'Guilty until proven innocent'

The United Nations has taken what seems a thoroughly egregious decision towards a member-state by suspending the fresh induction of an entire army for its peacekeeping operations due to the recent appointment of an army commander facing hitherto unproven allegations of war crimes.

The decision is kicking in the face the Western legal principle of the ‘presumption of innocence’ and that one is innocent until proven guilty. What is more, it is arguably an unprecedented step of questioning the right of a sovereign state to make a legitimate internal appointment.

As we have said before, the appointment by the President of the incumbent army commander was a questionable one for purely domestic reasons. But there is no ambiguity whatsoever in his constitutional right to make that appointment.

This very army commander was good enough for the same UN to accept his credentials when he served as the deputy ambassador of Sri Lanka to the UN in New York. These allegations from questionable NGOs existed even then. This time, however, because there is some noise from the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) on these still unproven allegations, the whole army and the nation is insulted. If the UN has “credible allegations” against the army commander why does it not spit it out?

The US President just a few days ago, told the UN General Assembly the world belongs to “patriots”, not “globalists”. Maybe he is wrong. But even so, it seems his diplomats do not seem to agree with him. And so, what is the Sri Lankan Government going to do about this right royal snub? One part of the Government might even be revelling in the egg now on the face of the President and Commander-in-chief. At least Foreign Secretary has raised issue in New York yesterday. If it only had the guts, it would withdraw its 650 man UN contingent now keeping the peace in Lebanon, Mali and South Sudan and ask the United Nations Peace Keeping Operations to go to hell. www.sundaytimes.lk