The United Nations General Assembly is undoubtedly the most significant forum to canvass international support. Whatever criticism is directed against its functions, the UN remains the most crucial global supporter to smaller countries like Sri Lanka. Its mandate and directives are essential for the general ‘well being’ of countries like Sri Lanka. There is a lot to be had of the UN if you play your cards right.
Unfortunately, the Sri Lankan delegation to the UN this week left much undone. The government of Sri Lanka had a greater responsibility in attending the United Nations General Assembly, than just trying to play to the gallery by speaking in Sinhala. While Sinhala remains one of the oldest languages in the world, and indeed one to be proud of, more was expected of the government than winning votes back home. Its presence at the assembly this year around was not happening under the most desirous of conditions.
Hammered left, right and centre with serious charges of human rights violations, abductions, extra judiciary killings and thousands left homeless, the government had few on its side before the Assembly.
Following closely on the government’s treatment of the UN Under Secretary General Sir Holmes and the UN Special Rapporteur on Summary and Arbitrary Executions Philip Alston, there was much to answer for. In the inability of none other than the Premier and a senior Cabinet Minister to differentiate between a UN official and a terrorist, we had done serious damage to diplomacy and protocol.
The Ashton report released just days before the sessions commenced, also gave a damning indictment on the government. Citing ''a spate of extrajudicial executions'' by the military, paramilitary forces and insurgent groups in Sri Lanka, he expressed concern that we were ‘on the brink of a crisis of major proportions.
"The situation has indeed erupted into crisis and neither the Human Rights Council (in Geneva) nor the General Assembly (in New York) has seen fit to take any action to address the spate of extra-judicial executions being reported out of that country,"Citing correspondence with the Government regarding extrajudicial executions by “home guards”, the Special Rapporteur has responded in part by “stressing the need for strict control of any such auxiliary force by the security forces.
“In view of the experience of other countries, where paramilitary groups are responsible for numerous and grave human rights violations, the Government may wish to consider as a preferable solution strengthening the regular security forces in areas with armed conflict, rather than creating a paramilitary body,” he said.
Diplomatic sources caution the failure of the government delegation in meeting much of these concerns at the sessions. The role of Karuna with regard to killings, extortion and recruitment of children for war, and his links to government security forces fared very badly before the international rights groups. Continued expressions of concern went unheeded by the government, resulting in the Ashton report. The charges are serious and clearly warrant immediate accountability.
The human rights violations by Karuna cadres in the Eastern bastion of Batticaloa did little to the government’s reputation. The absence of armed cadres during the visit of Sir Holmes can hardly be termed an eye wash. The fact remains that the entire district is under the direct authority of Karuna. The Batticaloa district suffers under serious levels of human rights violations, that have systematically failed intervention by the government.
It was clear that the international rights activists were not going to let the government go scot free in the presence of inaction on noted violations. Last week’s report of the International Independent Group of Eminent Persons also charged that the inquiry into 16 grave crimes has failed to comply effectively with international norms and standards.
IIGEP claimed that the role of the Attorney General’s Department in the work of the Commission continued to render the process flawed.
“The presence of the Attorney General’s Department in the Panel of Counsel to the Commission involves ‘serious conflicts of interest’ and lacks transparency and compromises both national and international standards of independence and impartiality that are central to the credibility of and public confidence in the Commission.
‘Since the first investigation into the ACF case on 14 May 2007 only a few witnesses have been examined. No public inquiry has been held and no substantial progress has been made into any of the mandated cases and that the Commission is unlikely to have completed any case before the expiry of the Commission’s mandate in early November 2007,” they added.
It was therefore clear that words were not going to do much before the other international bodies attending the sessions. The EU noted the ‘worrying increase’ in reported abuses under the Government forces, the LTTE and the Karuna faction. They termed targeted civilian killings, extortion and the use of child soldiers as seeing an increase. The governments of Switzerland, Germany, United Kingdom, Netherlands and Amnesty International expressed concern over the situation here.
Switzerland charged that violations either linked or not to the conflict and ‘regardless of their perpetrators’ are aggravated by the culture of impunity in the country. Germany asked the government to ‘redouble’ its efforts to achieve a peacefully negotiated settlement and put an end to ongoing human rights violations allegedly committed by the security forces.
The United Kingdom stressed that those ‘most egregious’ and serious human rights situations set the necessary immediate attention. The Netherlands called upon the government to put an end to impunity and to ‘vigorously’ investigate all human rights abuses and violations in Sri Lanka. Amnesty International maintained that the Government’s ‘persistent’ denial of the severity of the situation and the casting of aspersions on those expressing concern about the situation is unhelpful.
It is in this backdrop that the President most likely failed to convince the international body of sustaining a moral high ground.
‘Don’t use human rightas tool to victimize countries: actions on compliance should be just and equal to all’, said the President. But the question remains if the Rajapaksa administration can afford to talk of justice and equal treatment to the thousands left displaced in the East.
His call for international action to facilitate compliance with human rights standards be ‘fair and even handed’ fall far short of what was desired of his administration.
‘Human rights have to be protected and advanced for their own sake, not for political gain,’ he said. The questioned could be asked, who in effect stood to gain politically by turning a blind eye to the continued violations of the Karuna group. Or the ruse of the Karuna group coming into the political mainstream.
If the President thought that the fight for terrorism should be at any cost, there was little support to be had before the UN. His questioning of the mandate of the UN also held little rationale. ‘Although the UN system has set up mechanisms to deal with many of these problems, the capacity of the UN to address these challenges effectively has been brought into question,’ he said.
Interestingly the President claimed that ‘terrorism anywhere is terrorism. There is nothing good in terrorism.’ Certainly, it becomes imperative that we question the interpretation of the role of Karuna in this context.
It is to date unclear how the government could justify the capture of the East as a victory. Military victories apart, the human tragedy that is the East today, is far from what a democratically elected government can take pride in.
‘We have freed the Eastern Province from terrorism, and restored law and order there,’ said the President. Law and order are far from complimentary in areas with a strong presence of Karuna cadres.
The President spoke of a ‘massive programme of rehabilitation and reconstruction’ launched in the East. He cited proposals to make the Eastern Province ‘a model for development and rehabilitation’. But the ground situation in the East is far from ready for such plans. The government’s failure to make interim plans till this elaborate plan gets off ground has resulted in men, women and children in their thousands living under dire conditions.
Speaking of military victories and a ‘negotiated and honorable end’ to the conflict could not help convince the international community the justification to the government’s present approach. Claims that the All Party Representative Committee is working ‘successfully’ towards it, leaves much to be desired on ground.
While the State media reportage of the Sessions portrayed the government as having played victor at the UN, it is unclear if the mere fact that the President addressed the Assembly in Sinhala, can be considered his work done. Certainly, though the deliverance in Sinhala may win votes back home, such gimmicks rarely have the desired effect in international forums.
This is especially true if your track record is not as impressive as warranted. Rhetoric can hardly do the job where genuine action is called for. And the UN is the last place on earth to try such a fast one.
(http://www.dailymirror.lk/2007/09/29/opinion/1.asp)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment