{"id":12811,"date":"2012-11-29T15:24:17","date_gmt":"2012-11-29T20:24:17","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/?p=12811"},"modified":"2012-11-29T22:36:33","modified_gmt":"2012-11-30T03:36:33","slug":"un-internal-review-panels-findings-during-the-final-months-of-the-war-in-sri-lanka-an-analysis","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/?p=12811","title":{"rendered":"UN Internal Review Panel\u2019s findings during the final months of the war in Sri Lanka: An Analysis"},"content":{"rendered":"

By
\nUsha S Sriskandarajah<\/strong><\/p>\n

T<\/strong>he internal probe commissioned to examine the conduct of the United Nations during the final months of the war in Sri Lanka with a view to putting its house in order is to be commended for being forthright about UN\u2019s own failures.<\/p>\n

However it\u2019s findings must also be seen as a scathing indictment on the Rajapaksa Government\u2019s conduct of the war; the revelations contained in it conclusively making the case for the genocidal state to be put in the dock, indicating that the time has come for its senior political and military leaders and President Mahinda Rajapaksa to be hauled before the International Criminal Court and tried for genocide.
\n
\nIt isn\u2019t enough to address the failure of the UN to prevent the killings, more crucially it\u2019s finding the answers through independent means as to who was responsible for the genocidal mass slaughter of the Tamil people that need addressing.<\/p>\n

Critical to investigate the Genocidal Mass Slaughter in Mullivaikaal:<\/strong><\/p>\n

An honest analysis of the report would reveal a \u201cGovernment\u201d, totally in command and intent on eliminating the ethnic Tamil population it had wily trapped into so called \u2019no fire zones\u2019 capitalized on the breakdown of the UN system that was seemingly ill-equipped and faltering, to execute it\u2019s plan; this it did with pre-meditation, blocking all humanitarian aid and ensuring there were no witnesses, using heavy weaponry and firing at civilians from land sea and air, killing tens of thousands, and issuing orders to its military that was in violation of international law.<\/p>\n

The findings of the \u2018UN Internal Review Panel\u2019 (the Panel) headed by Charles Petrie in exposing the colossal failure of the UN to stop the killings have enough incriminating material on the conduct and actions of the Rajapaksa government, that should be investigated to establish beyond doubt whether or not what happened in Mullivaikaal was genocide. An international investigation has now become critically important for the truth to be revealed. <\/p>\n

The Issue of \u201cGovernment\u2019s\u201d Responsibility for Large Majority of Civilian Casualties Needs Scrutiny As Information Verified to \u201cGood Standard\u201d:<\/strong> <\/p>\n

The Panel\u2019s findings that a \u201clarge majority of civilian casualties,\u201d was caused by \u201cGovernment\u201d fire,\u201d and the \u201cinformation\u201d on violations was verified \u201cto a good standard,\u201d illustrate the need for the Rajapaksa government\u2019s role to be scrutinised by an independent body. Further more any doubts as to the veracity of the allegations raised by GL Peiris as per his response to the report must be seen as coming from the alleged perpetrator\u2019s corner and deemed to be irrelevant and of little value. <\/p>\n

The Panel\u2019s findings validate the \u201cGovernment\u2019s\u201d responsibility for the mass killings in Mullivaikaal and expose the UN for omitting to mention this fact in its communications:<\/strong> <\/p>\n

\u201cNumerous UN communications said that civilians were being killed in artillery shelling, but they failed to mention that reports most often indicated the shelling in question was from Government forces. The UN condemned the use of heavy weapons appeared to believe that because such weapons were almost exclusively used by the Government that this was a sufficient means of raising Government responsibility.\u201d<\/p>\n

With respect to verification of facts on the ground of \u201cGovernment\u201d and LTTE violations the Panel was satisfied the information on violations had been verified to a good standard: <\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cIn fact, information had been verified to a good standard; indeed UN statements on LTTE violations, including the killing of civilians and holding civilians hostage, were based on information verified in the same manner,\u201d the Panel reported dismissing the reason senior UN officials had given not to single out \u201cGovernment\u201d killings for lack of verification.<\/p>\n

This would discredit any attempt by the Rajapaksa government and Foreign Affairs Minister GL Peiris\u2019 comments that suggest the Panel\u2019s allegations against the \u201cGovernment\u201d were unsubstantiated and erroneous.<\/p>\n

Use of Heavy Weapons by Rajapaksa Government:<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Panel drew attention to the heavy weapons the Rajapaksa government had used on civilians by quoting the Panel of Expert\u2019s findings: <\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cAccording to the Panel of Experts report \u201cFrom as early as 6 February 2009, the SLA [Sri Lanka Army] continuously shelled within the area that became the second NFZ, from all directions, including land, sea and air. It is estimated that there were between 300,000 and 330,000 civilians in that small area. The SLA assault employed aerial bombardment, long-range artillery, howitzers and MBRLs [unguided missile systems] as well as small mortars, RPGs [Rocket Propelled Grenades] and small arms fire …\u201d<\/p>\n

LTTE Violations Spelt Out by UN But Panel found UN Placed Greater Emphasis on LTTE Responsibility And failed to Mention \u201cGovernment Violations\u201d <\/p>\n

The Panel\u2019s findings now show senior UN officials chose to misrepresent the ground situation with respect to responsibility for violation against the considered opinion of some UN staff, \u201cplacing primary emphasis on LTTE responsibility when facts suggested otherwise.\u201d <\/p>\n

\u201cThe UN repeatedly condemned the LTTE for serious international human rights and humanitarian law violations but largely avoided mention of the Government\u2019s responsibility\u2026Some UN staff in Colombo expressed to the UNCT leadership their dismay that the UN was placing primary emphasis on LTTE responsibility when the facts suggested otherwise, and urged a more public stance.\u201d<\/p>\n

Throughout the report the Panel mentioning LTTE violations, made it known the UN laid less emphasis on the main perpetrator the Rajapaksa government a fact that can be drawn for example from the UN\u2019s briefing to the diplomatic corps: <\/strong><\/p>\n

On 9 March, the RC and some UNCT members presented an estimate of casualties to the diplomatic corps in Colombo. They listed the \u201ctotal minimum number of documented civilian casualties\u201d, between 20 January and 2 March 2009 in Mullaithivu District, as 2,683 deaths and 7,241 injuries, two-thirds of which occurred within the latest 14 km\u00b2 NFZ. <\/p>\n

The briefing and accompanying documents were forthright in describing LTTE human rights and international humanitarian law violations \u2013 including \u201cthe forced recruitment of men and women \u2026 [and] children as young as 12, at least one mass execution of civilians, mass corporal punishments, \u2026 the blocking of corridors for civilians trying to leave the combat area \u2026 the forced movement of civilians, the placing of weapons in areas of civilian concentration, and the diversion and possible withholding of humanitarian aid to civilians.\u201d <\/p>\n

However, the briefing did not explicitly address Government responsibility for the situation or for shelling. The COG had prepared a casualty sheet which showed that a large majority of the civilian casualties recorded by the UN had reportedly been caused by Government fire, but the UN did not present this data.\u201d<\/p>\n

Mass Killings Need Addressing<\/strong><\/p>\n

In summing up UN failures, the report is a testament to UN\u2019s actions and omissions that unwittingly served the Rajapaksa agenda, contributing to the escalation of violence against civilians, exacerbating the humanitarian catastrophe in the Vanni Region resulting in a hitherto unprecedented loss of innocent Tamil civilian lives: <\/p>\n

\u201cSeen together, the failure of the UN to adequately counter the Government\u2019s under-estimation of population numbers in the Wanni, the failure to adequately confront the Government on its obstructions to humanitarian assistance, the unwillingness of the UN in UNHQ and Colombo to address Government responsibility for attacks that were killing civilians, and the tone and content of UN communications with the Government on these issues, collectively amounted to a failure by the UN to act within the scope of institutional mandates to meet protection responsibilities.\u201d <\/p>\n

It\u2019s not enough to address UN\u2019s paralysis in preventing the mass killings brought on by the fact that it unwittingly served the Rajapaksa Government\u2019s agenda, more crucially it\u2019s the mass killing of civilians that need addressing. It\u2019s not only the UN\u2019s mute response to \u201cGovernment\u201d violations and the litany of UN failure that have come out clearly in the report that are troubling, it\u2019s also actions of the Rajapaksa governments that led to the genocidal mass slaughter of Tamil civilians precipitated no doubt by UN failures that should be most troubling.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s the fact that UN did little to stop the killings that is troubling; that it allowed the Rajapaksa government to dictate, manipulate and control events leaving the UN ineffective and incapable of discharging its mandate and unable to \u201cconfront\u201d the Government\u201d and protect Tamil civilians; one that led to some senior UN staff in Colombo \u201c\u201cto not perceive the prevention of killing of civilians as their responsibility,\u201d a situation that had disastrous consequences. It\u2019s imperative to address the killing of civilians by both sides as well as the serious implications of the Rajapaksa agenda that the UN served.<\/p>\n

The findings make it obvious that the Rajapaksa Government made the UN look and feel powerless, helplessly inept and seemingly paralysed, failing in its mandate to protect civilians prompting the Panel to conclude that:<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201c\u2026events in Sri Lanka mark a grave failure of the UN to adequately respond to early warnings and to the evolving situation during the final stages of the conflict and its aftermath, to the detriment of hundreds of thousands of civilians and in contradiction with the principles and responsibilities of the UN.\u201d <\/p>\n

The International Community that looked away whilst a Terrorist State Starved Deprived Shelled and Killed People Must Now Call for its Scrutiny <\/p>\n

If heads don\u2019t roll, at least the verdict of the Panel must surely prick the conscience of those in high positions in the UN who had a moral and legal responsibility to protect civilian lives. The time has come for them to address the killings without a moments delay. <\/p>\n

The report reads like a catalogue of errors amounting to incompetence and vacillation on the part of the UN leadership. The international community which was ready to demonize and label the LTTE as a terrorist organization literally looked away whilst a terrorist state starved, deprived, shelled and killed people. The report meticulous in its narrative of events in the final stages of the conflict, the lead up to it and the aftermath and its assessment of UN actions shows that UN bodies did not come up to task and some senior officials may have been complicit. The UN must now move from an internal probe to a criminal investigation to finding the killers. <\/p>\n

Rajapaksa Government\u2019s Continued Denial of Civilian Casualties and the Manner in which it Pitted One Official against Another:<\/strong> <\/p>\n

The Rajapaksa government\u2019s position that it maintained a policy of \u201czero civilian casualty\u201d and that it rescued the Tamils trapped \u201cwithout a drop of blood.\u201d is now found to be utterly false. The Panel reported on the Government\u2019s denial of casualty figures and its continued rejection of suggestions to civilian casualties occurring and the manner by which it publicly pitted one UN official against another to create doubts as to the veracity of UN\u2019s casualty figures:<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cThe Government responded robustly to any UN suggestions that there were civilian casualties at all. Aware of disagreement among UN principals, the Government used correspondence and public statements by senior UN officials to refute the OHCHR public statement. <\/p>\n

Diplomats who had attended the UNCT\u2019s 9 March briefing and wanted the UN to take a public stand on casualties leaked the briefing materials to the media.37 On 24 March the RC was summoned to meet with the Minister of Foreign Affairs; and on 25 March, the Government released a statement saying \u201c[the RC] has stated that he is unable to confirm the veracity of the figures of civilian casualties \u2026.\u201d, and describing the numbers as having \u201cnot been attributed to any reliable or independent source\u201d and the assertion that two-thirds of casualties had occurred in the NFZ as \u201cpatently false\u201d and \u201cunsubstantiated\u201d. A second Government statement dated March said \u201cThe UN system has been exposed for using figures that it cannot verified (sic) \u2026The figures of 2,800 civilians killed and more than 7,000 injured as claimed by the [USG-Human Rights] are not supported by the [UN] as verifiable figures.\u201d The UN in Sri Lanka published a statement on its website saying the USG-Humanitarian Affairs \u201chas clarified since that these figures were drawn from an internal working document which is based on information that cannot be fully, reliably, and independently assessed, because of limits on access to civilians in the combat zone.\u201d <\/p>\n

Government\u2019s Denials Not Rebutted and Would Have highlighted Government Actions Illegal:<\/strong><\/p>\n

The panel found that the UN did not elaborate on the \u201cspecifics of the humanitarian law provisions that were violated if otherwise would have highlighted the \u201cGovernment\u2019s actions as possibly illegal including with regard to the vital concepts of \u2018distinction\u2019, \u2018proportionality\u2019 and \u2018precautionary measures\u2019:<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cOn the rare instances when UN letters to the Government and UN statements associated Government fire with civilian deaths they did not elaborate on the specific humanitarian law provisions that were being violated and that would have highlighted Government actions as possibly illegal, including with regard to the vital concepts of \u2018distinction\u2019, \u2018proportionality\u2019 and \u2018precautionary measures\u2019.<\/p>\n

When the UN received implausible Government denials, these were not effectively rebutted. After the events, several senior UNHQ and UNCT actors recalled that the UN repeatedly raised concerns over \u201cthousands of civilian deaths\u201d, and argued that referring to specific casualty numbers would have made little difference. However, the UN62 greatly weakened the impact of its statements by not identifying the Government as the perpetrator of individual attacks associated with these casualties.\u201d <\/p>\n

Demand for International Independent Investigation must be addressed:<\/strong> <\/p>\n

As the world contemplates both Ban Ki-moon\u2019s next move and the response of the Security Council, General Assembly and UN Human Rights Council to this damning report, the answer to the question of \u201cwho killed Tamil civilians\u201d would definitely continue to haunt it until it responds positively to the heightening demand for an international independent mechanism to fully investigate the actions of the combatants, the \u2018mass atrocity crimes\u2019 committed and apportion responsibility; culminating in identifying and prosecuting the perpetrators. Another \u2018mute response\u201d from UN bodies to the report would be absolutely appalling and shameful and would further raise questions of UN\u2019s continuing complicity.<\/p>\n

Inaction on the Part of UN Bodies to Prevent Killings Requires it to Address Killings: <\/strong><\/p>\n

Security Council Now Obliged to Investigate Killings: <\/strong><\/p>\n

Whilst a bloodbath of epic proportions was taking place the \u201cSecurity Council was unable to agree on placing Sri Lanka on its agenda,\u201d and at the Human Rights Council \u201cmember states could not gather 16 Council members,\u201d the minimum required for a special session. \u201cThroughout the final stages of the conflict, member states did not hold a single formal meeting on Sri Lanka, whether at the Security Council, the Human Rights Council or the General Assembly,\u201d the Panel found, recording the fact that \u201cwithout clear Security Council support,\u201d the UN felt it could not play a lead role and made no attempt to implement a comprehensive strategy.\u201d <\/p>\n

Finally, after remaining silent until three days before the end of the conflict and after tens of thousands of civilians had perished, \u201ca large majority of casualties the UN confirming caused by Sri Lankan government fire,\u201d the Security Council issues a press statement read out by Council President Vitaly Churkin (Russian Federation) in direct contrast to the facts on the ground, expressing the Security Council\u2019s full support for Sri Lanka\u2019s so called \u201chumanitarian rescue operation,\u201d strongly condemning the LTTE \u201cfor its acts of terrorism over many years, and for its continued use of civilians as human shields,\u201d and acknowledging the \u201clegitimate right of the Government of Sri Lanka to combat terrorism,\u201d and demanding that the LTTE \u201clay down its arms and allow the tens of thousands of civilians still in the conflict zone to leave.\u201d <\/p>\n

The Security Council must examine its collective conscience; the chances that it will are slim considering the nature of the dynamics between the powers:<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cThe tone, content and objectives of UNHQ\u2019s engagement with Member States regarding Sri Lanka were heavily influenced by what it perceived Member States wanted to hear, rather than by what Member States needed to know if they were to respond,\u201d and the Security Council\u2019s inability to, \u201cgather sufficient consensus\u201d as being a problem even as \u201cthe travel to Sri Lanka of two Foreign Ministers from members of the Security Council in late April 2009 and subsequent call, on 12 May in New York,\u201d which came too late to change the course of events.\u201d<\/p>\n

Furthermore \u201cSenior Secretariat officials\u201d the Panel said, did not adequately keep members states informed of civilian deaths:<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cThe UN did not give full information on the deaths of civilians to member states \u2026. And did not emphasize the responsibilities of the Government\u2026 in a 27 February briefing, the USG-Humanitarian Affairs said \u201cdozens of people per day at least are being killed and many more wounded\u201d but did not provide the COG casualty figures or mention that most casualties appeared to be the result of Government fire and were occurring in the No Fire Zone (NFZ).\u201d <\/p>\n

R2P:<\/strong><\/p>\n

Sadly, the Security Council and the General Assembly, the only bodies that has the power under the principle of \u2018Responsibility to Protect\u2019 (R2P) and could have intervened through military means to save lives on humanitarian grounds, did not, although R2P is designed to prevent \u2018mass atrocity crimes\u2019 that include the crime of genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing:<\/p>\n

\u201cThe concept of a \u2018Responsibility to Protect\u2019 was raised occasionally during the final stages of the conflict, but to no useful result. Differing perceptions among Member States and Secretariat of the concept\u2019s meaning and use had become so contentious as to nullify its potential value. Indeed, making references to the Responsibility to Protect was seen as more likely to weaken rather than strengthen UN action\u201d<\/p>\n

UNHRC has Work to do Towards Making a Specific Call for an International Independent Investigation:<\/strong><\/p>\n

The UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) has a lot of work to do with respect to the Panel\u2019s finding in the upcoming 21st session in March 2013 when its diluted resolution will be studied, discussions centering on the progress made by the Rajapaksa Government\u2019s on establishing a domestic investigation as recommended by the LLRC. It would be a crying shame if HRC does not respond to this report more constructively towards seriously finding answers to the panel\u2019s findings. The UNHRC\u2019s past history on Sri Lanka has shown it has done little to find the truth; it did not convene a special session at the time the war was raging and later congratulated the government approving the Ragapaksa government\u2019s own text in a special session, failing to acknowledge the violations and more recently in the 19th session passed a resolution that gave the Rajapaksa government time to establish its own domestic investigation. <\/p>\n

