Sri Lanka refutes misleading
claims
The Permanent Mission of
Sri Lanka to the United Nations Office at Geneva
11th December 2007
An expanded version of the
Sri Lankan reply By Prof Rajiva Wijesinha,
Secretary General of the Secretariat for Coordinating the Peace Process
to concerns raised in the debate at the United Nations Human Rights
Council following the report of Ms Louise Arbour, High Commissioner
for Human Rights
Sri Lanka welcomes the interventions of so many countries and organizations,
which suggest a deep concern for the welfare of the citizens of Sri
Lanka. Some expressions of this however are reminiscent of a character
in a novel of Trollope, a lady who was deeply in love with a gentleman,
and would have done anything on his behalf. However, as the novelist
put it in a vivid account that is relevant to many relationships, never
once did it occur to her to think deeply about what he himself might
want or need.
Thus, Mr Chairman, everyone prescribes for Sri Lanka, while not everyone
studies our situation deeply. We are as you know in the throes of dealing
with a very violent terrorist movement. Other countries, dealing with
proportionately less dangerous, proportionately less murderous, organizations,
have had to make adjustments with regard to the rights they have striven
to uphold, and we are no exception. However, we continue aware of the
importance of human rights, and welcome all assistance to maintain these,
whilst we continue with our struggle against terrorism that is so destructive
of perhaps the most fundamental right of all, the right to life.
We have requested assistance in a number of areas, but so far the response
has been disappointing. Sometimes this is due to our own incapacity,
sometimes to incapacity or unwillingness on the part of others. Thus,
our National Human Rights Commission, currently treated with contumely
by some members of the international community, was supposed some time
back to have the services of United Nations Volunteers in its branch
offices. When the former Senior Human Rights Adviser of the High Commissioner
was remonstrated with, for there being a shortfall in this regard during
his watch, he noted that donors had been unwilling to contribute. There
may have been good reasons for this, but the result is what seems a
self fulfilling prophecy.
Again the UN Special Rapporteur, Phillip Alston, produced a very helpful
report in 2006 which made clear the need for better police training.
Though undoubtedly the Sri Lankan government should also have been more
efficient in pursuing his recommendations, it is a pity that the SHRA
had not been able to facilitate this, or indeed draw attention to shortcomings
in this regard in regular reports to the relatively recently appointed
Minister for Disaster Management and Human Rights. Not perhaps coincidentally,
a national committee appointed by the Minister has recently produced
recommendations on similar lines (expanding also on Mr Alston's concern
for bilingualism amongst those responsible for security).
We hope that even now the High Commissioner's office will assist, along
with those members of the international community most concerned about
our situation, in expediting the necessary training, which Mr Alston
had indicated many months back. In this respect we should record our
gratitude to the Swedish government which has assisted with Scene of
Crime investigations, but more assistance to develop investigation,
interrogation and prosecution skills will help us move towards the professionalization
that is essential. It is now generally acknowledged, for instance by
the Sri Lankan Monitoring Mission, that the concerted training in human
rights provided to the Sri Lankan armed forces has led to greater adherence
to international norms than a decade ago, but we acknowledge the need
to extend similar training, and better language skills, to other security
personnel too.
Another example of misplaced concern may be seen in the assertion, undoubtedly
in good faith, of the honourable delegate from the Netherlands, who
said that the International Independent Group of Eminent Persons, asked
by the Sri Lankan government to assist in an important Commission of
Inquiry, has resigned. Last month there were very different rumours
to the effect that HE our President, who appointed both, was not going
to renew their mandates. He has now done this, but the IIGEP has indicated
that it will not continue beyond next March.
Certainly there have been problems, and many of us believe that the
inquiries should have been conducted more expeditiously. But it must
be remembered that, unlike in many other countries, we are inquiring
into such cases before the conflict has concluded. Progress has been
much quicker, in the year since the Commission was appointed, than in
many similar situations elsewhere. To suggest therefore that the IIGEP
has resigned already in despair is unfortunate, and we hope that, in
the four months left, the Commission will be able to resolve some of
the cases. Incidentally, with regard to one case - since regular investigations
continue - the police have already handed over documentation for an
indictment to be issued to the legal authorities.
It is important also to note some other misleading claims. There are
suggestions that the climate for aid workers is increasingly dangerous.
The actual figures however indicate that the situation is much better
than last year, when there was one particularly bad incident. That however
occurred to 17 aid workers sent, contrary to elementary safety precautions
being practised at the time by all other aid agencies, into an area
in which the LTTE had launched a full scale attack. This was the first
large scale breach of the Ceasefire Agreement (as opposed to its 3000
odd small scale breaches, in comparison with a few hundred by the government
as ruled by the Scandinavian manned Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission) and
aggressors as well as defenders were under severe pressure until hostilities
stopped.
The investigation continues and, though assistance from the UN was
not readily forthcoming with regard to Witness Protection in this regard,
the Australian government has recently proved extremely helpful in this
regard.
Again, reference has been made to increasing attacks on civilians.
Statistics have been cited with regard to incidents in the last couple
of weeks, but specific responsibilities have not been attributed in
the blanket assertion that both sides are responsible. As our Permanent
Representative made clear, there were three deliberate targetings by
the LTTE of civilians, leading to over 30 deaths, the vast majority
of those adduced here. Of the rest, the Sri Lankan government stands
by its right to deal with institutions devoting themselves to militaristic
propaganda. We are sorry in this regard that, whilst the Norwegian government
has remonstrated with the LTTE Peace Secretariat, which it helped to
fund, for highlighting pictures of suicide cadres about to set off on
a mission of destruction, this has not been done by UNDP, which also
funded this institution (in good faith and with the acquiescence of
the Sri Lankan government, albeit required procedures were not always
followed).
Of the civilian deaths in LTTE controlled territory, it should be noted
that the Jaffna University Teachers for Human Rights, in a report which
is certainly critical of the government in some respects, asserts that
the incident in which there were 11 casualties was not the work of the
Sri Lankan army. It attributes this to Tamils under the brutal control
of the LTTE who resent this, a segment of the population who are ignored
by many of the agencies who are otherwise concerned about Sri Lanka.
Finally, attention should be paid to the enduring commitment of the
Sri Lankan government, despite all the difficulties it encounters, both
with regard to its own capacity and technical competence, as well as
with regard to terrorist threats, to abide by its commitments to its
citizenry. A recent report by the office in Sri Lanka of the United
Nations High Commissioner for Refugees highlights the continuing provision
of advanced educational facilities for instance to almost all the children
in Jaffna Welfare Centres. In a context in which the government and
Sri Lankan forces are demonized, it should be recorded that there are
hardly any problems with regard to what are characterized as 'Protection
Incidents'. Just 12 incidents of torture over 18 months may be 12 incidents
too much, but it is a record of which many countries would be proud.
Incidents with regard to security checks, essential given the terrorist
methods Sri Lanka has to combat, came to 134, but the only other type
of incident in double figures was Domestic Violence at 62, regrettable
but not something to lay at the door of the government or the armed
forces.
The government provides IDP rations to 97% of the centres, work is
available for 100%, and basic foodstuffs are not only readily available
but also affordable. Mr Chairman, this type of monitoring, by a respected
UN agency, should be taken note of by our interlocutors. It will make
clear that, while we have problems, and welcome aid and assistance to
overcome them, as a nation we can be trusted to look after our own.
www.lankamission.org ©
|
