(Text of Interactive Dialogue with the High Commissioner for Human Rights on Promoting Reconciliation, Accountability and Human Rights in Sri Lanka at the 49th Session of the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva on March 4th 2022)

The Council has before it (A/HRC/49/9), the report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on promoting reconciliation, accountability and human rights in Sri Lanka.

Presentation of Report

MICHELLE BACHELET, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, said the report mostly focused on developments since the last report. There had been recent signs of increased engagement and certain steps to initiate reforms. The Government should take further steps to address the fundamental problems with the Prevention of Terrorism Act and undertake deeper legal, institutional and security sector reforms that were critically needed to put an end to impunity and prevent any reoccurrence of past violations. However, victims and their families continued to be denied truth and justice.

There were a number of underlying trends that threatened human rights, and these continued to advance. There was deep concern about the concentration of civilian positions in the hands of military officials, some of them implicated in serious allegations of human rights violations.

Minority communities continued to be marginalised and lived in fear. There were land disputes which were exacerbating the grievances of minority communities and creating new tensions.
Two years after committing to pursue an accountability process before the Council, the Government had not yet produced a credible road map on transitional justice towards accountability and reconciliation. The families of the disappeared called for truth and justice and to know the fates of their loved ones. Perpetrators should be called to justice in this regard.

There were continued reports of harassment and intimidation of civil society organizations, human rights defenders and journalists. Continued reports of deaths in custody were alarming, as were reports of ill-treatment and violence by the police and the military.

Successive Governments had failed to prosecute international crimes and serious human rights violations and to pursue an effective transitional justice process. The current Government not only demonstrated its unwillingness to pursue accountability, it had incorporated military officials implicated in alleged war crimes at the highest levels of government, reinforcing a narrative of impunity. The Council should pursue alternative strategies to advance accountability at the international level.

There was a considerable amount of work required from the Office to investigate and prosecute those guilty of international crimes committed by all parties in Sri Lanka. The mandate under the resolution gave an important opportunity to pursue accountability for serious international crimes in Sri Lanka. As long as immunity prevailed, Sri Lanka would not achieve genuine reconciliation and sustainable peace.

Statement by Country Concerned

Sri Lanka, speaking as a country concerned, said the resolution on the mandate had been adopted by a divided Council. This was a deeply flawed procedure. The resolution was directly contrary to the Council’s founding principles of impartiality, objectivity and non-selectivity. It went well beyond the mandate of the Council. Sri Lanka had submitted its comments on the report, noting with regret that the Secretariat had failed to publish the comments simultaneously with the report.

Sri Lanka would continue to engage with the United Nations, including the Council. It would also continue with its voluntarily agreed human rights obligations. Sri Lanka had regularly shared its challenges and progress with the relevant organizations of the United Nations system.

There were serious anomalies and problems with the report. It had an intolerably intrusive character and there was a clear element of discrimination within it. This in itself struck at the root of the foundations of the United Nations system. Uniformity and conformity of standards, applied to Member States by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, were cynically transgressed in several portions of the report, and this was particularly disturbing, as the strength and prestige of the United Nations derived from the regard of the international community for the moral and ethical underpinnings of the work of the Council. It was vital to retain this confidence undiminished.

It was deeply regretted that numerous unsubstantiated allegations had found their way into the report. The High Commissioner’s unwarranted onslaught on seminal institutions of the country was of great concern. The international community should join Sri Lanka on a footing of mutual respect to face the challenges ahead.

Discussion

Speaking on Sri Lanka were the European Union, Netherlands on behalf of the Benelux countries, Norway on behalf of the Nordic-Baltic countries, United Kingdom on behalf of the Sri Lanka Core Group, Saudi Arabia on behalf of the Gulf Cooperation Council, Germany, Egypt, Montenegro, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Canada, Philippines, Nepal, Kenya, India and France.

Speakers said Sri Lanka should ensure a safe democratic space and strong independent judicial institutions. The erosion of democratic institutions and the lack of accountability for past human rights violations was undermining progress. The building of a prosperous State for all Sri Lankans was required, including all minorities. The Government had taken the first steps to undertake reforms, but there was a long road ahead.

There was also concern for political prisoners still in custody, and concern that the proposed changes were not sufficient to address human rights concerns. There should be freedom of speech for journalists and those in minority communities, as well as non-governmental organizations. The Government should ensure the independence and effectiveness of human rights institutions, and encourage proper investigation of reports of deaths in police custody. There should be full implementation of Council resolution 46/1.

More comprehensive reforms were needed to allow civil society to operate freely and safely, and to bring terrorism legislation in line with international norms and standards. The rights of religious minorities should be protected. More inclusive governance was needed in Sri Lanka: a safe and open space should be maintained, even for dissent. Ensuring accountability and justice for survivors was essential for maintaining peace and ensuring reconciliation. A more comprehensive and deeper reform agenda was required to ensure that future violations could not occur.

The Government should fully consider the numerous and consecutive recommendations made by various United Nations mechanisms and organizations. The lack of domestic progress in accountability and the reconciliation process required further commitment by the Government. The human rights situation could degrade further if steps were not taken to address the issues of the past.

Some speakers said that reports should be based on reliable, objective and neutral observation. The development of reports should be done with constructive cooperation with the concerned country. When dealing with human rights situations, the Council should retain a non-biased, non-selective and non-hypocritical point of view.

The community of nations should support in good faith any steps taken towards reconciliation in the country, and encourage genuine dialogue in an impartial manner, standing against selectivity, politicisation and double standards. The Human Rights Council should support Sri Lanka in order to achieve its priorities for its domestic development in the context of its own needs.

The Council will reconvene on Monday, 7 March at 9 a.m. when it will continue and conclude its interactive dialogue on the High Commissioner’s report on promoting reconciliation, accountability and human rights in Sri Lanka. It will then hold a meeting on technical cooperation in protecting the human rights of vulnerable persons in and after the COVID-19 pandemic.

*************************************************