Ban Ki-moon Failed to use his Powers Under Article 99 Ban Ki-moon must Spur UN into Action to Find Killers:<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Panel discussed the Secretary General\u2019s options citing Article 99 as one option that was considered although there was a difference of opinion on whether he should \u201cactively seek Security Council involvement,\u201d some feeling, \u201dthey needed to protect the Secretary-General from taking sharper positions on the situation because there was no consensus from Member States..\u201d <\/p>\n

If Ban Ki-moon\u2019s words, in response to the Panel\u2019s findings are to be taken seriously that \u201ctransparency and accountability are critical to the legitimacy of the UN,\u201d and his admission to UN\u2019s failure to protect civilians are to mean something, he has got to draw upon the powers he has under Article 99 of the Charter to do more to spur the UN into action. His refusal to call for a cease-fire to stop the killings when the casualties were far greater in number compared to Gaza, Sudan and the Congo and later in Libya and Syria where he expressed condemnation and outrage calling for a cease-fire in many cases and his reluctance in raising the matter with the Security Council again under Article 99 on the excuses that he had no mandate and that the matter was not in the Security Council agenda are issues that raised eyebrows then and are questions that still remain unanswered. Also the Panel reported that some members \u201cregretted\u201d that Ban Ki-moon when sending the UN Panels of Experts report to the UNHRC did not \u201ctransmit it for their possible action.\u201d<\/p>\n

Worry that Report May be Shelved:<\/strong><\/p>\n

Undoubtedly everything rests on the Security Council not to shelve the report but to examine its own conduct and take the most constructive, proper and predictable next step to creating an independent mechanism to finding those accountable for the 40,000 civilians possibly much more who perished in Mullivaikaal.<\/p>\n

Palitha Kohona – \u201cReport Won\u2019t Affect Sri Lanka\u201d:<\/strong><\/p>\n

Whilst the Panel was categorical about the UN\u2019s failure to exert its mandate the Rajapaksa Government in total contrast \u201crubbishing\u201d the report through its spokesman Palitha Kohona, Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka to the United Nations was defiant that the report \u201cwould not affect Sri Lanka,\u201d with no authority to speak on UN\u2019s mandate, insisted \u201cthe UN acted within its mandate under the Charter.\u201d <\/p>\n

He told \u2018Newsfirst Sri Lanka\u2019 that as a lawyer he is prepared to \u201cchallenge\u201d the findings, implying the UN is \u201cnot a supranational body\u201d, claiming the Rajapaksa Government worked with senior UN officials through out.<\/p>\n

Kohona\u2019s impudence and lack of remorse revealed the Government\u2019s confidence in its allies among the member states, the Security Council and the Human Rights Council. He laid out everyone\u2019s responsibilities and indirectly warned against any form of interference, typical of the stance the Rajapaksa Government has taken to effectively escape accountability, continuing a culture of impunity where it refuses to accept any culpability for its actions in the war. <\/p>\n

Kohona\u2019s Interview: <\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cThe UN is not a supranational body, it\u2019s an organisation of members state\u2026 with clearly defined roles to play; when the UN operates in a country it operates within its mandate provided by the Charter\u2026 it is not an autonomous body, it has to be very sensitive to what the member states think, how the member states guide it and how the host country looks at it\u2026 (the Panel) totally ignored the fact the government has conducted a census in the North. Which gave a clearer picture of the casualties; it hardly paid any attention to the fact the LTTE fought in civilian clothes… when a combatant fights in civilian clothes and dies, it doesn\u2019t convert him to a civilian; so many things like that have escaped the compilers of the report.\u201d<\/p>\n

Demand for International Independent Investigation Heightens:<\/strong> <\/p>\n

The report has naturally evoked a heightened demand for an international independent investigation from International NGOs, human rights defenders and journalists, and from the Tamil Diaspora including the Global Tamil Forum (GTF), the United State Tamil Political Action Council (USTPAC), the Canadian Tamil Congress (CTC) and the Transnational Government of Tamil Eelam (TGTE among other.<\/p>\n

TGTE\u2019s Response to the Report:<\/strong><\/p>\n

Deluxon Morris, TGTE Minister for Investigation of Genocide, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes, issued a call for a \u201ccommission of investigation on Sri Lanka\u201d and asked that: \u201cthe prosecutions should not be limited to War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity and must include Genocide\u201d; that the \u201cSpecial Adviser to the UN Secretary-General on the Prevention of Genocide must make public the report on Tamil Genocide\u201d; that \u201cgiven the constraint on the mandate of the Lessons Learned and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) coupled with the \u2018lack of an enabling environment for a judicial follow up\u2019 as stated\u2026 in the report, the Secretary-General need not wait till the exhaustion of the domestic remedies\u201d and urged Ban Ki-moon to use his powers, \u201cUnder Article 99 of the UN Charter to appoint an International Commission of Inquiry as recommended by his own advisers.\u201d <\/p>\n

