Sri Lanka wary over US move

Tuesday, 22 September 2015

Ambassador Ravinatha calls lengthy US draft resolution

prescriptive and judgmental

Says resolution is imbalanced; focuses too much on criminal

justice element
Urges sponsors to be sensitive to political realities and

constitutional difficulties in implementing resolution

recommendations
Resolution in its present form will strengthen spoilers of

reconciliation process
Hectic backroom consultations begin soon after informal session

ends in Geneva
Pakistan, China, Russia, Cuba push strongly for dilution of draft

text
EU, Ireland, Switzerland, Norway support international element

in Lankas accountability process

Dharisha Bastians Reporting from Geneva
The Government has opposed the first draft of the US-sponsored resolution
to promote reconciliation and accountability in Sri Lanka, calling it
repetitive, judgmental and prescriptive and counterproductive to the
reconciliation process in the island.
Sri Lankas Per-manent Represent-ative to the UN in Geneva, Amba-ssador
Ravinatha Aryasinha told member states attending an informal consultation
at the Palais des Nations in Geneva on the language of the draft resolution,

urged sponsors of the resolution and its supporting partners to ensure the
draft was sensitive to constitutional and institutional difficulties in
implementing its recommendations and political realities in the country.
The US draft resolution contains 26 operative paragraphs or clauses
calling for action by the Government of Sri Lanka including the need for
international judges, prosecutors and investigators in the transitional justice
mechanism that will address serious wartime abuses.

My delegation is of the view that a lengthy resolution of the nature of the

current draft before us..which is repetitive, judgmental and prescriptive is
not in keeping with the spirit of the process of reconciliation efforts of the
Government. Neither is it helpful in adopting a collaborative approach to
reaching consensus, Ambassador Aryasinha charged.
The Sri Lankan Head of Mission said that many paragraphs in the present
draft resolution had a tendency to polarise communities, vitiate the
atmosphere on the ground that is being carefully nurtured towards
reconciliation and peace building.
There is a real danger that the current approach will leave room for
negative interpretation, thus, only helping spoilers in this process,
Ambassador Aryasinha added. The remark was a reference to backlash
against the Government emerging from hardline nationalist quarters in Sri
Lanka, that were strongly opposed to international judges and prosecutors
in Sri Lankas domestic accountability process.

Ambassador Aryasinha said that the resolution had been rendered

imbalanced because of what he called excessive emphasis on the
criminal justice aspects, even though the OHCHR report on Sri Lanka was
specifically a human rights investigation and not a criminal investigation.
He explained that the language of the US resolution must contain clear
language that the people of Sri Lanka find respectful.
Ambassador Aryasinha kicked off his remarks by noting that his
delegations participation in the informal consultations on the draft
resolution was a clear departure from Sri Lankas previous positions on
US-sponsored resolutions. Sri Lankas Head of Mission said his delegation
was attending the session to engage constructively in the discussionsin
a collaborative spirit to reach a consensus on this resolution.

Noting that Sri Lanka was following a clearly different path to what was
followed pre-January 8, 2015 the Sri Lankan Envoy said the Governments
expectation was that there would be similar change in the tone, tenor and
even the strategy on the part of the Council.
The first informal consultation on the US sponsored resolution on Sri Lanka
took place in Room XXIII of the Palais des Nations, at 10.00 a.m. yesterday.
The resolution is expected to be tabled at the Human Rights Council on
Thursday (24) ahead of the deadline.
The informal session was chaired by the United States Ambassador to the
UN in Geneva, Keith Harper, while core group member states UK,
Macedonia and Montenegro also sat at the head table.
US Ambassador to Sri Lanka Atul Keshap, who is in Geneva for consultations
this week, also attended the informal session on the Sri Lanka resolution.
Ambassador Keshap met with delegations in the core group of sponsors of
the Sri Lanka resolution yesterday and will consult with other member
states during his visit.

