*Investigation against Sri Lanka: UNHRC & Navi Pillay cunningly exceeding
mandate*


 What started out as the world’s indignation against Sri Lanka for the
events that took place during the last three months of the war has changed
leaps and bounds with each successive resolution being passed by same camps
of nation. With the obvious lack of any credible proof to nail Sri Lanka
the next option has been to include items that could easily have been dealt
with at the Universal Periodic Review. The Resolutions passed since 2009
have had nothing to do with the war, the last phase of the war or even
cared about the victims. But the architects of the resolutions have found
common ground in their hunger to avenge those that eliminated the LTTE.
Like it or not, none of the Resolutions can bring back to life either the
LTTE or its Leader, Velu Prabarakan. He is very much a dead man and the
people of Sri Lanka are thankful he is no more even if a handful of others
are angry he is dead. In the present context what is important is to
highlight that the UNHRC head before bidding adieu has cunningly included
into the terms of reference for the investigation a period that was not
included in the mandate. The Resolution was to cover the period under LLRC
investigation. This period was 2002 to 2009. Why has the UNHRC Resolution
put self-appointed itself to investigate from 2002 to 2011? The GOSL
instead of wasting money and time lobbying useless groups need to
immediately make objections to this even if it is not cooperating.



The OHCHR investigation on Sri Lanka quotes the Resolution :



*In its resolution **A/HRC/25/1
<http://ap.ohchr.org/documents/dpage_e.aspx?si=A/HRC/RES/25/1> adopted in
March 2014 on “Promoting reconciliation, accountability and human rights in
Sri Lanka”, the United Nations Human Rights Council requested the UN High
Commissioner for Human Rights to “undertake a comprehensive investigation
into alleged serious violations and abuses of human rights and related
crimes by both parties in Sri Lanka during the period covered by the
Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC), and to establish the
facts and circumstances of such alleged violations and of the crimes
perpetrated with a view to avoiding impunity and ensuring accountability,
with assistance from relevant experts and special procedures mandate
holders”.*



*http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/Pages/OISL.aspx
<http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/Pages/OISL.aspx> *



Note: The OHCHR Resolution was clear that it was to cover

1.   Both parties (LTTE and Sri Lankan Government)

2.   Period covered by the LLRC (2002 to 2009)



This clearly establishes the need for the investigation to ensure it is
covering both parties (LTTE and GOSL) and to also ensure it covers the
period that LLRC investigated 2002 to 2009.



Does Navi Pillay and OHCHR think that we are fools to accept upto 2011 just
because the LLRC handed over their report in 2011 and that gives Navi
Pillay and her office to go beyond her mandate and put the timeframe to
2011?



The OHCHR has also been cunning enough to add *“The OISL will also take
into consideration any contextual and other relevant information that may
fall outside this timeframe which may provide a better understanding of
events or which may be pertinent regarding continuing human rights
violations.”*



This raises the question what does ‘other relevant information that may
fall outside this timeframe’ have to do with the LLRC period covered, the
crimes by both parties and/or the last phase of the war?



*Given that the OHCHR is investigating FOR THE FIRST TIME a country where a
conflict has ended (the first country in the world to eliminate terrorists)
why is it investigating 1/3 of the entire conflict ONLY?*





The OHCHR website includes the timeframe of the investigation which reads
as thus:

*“The period under investigation is that covered by the LLRC, that is, from
21 February 2002 until 15 November 2011, when it presented its report to
the President of Sri Lanka” *



Note: (If it is the period covered by the LLRC surely it is the period that
the LLRC investigated. That period was 21 February 2002 to 19 May 2009)





What is that mandate. The LLRC mandate as per its website declares:

www.llrc.lk

To inquire and report on the following matters that may have taken place
during the period between 21st February, 2002 and 19th May, 2009, namely;

·         The facts and circumstances which led to the failure of the
ceasefire agreement operationalized on 21st February, 2002 and the sequence
of events that followed thereafter up to the 19th of May, 2009.

·         Whether any person, group or institution directly or indirectly
bear responsibility in this regard

·         The lessons we would learn from those events and their attendant
concern, in order to ensure that there will be no recurrence;

·         The methodology whereby restitution to any person affected by
those events or their dependants or their heirs, can be affected;

·         The institutional administrative and legislative measured which
need to be taken in order or prevent any recurrence of such concerns in the
future, and to promote further national unity and the reconciliation among
all communities, and to make any such other recommendations with reference
to any of the matters that have been inquired into under the terms of the
Warrant.



The Sri Lankan Governments response to the 2014 UNHRC Resolution is also
noteworthy.