One of TGTE\u2019s main demands was to call for the Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide to release the report on his predecessor\u2019s concerns\u2019 which \u201che raised\u201d with the (Rajapaka) Government and Secretary-General over the situation initially but later decided not to disclose, telling the Government he would \u201cnot speak out,\u201d favouring instead, in his words \u201cquiet diplomacy\u201d. <\/p>\n

However the panel also recorded the fact that \u201cwhen his office later tried to issue a public statement this was not supported by UNHQ,\u201d a matter that must investigated.<\/p>\n

M A Sumanthiran speaking for the Tamil National Alliance, \u201cdemanding a probe\u2019 told NDTV that “There should be an international inquiry. The government as the main accused party cannot be involved in the investigation. Now that the UN has come with this report we want action,” the MP said. <\/p>\n

Three Reports Plus the Dublin Report Combined Make a Compelling Case – UN Cannot Ignore the Elephant in the Room: <\/strong><\/p>\n

The UN can no longer pretend to ignore the elephant in the room, it\u2019s time it addresses the issue of accountability head on. The need to find out who was responsible for civilian deaths and who should face prosecution should now be a priority for senior UN officials and all UN bodies.<\/p>\n

Additionally the two combined UN sponsored reports, this as well as the \u2018UN Panel of Experts\u2019 report together with another Independent Report containing testimonies from UN workers and the findings of the Dublin Tribunal, (The same Dublin Tribunal preparing at this time to hear the case for genocide in Mullivaikaal), now in the public domain all providing irrefutable evidence, make it more compelling for the UN to start the wheels of justice moving. The UN Panel of Experts on accountability found \u201cmost civilian casualties was caused by Government shelling\u201d and held what took place was “a very different version of the final stages of the war than that maintained to this day by the Government of Sri Lanka.” <\/p>\n

Another report titled \u2018Independent Report on Sri Lanka and United Nations Human Rights Violations\u2019 authored by Julian Vigo who interviewing UN workers who testified to genocidal act occurring, raised the need for addressing the issue of UN complicity and the question of whether \u201cUN failure to act made it an accomplice in the Sri Lankan government\u2019s human rights abuses and possibly various acts of genocide.\u201d<\/p>\n

Government Obstruction to the Delivery of Humanitarian Assistance:<\/strong><\/p>\n

The UN\u2019s failure to correctly \u201cpresent data\u201d on casualties caused by the Rajapaksa Government at the crucial time the war was in progress and its failure to \u201cexplain that the most immediate causes for the severe shortfall (in food and medicines) had been Government obstruction to the delivery of assistance, including its artillery shelling,\u201d have been recorded by the Panel:<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201c\u2026.And when describing the lack of food and medicines, the briefing did not explain that the most immediate causes for the severe shortfall had been Government obstruction to the delivery of assistance, including its artillery shelling\u2026..The expectation that the UN would not confront it on the issue may, in turn, have influenced Government action. There location had a severe impact on the delivery of humanitarian assistance and reduced the potential for monitoring the protection of civilians. It removed the most significant protection layers, even as thousands of civilians sought protection by remaining close to UN premises. There action of the UN system as a whole to the Government\u2019s withdrawal of security assurances represented a serious failure.\u201d And when describing the lack of food and medicines, the briefing did not explain that the most immediate causes for the severe shortfall had been Government obstruction to the delivery of assistance, including its artillery shelling.\u201d<\/p>\n

Senior UN Officials Concealed Casualty Figures:<\/strong><\/p>\n

It\u2019s clear that some officials behaved as though they were under the spell of the Rajapaksa Government, choosing to conceal \u201ccasualty figures\u201d and \u201cviolations of international law, afraid publication would \u201cprovoke criticism\u201d from the Rajapaksa government. To this end senior UN officials went as far as trying to block Navi Pillai\u2019s office (OHCHR \u2013 Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights) from releasing the only statement the UN issued which the Rajapaksa Government capitalizing on dissention in the UN refuted:<\/p>\n

\u201cGovernment used dissenting opinions by senior UN staff to discredit the statement, diluting its potential preventive impact\u2026The Government responded robustly to any UN suggestions that there were civilian casualties at all. Aware of disagreement among UN principals, the Government used correspondence and public statements by senior UN officials to refute the OHCHR public statement.\u201d<\/p>\n

UN downplayed Government responsibility and magnified LTTE violations:<\/strong><\/p>\n

It\u2019s clear that there was a concerted effort by the UN particularly some officials to down play the mass atrocities committed by the Rajapaksa government and magnify those committed by the LTTE, the UN officials justifying its mute criticism of the Government\u2019s conduct:<\/strong> <\/p>\n

