer is a Senior Lecturer in Law at the Colombo University)
……………………………………………………………………….
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect those of this publication