KAMALIKA PIERIS

Sri Lanka has been taking a defensive position in Geneva, from the first UNHRC resolution in 2012.  Always explaining its actions during and after the conflict, observed Neville Ladduwahetty. This is a flawed strategy, he said. Instead, Sri Lanka should table a Resolution in the General Assembly and seek redress.

Sri Lanka should not have to keep going to the UNHRC to make its case, given that 10 years had now lapsed since the end of the war, said Sarath Amunugama in Parliament. Its 10 years now since the end of the war. This joke must stop,” he said.

Unlike Sri Lanka, other countries ignore UNHRC. UNHRC has passed many resolutions against Israel. In 2017, HRC adopted 5 such resolutions in one session despite opposition from US and UK. Israel boycotts UNHRC and does not reply to the charges leveled against it.

India told the UN point blank that it was not ready to talk about Kashmir at the UN. When anti- Muslim clashes took place in Gujarat, in 2002, killing over 1,000 civilians and injuring many more, India told the UN that it was an internal matter and New Delhi would not allow it to be raised at international forums.

Sri Lanka should now change its strategy. Sri Lanka      should stop running to Geneva. It should go straight to the UN General Assembly, and make a formal complaint about UNHRC and OHCHR.

Sri Lanka must begin by reporting UNHCR and OHCHR for interference in Sri Lanka’s internal matters. The   Eelam war was a secessionist civil war which stayed within the island. It did not spill out to other countries. It was an internal matter. The military fought a secessionist group, not an ethnic community.

Also, the Eelam war was primarily a political issue, relating to sovereignty, not a Human rights issue.  But UNHCR looked at it as a violation of Human rights and focused on accountability and reconciliation.

Secondly, Sri Lanka must report UNHRC and OHCHR for grossly exceeding its mandate. UNHCR has done this over and over again in its anti-Sri Lanka Resolutions. Resolution 30/1 of 2015 speaks of devolution of political authority, land use and ownership, with a call to the people of Sri Lanka to work with OHCHR and NGOs. These are internal matters which are outside the remit of the UNHRC.

The UN General Assembly must also be told of the dishonest methods used by UNHRC, and OHCHR under the guise of Human Rights, to push the Eelam agenda. 

HRC has used for this purpose, contrived, biased reports (Darusman and OISL) crackpot documentaries, (Channel Four)    extreme observations (UNHRC   Special Rapporteurs) and evaluations by the OHCHR itself. The faulty Darusman report was used as a primary source by the OCHRC.  The OISL Report is ‘unique’ and was the first of its kind by his Office in respect of any country said the High Commissioner. (see Note 1)

There is also the question of ethics. UNHRC sponsors false reports and threatens small, defenseless countries to please powerful countries, while turning a blind eye to the HR abuses of those powerful countries. The degree of pressure that was exerted on Sri Lanka is without parallel, said GL Pieris.

Sri Lanka will receive support at the UNGA. There is much goodwill for Sri Lanka at the international level, for its long standing record of democracy, economic and social achievements, its old civilization and multiracial roots, said Sarala Fernando, writing in 2021.,

The countries that spoke out at the UNHRC in support of Sri Lanka will speak out at the UNGA. They will have much to say and will say with gusto.  Cuba said   UNHRC has one policy towards some countries and another towards other countries. There are no resolutions on countries responsible for invasions of other countries and killing their people.   We are against this duplicity.

We are against the politicization of the UNHRC, continued Cuba. We are against any country-specific resolution. That is our stand. It is an infringement of the country’s sovereignty. It is unnecessary interference with internal affairs of a country.  It is the creation of unnecessary pressure on a country. When a country is singled out in this manner,   it will not cooperate. There should only be co-operation by the UNHRC with the member states. 

In 2013, Cuba’s ambassador to Sri Lanka was asked by the media, UNHRC has adopted two resolutions on Sri Lanka. What are your views on them. These resolutions have not been fair by Sri Lanka, the Ambassador replied. They have not recognized Sri Lanka’s achievements. Why is Sri Lanka singled out? Sri Lanka has not invaded another country and killed its people.

In 2018, Russian Ambassador to Sri Lanka   said We are strongly condemning the use of human rights issues as an excuse for interfering in domestic affairs of countries as well as undermining the basic principles of International Law. We oppose the adoption of the politicized country-specific resolutions. The adoption of country-specific resolutions has only one goal, to punish unfavorable governments. This is utterly counterproductive.  It has not contributed to improvements in the human rights situation.

China’s Permanent Representative in Geneva, Ambassador Chen Xu spoke up for Sri Lanka in his official statement in the Interactive Dialogue on the OHCHR Report on Sri Lanka during the 46th Session of the Human Rights Council in 2021.