\u201cThroughout the final stages, the UN issued many public statements and reports accusing the LTTE of committing human rights and international humanitarian law violations, and mentioning thousands of civilians killed\u2026 UN almost completely omitted to explicitly mention Government responsibility for violations of international law. UN officials said they did not want to prejudice humanitarian access by criticizing the Government \u2013 and maintained this position even when access within the Wanni was almost non-existent.<\/p>\n

Officials also said that by March they were trying to ensure access to IDPs who had already left the Wanni and that they were negotiating a humanitarian pause to allow more civilians to escape. According to these officials, both factors justified the UN\u2019s mute criticism of the Government\u2019s conduct. However despite UN advocacy and its relative withholding of criticism, access to IDPs in camps outside the Wanni remained strictly limited by the Government and the UN never obtained the kind of humanitarian pause that would have allowed civilians to be moved to safe ground\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cWho was killing civilians\u201d and \u201chow many civilians were killed\u201d are Questions Political not Humanitarian \u2013 Not UN\u2019s Purview:<\/strong><\/p>\n

It\u2019s clear that the UN was indecisive and dragged its feet, unable to act independently to protect people and save lives. It is unimaginable but true the UN failed to exert its mandate over a government which was killing civilians, choosing to be silent than speak out about \u201cwho was killing civilians\u201d and \u201chow many civilians were killed\u201d: <\/p>\n

\u201cThroughout the conflict, some UNCT and UNHQ actors sought to separate the humanitarian response from what they termed \u201cpolitical\u201d issues. Issues appear to have been defined as political not because they had a political aspect but rather because UN action to address them would have provoked criticism from the Government. Thus, raising concern over who was killing civilians, how many civilians were being killed, or how many civilians were actually in the Wanni were all, at various times, described as political issues. The distinction was used by some senior UN staff as an argument against additional UN action or full reporting on these issues, and even to exclude them from the purview of UN monitoring or response.\u201d<\/p>\n

Scale of Government Inaccuracies on Population Numbers Staggering:<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Panel\u2019s findings now legitimize the Bishop of Mannar\u2019s concerns on the number of missing people which he estimated to be 146, 679. In terms of the number of people trapped, the Panel was unequivocal in pointing out the scale of inaccuracy in the National Government\u2019s figures of numbers and that \u201cthe determination of the numbers of people in the Wanni was central to all humanitarian action.\u201d:<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cA Wanni local government official testified to the LLRC that during the final stages there had been 360,000 IDPs in her district alone. Others who submitted testimony to the Commission quoted estimates of local Government authorities that placed the total population number in October 2008 at 429,000. Yet national Government authorities in Colombo insisted that there were no more than about 70,000 people. <\/p>\n

The UN believed there were up to 350,000 civilians, but in its internal and public statements made references which oscillated between 150,000 and 350,000, and used an assistance-planning figure of 200,000. The reception and registration of almost 280,000 people in IDP internment camps when they left the Wanni is an indication of the scale of inaccuracy in the national Government\u2019s figures. The Government\u2019s denial of the real numbers buttressed arguments against increasing humanitarian convoys and was later used to rebut reports of high civilian casualties.\u201d<\/p>\n

UN Chef de Cabinet\u2019s Offer to be Present at LTTE Surrender Refused\u201d <\/p>\n

According to Credible Sources the Panels said Surrendering LTTE Leaders were Executed:<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Panel reported that \u201cby 18 May most of the remaining LTTE leadership was reportedly killed\u201d and although the Government claimed they died in armed engagements, possibly at the hands of other LTTE, Other credible sources said many were executed, including some who on the morning of 18 May had crossed into Government-held territory unarmed and with white flags.\u201d <\/p>\n

The Panel revealed the dilemma facing the UN on the issue of LTTE surrender, the UN concluding it did not have the means to guarantee safe passage to the LTTE leadership:<\/strong> <\/p>\n

\u201cThe UN did not have the means to guarantee safe passage to the LTTE leadership\u2026The Chef de Cabinet could not circumvent the Government\u2019s rejection of a UN presence during the surrender. UN officials said that in transmitting the LTTE request to the Government and in firmly expressing to the Government the UN\u2019s wish to be present at a surrender they did the best they could, and had no other options. <\/p>\n

Given the UN\u2019s approach toward the Government regarding its conduct of the conflict over the previous few months, and given the lack of clear support for UN action from Member States, the war\u2019s final days the UN was not well positioned to exercise leverage with the Government on this issue.\u201d<\/p>\n

Gotabaya Rajapaksa\u2019s Order to Kill Surrendering LTTE Leadership and Sarath Fonseka\u2019s Retraction:<\/strong><\/p>\n