*SRI LANKA ACCUSES UNHRC OF VIOLATING HRC RESOLUTION*

·         *"The draft resolution in its key Operative Paragraph vests the
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights with an investigative
mandate in violation of the HRC resolution 60/251 and the IB package.”*

*SRI LANKA SAYS UNHRC DOES NOT HAVE A MANDATE TO CARRY OUT AN INVESTIGATION
OR RESOURCES:*

·         *“**In addition to not having the mandate to conduct an
investigation, the OHCHR also does not have the capacity or the resources
to do so.”*

*SRI LANKA OBJECTS TO LACK OF CLARITY AND USE OF AMBIGUOUS LANGUAGE:*

·         *“**Operative Paragraph also contains lack of clarity in
reference to 'relevant experts', thus deceptively opening the door to third
party elements in the guise of an investigation by the OHCHR. The reference
to an international investigation mechanism is clear though crafted in
ambiguous language which could be open to interpretation”*

*SRI LANKA ALSO HIGHLIGHTS INCONSISTENCIES & CONTRADICTIONS*

·         *“Additionally, this Operative Paragraph which requests the OHCHR
to conduct an independent investigation is mutually inconsistent with
Operative Paragraph 2 which calls upon the Government of Sri Lanka to
conduct an independent and credible investigation into alleged violations.”*



*SRI LANKA’S COMMENTS ON THE PERIOD TO BE COVERED UNDER THE UNHRC
RESOLUTION (THIS INFORMATION IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT RECONFIRMS THE PERIOD
TO BE COVERED)*

·         "By a deliberate failure to specify a time period in Operative
Paragraph 10 (b), the draft resolution may confine its ambit between 2002
and 2009, by adopting a narrower interpretation of the period covered by
the LLRC, thus completely excluding the atrocities and violations of
international human rights and international humanitarian law committed by
the LTTE prior to 2002”.



*SRI LANKA ALSO POINTED OUT THE DANGERS OF THE PRECEDENTS BEING SET BY THE
UNHRC AND WARNS MEMBER STATES*

·         *"This violation of established methods of work of the Council,
as well as the deliberate lack of clarity of language in key Operative
Paragraphs set a dangerous precedent with wider relevance to all member and
observer states of this Council. If the Council is to maintain its
credibility, it is incumbent upon all members to take note of such
procedural irregularities and halt their continuation through the clear
rejection of resolutions such as this”.*


What is clear then is that the Resolution passed indicated that the
Resolution was to cover the period covered by the LLRC. The LLRC period
covered 2002 to 2009 and NOT 2011. Just because the LLRC handed over the
report in 2011 it does not give Navi Pillay the right to childishly play
around with numbers and craftily extend the investigating time period.

No sooner the Resolution passed the media highlighted the period of
investigation to cover 2002 to 2009. Any search of mainstream media news on
the Resolution will indicate this period.

To further highlight this period and strengthen the argument against Navi
Pillay for abusing her power and mandate, we give the statement by US
Ambassador Michelle Sisson herself:

“There have been many questions about why the time frame of the
investigation was limited to this period. It is not because the
international community only cares about what happened between 2002 and
2009. In fact, an independent and credible investigation into all actions,
by all parties, for the entire period of the conflict would be good for Sri
Lanka, US Ambassador to Sri Lanka, Michele J. Sison said addressing to the
Foreign Correspondents Association in Colombo.

*Ambassador Sison’s Remarks to the Foreign Correspondents Association April
3, 2014*

http://www.dailymirror.lk/top-story/45462-probe-on-the-entire-period-will-be-good-for-sl-us.html



Obviously the mischief on the part of Navi Pillay and her investigating
team is because she or her UNHRC does not have anything to hold against the
Sri Lankan Government on the last phase of the war. Given that the conflict
has been determined as an internal armed conflict it strengthens Sri
Lanka’s case further.



Nevertheless, what is important is that there is an official objection to
exceeding the mandated time frame by including years that were not approved
by the UNHRC voting members in March 2014. Navi Pillay and her office has
no right to add years or remove years or add other items that were not
approved by the Members that voted for the Resolution.

The Investigation inspite of flaws, contradictions and discrepancies must
however remain confined from 21 February 2002 to 19 May 2009….NOT EXTENDED
to 2011.

Friends of Sri Lanka at the UN must also speak on behalf of Sri Lanka and
highlight the mischief being played. This is totally unethical and totally
unjustified.







*Shenali D Waduge*

-- 
තෙරුවන් සරණයි !
--
If You Unable to read SINHALA,
http://www.siyabas.lk/sinhala_how_to_install.html
==================================
E-MailSriLanka E-Mail Group
==================================
http://groups.google.com/group/emailsrilanka

මෙම පණිවිඩය ඔබට ලැබෙන්නේ ඔබගේ ඊමේල් ලිපිනය 
ඊමේල් ශ්‍රීලංකා හි සාමාජිකත්වය ලබා ඇති නිසාය.

ඊමේල් ශ්‍රීලංකා සමුහයෙන් ඉවත් වීම සදහා.
To UNSUBSCRIBE from this E-Mail Group, 
send email to : 
emailsrilanka+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
==================================
ඊමේල් ශ්‍රීලංකා සමූහයට ඇතුලත් වීම සදහා.
To SUBSCRIBE to this E-Mail Group, 

emailsrilanka+subscr...@googlegroups.com

OR Go to,
http://groups.google.lk/group/emailsrilanka/boxsubscribe
=================================
For Invite Members
ඊමේල් ශ්‍රීලංකා වෙත ඹබගේ යහලුවන්ගේ ඊමේල් ලිපින හදුන්වාදීම සදහා
http://groups.google.com/group/emailsrilanka/members_invite
............................
බුදු සසුන බැබලේවා !

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"ඊමේල් ශ්‍රීලංකා" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to emailsrilanka+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to