The 53rd session of the United Nations Human Rights Council (UN HRC) started on 19 June and will continue until 14 July, 2023. It is meeting under the Presidency of the UN representative of the Czech Republic, Vaclav Balek.
In brief, the HRC’s main concern is accountability issues in the Member States. In other words, human rights violations, war crimes, and the beginnings of ethnic cleansing are scrutinised through this Council.
On this basis, eight resolutions have been passed by the HRC on Sri Lanka.
The agenda of the 53rd session states two important issues to be discussed on Sri Lanka. One is the report of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (HCHR) with regard to the HRC Resolution 51/1 on Sri Lanka. The other one is about the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) which will be discussed on 6 July.
The HCHR and the duplicity of SL
The HCHR, Volker Turk addressed the Council on 19 June and spoke about the situation in Sri Lanka. He said: “In Sri Lanka, although the Government has regrettably rejected aspects of the Council's resolutions related to accountability, it has continued to engage with our presence on the ground. Sri Lanka has received a dozen visits by mandate holders in the past decade, and I encourage the authorities to implement their recommendations.”
Following the HCHR’s speech, the Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka to the UN office in Geneva, Switzerland, Himalee Arunatilaka expressed her views. In brief: “We have repeatedly mentioned in the Council the reasons for our categorical rejection of the Resolutions 46/1 and 51/1, that set up the external evidence gathering mechanism”.
Sri Lanka’s double standards must be noted, especially since a President who sponsored past resolutions categorically rejects all subsequent resolutions based on them.
At least now, the international community and also India realises how smartly Sri Lanka moves in the international arenas.
Core Group on SL
At the same time, the Core Group on Sri Lanka in the HRC has said in brief: “We remain concerned by the continued use of the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act as amended (PTA). We also call on the Government to protect the freedoms of expression and association. We stress the importance of transparency, accountability, inclusivity, and of building meaningfully on past work and recommendations that address the root causes of conflicts and impunity”.
Meanwhile, Amnesty International said that, “In Sri Lanka, the State response to the right to peaceful assembly, as well as to truth, justice and accountability continues to be concerning. The Government’s new Anti-Terrorism Bill doesn’t meet international human rights standards, and the renewed use of the domestic International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Act curtailing the right to expression is deeply worrying”.
Oral report on SL
On 21 June, the UN Deputy HCHR Nada Al-Nashif delivered the report of the HCHR on Sri Lanka. Excerpts: “The oral update, presented today, highlights some key developments and trends from our close monitoring of the situation in Sri Lanka, ahead of the full written update that will be presented to the Council at its 54th session. The announcement of plans for a truth commission or similar reconciliation mechanisms requires attention, as Sri Lanka has witnessed too many ad hoc commissions in the past that failed to ensure accountability. The Office on Missing Persons has not achieved the results that provide satisfaction to victims. What is needed is a coherent plan that connects the different elements of truth, redress, memorialisation, accountability and creates the right enabling environment for a successful transitional justice process. Accountability remains the fundamental gap in attempts to deal with the past. As long as impunity prevails, Sri Lanka will achieve neither genuine reconciliation nor sustainable peace. The project team established in our Office to advance accountability has continued to make progress pursuant to Resolution 51/1. It is in the process of providing concrete support to several jurisdictions that have ongoing criminal justice investigations. It is conducting proactive investigative work on key cases and collecting, consolidating and analysing information and evidence from a variety of UN and other sources, which is preserved in a repository so as to be used for future accountability initiatives. Victims continue to be placed at the heart of this work, including through our active engagement with victim organisations and the civil society more broadly. Fundamentally, it is and remains the responsibility of the Sri Lankan authorities to directly acknowledge past violations and undertake credible investigations and prosecutions, alongside other accountability measures. However, as long as an ‘accountability deficit’ remains, the international community can and should play complementary roles. Means to do so include the use of accepted principles of universal and extraterritorial jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute alleged perpetrators, and support to the relevant accountability processes in third States, as well as the fair application of targeted sanctions against credibly alleged perpetrators. The Government has committed to replacing the PTA with legislation that adheres to international standards, but the new ‘Anti-Terrorism’ Bill gazetted in March contained sweeping provisions that would limit the freedoms of expression and peaceful assembly and even labour rights”.