The facts about fate of the surrendering political leaders of the LTTE and Sarath Fonseka\u2019s shocking disclosure of Gotabaya Rajapaksa\u2019s \u201cinstructions to kill all surrendering LTTE leaders\u201d is borne out by the Panel\u2019s findings:<\/strong> <\/p>\n

\u201c\u2026. the Chef de Cabinet\u2026was willing to travel to the Wanni and be present at the surrender. His offer was refused. The Chef de Cabinet said he was nevertheless assured by senior Government officials that LTTE leaders bearing a white flag could surrender. General Fonseka, commander of the Sri Lankan Army, declared victory against the LTTE on 16 May. By 17 May, according to the Army, the LTTE was confined to an area of 400m by 400m. On 18 May, Government representatives were announcing that Prabhakaran and other LTTE leaders were dead, as was subsequently confirmed in videos and photographs.<\/p>\n

The Government stated that the LTTE leadership had been killed while trying to escape, or possibly in intra-LTTE fighting. Pointed questions were raised later by NGOs and in the international media regarding the possibility that the deaths were in fact the result of executions. And there were questions regarding the UN\u2019s role in an interview months later, General Fonseka, who had subsequently launched his candidacy for President in opposition to President Rajapaksa, stated that the Defence Secretary had instructed a commander in the north to kill all surrendering LTTE leaders. <\/p>\n

General Fonseka was later arrested and retracted his statement. The UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions wrote to the Government requesting clarification.\u201d <\/p>\n

International Independent Mechanism now Necessary, Obligatory and Incumbent upon the UN:<\/strong><\/p>\n

In view of the Panel\u2019s report which reads like a damning indictment on the Rajapaksa Government it is now patently clear the creation of an independent international mechanism has become necessary, obligatory and incumbent upon the UN. Although the Panel focused its recommendations \u201con how the UN approached similar situations in the future,\u201d yet under the heading \u201cSri Lanka\u2019s way forward\u201d, it was unequivocal in saying that \u201cthe UN cannot fulfil its post-conflict and development responsibilities in Sri Lanka without addressing (certain) fundamental concerns\u201d:<\/strong> <\/p>\n

\u201cIt is nevertheless clear that there can be no lasting peace and stability without dealing with the most serious past violations and without a political response to the aspirations of Sri Lanka\u2019s communities. The UN cannot fulfil its post-conflict and development responsibilities in Sri Lanka without addressing these fundamental concerns; and the UN should continue to support implementation of the recommendations of the Panel of Experts on Accountability.\u201d<\/p>\n

The Report\u2019s Findings Persuasive Case for International Independent Investigation \u2013 UN cannot Fail Victims of the Genocidal Mass Slaughter:<\/strong><\/p>\n

As the Rajapaksa Government moves to impeach the Chief Justice for not conforming to its agenda, it continues unabated with its primary focus of maintaining the North and East as a heavily militarized zone and of altering forcibly the demography of the area as it seeks to destroy the historical habitats and national identity of the Tamils. In a climate of fear and autocratic rule where the fundamental principle of separations of powers has no meaning, and the Tamil people are looking to the international community and the UN for a \u2018protection mechanism\u2019 to stop the \u2018structural genocide\u2019 of the Tamil Nation one which the TGTE is strongly advocating, the probability of justice being served and for the truth to be finally revealed through a \u201cGovernment\u201d appointed commission is nil.<\/p>\n

Both the continued denial by the Rajapaksa government of any wrongdoing and its refusal to accept responsibility for any civilian casualties must justifiably underscore the urgency and need for a credible international investigation. not withstanding the fact the LLRC, the government\u2019s own \u2018Lessons Learned Reconciliation Commission had exonerated it from any responsibility for civilian deaths, The allegations of the genocidal mass slaughter of Tamils in Mullivaikaal need addressing; the Tamils deserving justice just as much as the Bosnians of the Srebrenica and the Tootsies of Rwanda. <\/p>\n

The UN must not and cannot fail the victims of the genocidal mass slaughter that took place in Sri Lanka. <\/p>\n

( Usha S Sriskandarajah is the chair of Transnational Govt of Tamil Eelam (TGTE) Senate)<\/em><\/p>\n

Tweet<\/a><\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

By Usha S Sriskandarajah The internal probe commissioned to examine the conduct of the United Nations during the final months of the war in Sri Lanka with a view to putting its house in order is to be commended for being forthright about UN\u2019s own failures. However it\u2019s findings must also be seen as a …<\/p>\n

Continue reading ‘UN Internal Review Panel\u2019s findings during the final months of the war in Sri Lanka: An Analysis’ »<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[12],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12811"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=12811"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12811\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":12814,"href":"https:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12811\/revisions\/12814"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=12811"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=12811"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=12811"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}