Ambassador Chen Xu   said, it is the consistent stand of China to oppose politicization and double standards on human rights, as well as using human rights as an excuse in interfering in other countries’ internal affairs. We are concerned about the clear lack of impartiality shown in the OHCHR’s report to this session on Sri Lanka and express our regret over the failure of the OHCHR to use the authoritative information provided by the Sri Lankan Government. The so-called preventive intervention” and the proposed targeted sanctions contained in the OHCHR’s report are clear interference in the internal affairs of Sri Lanka and exceed the mandate of the OHCHR.

Sri Lanka should stay the course and not budge from its present position, said analysts. Sri Lanka  government has put up a good fight all these years in the face of tremendous pressure from the US led western bloc, Perseverance will pay off in the end. The rest of the world is also  becoming critical about UNHRC.

In 2011   while the UN General Assembly was meeting in New York and Human Rights Council was in session in Geneva, the Canadian Minister of Citizenship and Immigration spoke at a conference in New York,  and what he said sounded much like what Sri Lanka was saying. He had, inter alia,  criticized the UN  High Commissioner for Human Rights,  Navaneethan Pillai.

The Council was never established to isolate countries, intimidate and harass nations. It was designed to help countries to improve their human rights performance in a collaborative manner. The Council’s job is to assist and to encourage, not to punish. This was the objective of those who created the Council in the first place, said critics.

  UNHCR is well  aware of the criticism. We recognize that  the Human Rights Council is a flawed body, in need of reform to its agenda, membership, and focus,  admitted USA in 2021. UN High Commissioner announced at the 32nd session of UNHRC in 2013, a growing number of countries are refusing to cooperate with the UNHRC. But  this will not deter the UNHRC, he said. 

Sri Lanka should now go before the UN General Assembly,  and suggest that the UNHRC should be scrapped .it should be replaced by  something more effective, an  organization which is fully funded by the UN  and therefore   independent of all member states. The focus should be on prevention  and mediation, not fault finding. While the other more prestigious UN  organization  provides services to member states, UNHRC engages in fault finding.

 International Labor Organization, created in 1919, has been offered as an example, probably because the ILO also deals with sensitive issues. ILO became a specialized agency of the United Nations in 1946. It has a unique tripartite structure  which gives an equal voice to workers, employers and governments. They are all represented on its Governing Body and participate in its decision-making processes. ILO has passed 189 Conventions – more than any other body. ILO Conventions become a part of national law not on ratification by States, but by incorporation of their provisions into the national laws. ILO officials treat members with the utmost respect, said   experts.

UNHRC is not as well  entrenched as  people think. It is still under observation. Its future is  uncertain.  When the UNHRC was created, the UN General Assembly decided that the work and functioning of the new HRC should be reviewed five years after it had come into existence, and the review should take place at the level of the General Assembly. At this review, the status of the Council would also be considered.”

The first review of the UHRC took place in 2011.The General Assembly decided to  continue   the Human Rights Council as  a subsidiary body  and to re-examine its position at a date   no sooner than ten years and no later than fifteen years from 2011. (Resolution 65/281 of 17.6.2011.) This means that UNHRC will come up for review before the UN General Assembly in 2021 or between 2021 and 2026. It is likely that at this second review, a firm decision will be taken whether to continue with the UNHRC or not. 

There is already an overlap between UNHRC and the  Third Committee of the UN General Assembly (UNGA). Third Committee deals with a wide range of social and economic issues,  including human rights and humanitarian affairs. It  examines human rights questions, including reports of the Special Procedures of the Human Rights Council  .UNHRC submits its annual report to the Third Committee,  for  submission to UNGA. This makes UNHRC a subsidiary of the Third Committee, rather than UNGA, moaned HR fanatics.

NOTE 1

• the Panel in the Darusman  report came from outside the UN. This violates the authority under which the  UN  Secretary General is expected to function.  The role of the panel was only ‘advisory’.
• The High commissioner admitted that his report on Sri Lanka (OISL Report)  the exercise has been done for the first time. The report is ‘rather unique’ and it is the first of its kind by his office in respect of nay country. The report makes drastic recommendations relating to demilitarization of the north and east, downsizing the military, removing the indispensable security mechanism embedded in the Public Security Ordinance and impinging on the command structures of the military. Other recommendations are breathtaking in the degree of intrusive impact including fundamental land reforms, distributing political and administration powers within the country, and the establishment . of special courts outside the country legal system.  193 countries are exhorted to prosecute Sri Lanka ‘under universal jurisdiction.’ Sri Lanka is castigated for delays in resettling persons without mentioning the presence of land mines.  All member states of the UN are asked to  re-consider applications by Sri Lanka military and police for participation in peace keeping and training programmes across the world..    (GL Pieris)
• The OISL report calls on the Sri Lankan Government to accede to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and establish a hybrid Court to handle allegations of war crimes and human rights abuses. However, it is impossible to take such action as that would be a violation of the Constitution of Sri Lanka.
• 2015 Resolution is all about system change, a complete overhaul of Sri Lanka’s political, legal, security and defense system to serve the global interests of the United States, said Tamara Kunanayagam. ( Continued)