Hectic backroom consultations and lobbying commenced inside the UN

building in Geneva soon after the informal session ended. Sections of the
international community are strongly urging the main sponsors of the
resolution to water down the documents language, lest it creates a
backlash in Colombo, with nationalist forces mobilising support against
international interference.
These diplomatic envoys argue that the new Government in Sri Lanka could
be weakened by forces aligned to former President Mahinda Rajapaksa and
his close allies, if intrusive language is included in the draft resolution, Daily
FT learns.
While some groups and interested member states are urging the inclusion
of High Commissioner Zeids language in the resolution, specifically relating
to a hybrid special court, Daily FT learns that this insertion is highly
improbable ahead of the tabling of the draft.
Highly placed diplomatic sources told Daily FT that the Government of Sri
Lanka is seeking a draft resolution that is realistic and can be implemented
in the country without major political opposition. The Government must be
able to pass statutes without huge Opposition in Parliament in order to be
able to implement any of its own proposals or recommendations in the
resolution, the sources explained.

The informal consultations on the US draft resolution on Sri Lanka held at the Palais des
Nations in Geneva last morning proceeded in the same vein it has unfolded in past years,
UNHRC observers said.
Russia, China, Cuba and particularly Pakistan strongly backed the dilution of language of the
resolution, while the EU, Switzerland, Ireland, Canada and the core group of sponsors
reiterated support for the draft.
Kicking off the discussion, the Pakistan delegation insisted that the US resolution on Sri Lanka
would only be fruitful if it had the full support and acceptance of the country concerned. Its
important for the international community to strengthen the Government of Sri Lankas hand
and not to weaken it internally, the Pakistani diplomat told delegates at the informal session.

The Russian delegation urged the sponsors of the resolution to heed Sri Lankas concerns
about the draft.
The Chinese delegation raising issue with Operative Paragraph 4 of the draft resolution,
opposed the inclusion of international judges, investigators and prosecutors in Sri Lankas
accountability mechanism, saying the language eroded Sri Lankas judicial sovereignty.
Cuba also opposed the draft resolution, saying it was repetitive and selective. Each country
should decide internally how to promote human rights, the Cuban delegate said.
Pakistan held firm for Sri Lanka, requesting clarity on paragraphs in the draft referring to
demilitarisation of the North and insisting that it was up to the people of Sri Lanka and its
Government to find a solution to the issues.
Trying to internationalise this process through a hybrid mechanism to solve the problems is as
if to say they are not capable of doing that. Theirs is a civilisation thousands of years old, the
Pakistani envoy asserted. Pakistan said it would oppose the resolution unless the country
concerned Sri Lanka was fully onboard with its language. Pakistan also demanded to
know if the continuous assessment recommended in the resolution by the UN High
Commissioner for Human Rights would have budgetary implications.
Head of the US delegation in Geneva, Ambassador Harper responded that they were not aware
of any budgetary implications so far, and insisted that the aim of the resolution should be to
make the accountability mechanism in Sri Lanka credible. The key term here is credibility.
Whatever this resolution does, it must make the mechanism more credible, Ambassador
Harper noted during the informal session.
Responding to Pakistans request for clarity on the demilitarisation clauses, Ambassador
Harper said that militarisation of the region has been a driver of human rights issues. This
has been reflected in OHCHR reports and also domestic reports it is a core concern, the US
Envoy reiterated.
The Irish delegation also had several inputs supporting the draft resolution, and urged Sri
Lanka not to view the international element recommended to its accountability process as
intrusive or judgmental. From our own experience in Ireland, we found the international role
to be helpful. The international dimension could assist rather than undermine, the delegate
from Ireland explained. Ireland called for a strong international element which it said was
crucial to the credibility of the accountability mechanism in Sri Lanka.
The delegations of both Norway and Switzerland urged that the resolution call for an oral
report from High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Raad Al Hussein in March 2016,
instead of one year ahead in September 2016, as the resolution currently recommends.
The credibility and success of any transitional justice mechanism is enhanced by international
assistance and expertise, the Norwegian delegation noted.
The EU delegation called for a robust international component in the accountability process
in Sri Lanka, in line with the High Commissioners report on war crimes released last week.
Sri Lankan human rights activist Dr. Nimalka Fernando making an intervention on behalf of
civil society, praised the overall framework of the draft resolution. She said had built on the
pain and agony of victims in Sri Lanka.

Dr Fernando told member states that there has been clear indication in the language of the Sri
Lankan Prime Minister, the commitments of the President and remarks by the Cabinet
Spokesman that the political leadership was seriously considering the need for an international
role and engagement of the international community in the reconciliation and accountability
process.

Posted by Thavam