brand logo

Diplomacy over defensiveness, action over assurances

14 Sep 2021

Sri Lanka is at a critical juncture where it has to defend its image and autonomy before the international community while defending the state of its citizens’ rights. At the 48th United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) Regular Session, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet claimed that the continued surveillance, intimidation, and judicial harassment of human rights defenders, journalists, and families of the disappeared in Sri Lanka has not only continued, but has broadened to include students, academics, medical professionals, and religious leaders who are critical of Government policies. Her remarks on Sri Lanka included calls for more action from the Government, with a focus on addressing widespread fears as to whether the new regulations concerning the country’s civil society would restrict fundamental freedoms, the risk of militarisation under the state of emergency regulations, the urgency and importance of delivering truth and justice for those affected by the Easter Sunday attacks, arrests, and detentions taking place under the notorious Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act No. 48 of 1979 (PTA), and de-radicalisation regulations, among others. Bachelet made these observations in a context where certain local groups had expressed their grievances to her, the most recent one being communications by several civil society groups, including the Association of the Relatives of the Disappeared (North and East). They had raised concerns about the ineffectiveness of the Office on Missing Persons (OMP), the most prominent initiative Sri Lankan authorities take pride in, when discussing post-war reconciliation efforts. In this regard, she said that the OMP needs to inspire confidence among victims and that there needs to be a transparent, victim-centred, and gender sensitive approach. The truth is, the UNHRC’s opinion about Sri Lanka’s situation is not something we did not see coming. While it was never a secret that the international community was keeping a close eye on Sri Lanka’s human rights situation, especially after the war, the Sri Lankan Government knew that it had to deal with the UN, in addition to other international institutions such as the European Union (EU), at some point. In fact, we were warned twice this year. The majority of Member Countries of the UNHRC voting against Sri Lanka at the 46th Session in March and the European Parliament adopting a Resolution against Sri Lanka on account of the prevailing human rights situation were signs that they have no faith in the Sri Lankan Government. It is true that the UNHRC has historically been somewhat selective in its pursuit of certain human rights causes. Allegations of human rights abuses in Kashmir by India, in Xinjiang by China, and in the Middle East by the US may not have been pursued with the same vigour as the allegations against Sri Lanka or other smaller, less powerful nations. However, these are just comforting words which help console us with a western conspiracy narrative. Fairly or unfairly, Sri Lanka is faced with a huge diplomatic challenge which must be won through diplomacy and action, not aggressive rhetoric and stalling measures. Unfortunately, newly appointed Foreign Minister Prof. G.L. Peiris gave the usual answer to the UN, i.e. the Government will take action to address the matters pointed out by Bachelet. This also included promises of continued action to investigate and prosecute those behind the Easter Sunday attacks. Most importantly, Prof. Peiris rejected the proposal for external initiatives, which he said are purportedly established by Resolution 46/1, while domestic processes are vigorously addressing said matters. The Minister also highlighted that external initiatives embarked on without the co-operation of the country concerned cannot achieve their stated goals, and are likely to be subjected to politicisation. As much as it is necessary, being defensive is not a solution, and there is uncertainty as to whether it can at least buy us more time. During the last decade, Sri Lanka demanded that it be given the freedom to resolve its internal issues, with no interference from external parties. It worked for some time; however, we overlooked the fact that our demands and requests can be justified only through actions that can convince the international community that we are capable, even though we have not achieved the final results. In his response to Bachelet, Prof. Peiris further pointed out several steps that are being continued by the Sri Lankan Government including the activities of the OMP, the Office for Reparations (OR), the Office for National Unity and Reconciliation (ONUR) and the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka (HRCSL), and the actions being taken to review the PTA. It is comforting that Sri Lanka has achieved some progress as far as human rights are concerned, even though we have not delivered great results. However, the best way to face increasing concerns and opposition regarding the country’s human rights situation is actually showing tangible results, not relying solely on defensive strategies or progress that is too slight for the international community to see and people to breathe a sigh of relief about.  


More News..