South Africa is in the propaganda
As a concerned country, the representative of Sri Lanka immediately responded to the Deputy HCHR's report on Sri Lanka. Excerpts as follows: “In March of this year (2023), the Ministers of Foreign Affairs (President’s Counsel [PC] M.U.M. Ali Sabry) and Justice (Dr. Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe PC) undertook a working visit to South Africa, for a preliminary study of their experience on truth and reconciliation”.
It is to be noted that the conflict in South Africa was not the same as what is happening, and what has happened, in Sri Lanka. The South African conflict was based on minority rule against the majority. The Sri Lanka problem is between two nations who experienced different kingdoms in the Island. In other words, the aggressive rule by the numerically larger nation is based on ethnic cleansing, land grabbing, religious domination, etc., of the other nation. Sri Lanka highlights the South African experience for propaganda, without learning from the South African process of taking seriously the voice of the victims.
The fourth cycle of the UPR regarding Sri Lanka was discussed in the 42nd session of the UPR held in Geneva on 1 February, 2023. The report will be presented in the 53rd session on 6 July. Britain, Algeria and Qatar acted as the 'troika'.
This report A/HRC/53/16, consists of 24 pages. It includes statements and proposals submitted by 106 countries. There are about 294 different opinions stated on Sri Lanka.
The UPR
If 106 out of 193 UN Member Countries made remarks, this shows where Sri Lanka stands on its promises and the lack of progress on human rights. The following are some of the important remarks:
Luxembourg, Austria, Botswana, Ecuador, Estonia, East Timor and a few other countries requested Sri Lanka to sign and ratify the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
While Switzerland insisted on pursuing efforts for the decentralisation of power, India spoke about policy measures to strengthen the Sri Lankan economy and combat poverty and its impact on the vulnerable segments of the population, including Indian origin Tamils; and measures to ensure that the fundamental freedoms and human rights of all its citizens, in particular all Tamil speaking citizens, are fully protected.
New Zealand, East Timor and France wanted Sri Lanka to establish a moratorium on the use of, with a view to abolishing, the death penalty.
Australia, Austria, Belgium and Canada wanted Sri Lanka to repeal the PTA and ensure that any replacement legislation conforms to the best practices of international human rights standards.
The United States wanted Sri Lanka to end impunity for human rights violations, abuses and harassment, especially against members of ethnic and religious minority communities, by holding those responsible to account, including the security forces and Government officials, and implementing commitments under HRC resolutions.
Germany requested Sri Lanka to refrain from imposing undue limitations on non-Governmental organisations (NGOs) and ensure that the planned NGO law is in line with international obligations.
In the meantime, the Netherlands urged Sri Lanka to ensure that the rights to the freedoms of expression, association and peaceful assembly are guaranteed to everyone, including journalists and human rights defenders.
The United Kingdom addressed concerns around land expropriation in the north and east by Government departments, including the Archaeology Department, and related restrictions on access to land.
Paraguay wanted Sri Lanka to establish a permanent national mechanism for the implementation, reporting and follow up, regarding human rights recommendations, considering the possibility of receiving cooperation for this purpose.
Some countries and representatives of NGOs will make their interventions regarding this report following its presentation to the HRC on 6 July.
If one analyses the 53rd session of the HRC, it is obvious that Sri Lanka is being heavily scrutinised and seriously warned by the world’s highest authorities on human rights – the HCHR and the HRC.
(The writer is the General Secretary of the France based Tamil Centre for Human Rights.)
–-----------------------------------------------------------
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect those of this publication.