- Govt. turns down Core Group's final suggestion
- SL hopeful of getting between 10-15 votes
- Resolution of Covid-19 burials issue crucial
- India, Japan, and Australia likely to abstain
Informal sessions
The UNHRC last week commenced “informal consultations” on Sri Lanka with the Permanent Missions of Canada, Germany, Malawi, Montenegro, North Macedonia, and the UK, on 28 February. The informal consultations on “promoting reconciliation, accountability, and human rights in Sri Lanka” are scheduled to continue until Wednesday (10). At the interactive dialogue sessions on the High Commissioner’s report on Sri Lanka that took place last week, many Western countries, including the UK and Canada, criticised the human rights conditions in Sri Lanka, whereas most Asian countries, such as Pakistan, supported Sri Lanka. Meanwhile, India, during its observations before the UNHRC, said that although it supports Sri Lanka’s right for territorial integrity, it is still committed to the demands of Tamils for equality, including through the complete implementation of the 13th Amendment to the Constitution. “We call upon Sri Lanka to take necessary steps to address such aspirations, including through the process of reconciliation, and the full implementation of the 13th Amendment to the Constitution of Sri Lanka,” said Ambassador of India to the UN Indra Mani Pandey. Foreign Ministry Secretary Admiral Prof. Jayanath Colombage had recently stated that Sri Lanka is seeking proactive support from India. However, he had also told The Morning last month that the 13th Amendment did not serve its desired purpose. Nevertheless, such glaring contradictory stances from the Sri Lankan Government would not help in garnering the support of neighbouring India at the Council. The UK said at last week’s dialogues that the Core Group of Countries on Sri Lanka (Canada, the UK, Germany, North Macedonia, and Montenegro) will present a new resolution in support of accountability and lasting reconciliation for all communities in the country. Meanwhile, it is learnt that Sri Lanka has raised strong objections with the UNHRC, accusing the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) of disregarding a request to publish the response of the Government to a damning report formally submitted to the Council last week. In a letter to UN Human Rights Council President Nazhat Shameem, Sri Lanka has reportedly stated that the OHCHR had published an advance unedited version of its report on Sri Lanka in the list of documents for the 46th Session of the Council, disregarding the Permanent Mission’s request to publish the Government’s comments alongside the OHCHR report in the form of an addendum. Sri Lankan envoy in Geneva C.A. Chandraprema had stated in the letter that on 27 January 2021, the Government of Sri Lanka, upon a request made by OHCHR, shared its comments on the advance unedited version of the report of OHCHR on Sri Lanka, and had requested that the comments be published as an addendum to the OHCHR report, with a view to upholding the integrity between the report and the comments by the State concerned, and in the interest of providing equal visibility to the latter. “However, I regret to note that, only a few hours after making the above request, OHCHR proceeded to publish an advance unedited version of its report on Sri Lanka in the list of documents for the 46th Session of the Council, in disregard of the Permanent Mission’s request to publish the Government’s comments alongside OHCHR report in the form of an addendum,” Chandraprema had noted. “You would agree that if any United Nations entity, including OHCHR, publishes a report about a member state, such a report should be accompanied by the observations made by the State concerned, as an addendum, so that other member states can read both sides of the story and form an informed opinion about the contents of the report concerned. Publishing the response of Sri Lanka on a different webpage dedicated to government communications in no way serves this objective,” Chandraprema had further noted in the letter.Govt's recommendations
The Sri Lankan Government's response to the High Commissioner's report was last week published under “Comments received from the Permanent Mission of Sri Lanka on the report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on promoting reconciliation and accountability in Sri Lanka”. Following are the conclusions and recommendations of the Government outlined in the report:- The GoSL repudiates the conclusions and recommendations that have been erroneously arrived at in the High Commissioner’s Report, as they are based on incorrect and/or unsubstantiated and extraneous sources/material, and contravenes the principles of universality, impartiality, objectivity, and non-selectivity, as stipulated in the GA resolution 60/251 that created the HRC.
- The GoSL rejects the High Commissioner’s proposal “to advance accountability options at the international level”, including, in particular, her proposal to take steps towards referring Sri Lanka to the International Criminal Court. Sri Lanka regrets that that OHCHR has submitted itself to the preconceived, politicised, and prejudicial agenda which certain elements have relentlessly pursued to trigger such disproportionate and unwarranted measures against Sri Lanka, and cautions that any options at the international level would tantamount to an unwarranted interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign State in contravention of the UN Charter.
- The GoSL reminds that calling for targeted sanctions and travel bans against individuals, in the absence of credible findings by a competent court/body on violations committed by them, itself constitutes nothing less than a political agenda against a sovereign nation, aimed at destabilising, and is a violation of their rights and contravention of the principles of natural justice.
- Similarly, the GoSL condemns the recommendation in the report to the UN to keep Sri Lanka’s peacekeeping operations under review. As already maintained by Sri Lanka, such measures constitute unreasonable and indiscriminate punitive action against the armed forces of a sovereign State which has engaged in UN peacekeeping for six decades in a professional manner, and several members of which have paid the ultimate sacrifice while serving under the UN flag. We urge the UN to refrain from such violations of the principles of the UN Charter on non-interference and sovereignty of states.