High price to pay in Geneva

National Plan of Action and the LLRC's report do not adequately address serious allegations of violations of international law, (PP6 19/2, modified)

PP9 Expressing concern at the continuing reports of violations of human rights in Sri Lanka, including enforced disappearances, extra-judicial killings, torture, violations of the rights to freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly, as well as intimidation of and reprisals against human rights defenders, members of civil society and journalists, and threats to judicial independence and the rule of law,

PP10Also noting with concern the failure by the Government of Sri Lanka to fulfil its public commitments, including on devolution of political authority, which is integral to reconciliation and the full enjoyment of human rights by all members of its population,

PP11Expressing appreciation for the Government of Sri Lanka's efforts in facilitating the visit of a technical mission from the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), and

the Government of Sri Lanka to increase its dialogue and cooperation with the OHCHR,

Welcomes the Report of the OHCHR on advice and technical assistance for the Government of Sri Lanka on promoting reconciliation and accountability in Sri Lanka and the recommendations and conclusions contained therein, in particular on the establishment of a truth-seeking mechanism as an integral part of a more comprehensive and inclusive approach to transitional justice; and notes the High Commissioner's call for an independent and credible international investigation into alleged violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law; 1. Urges the Government of Sri Lanka to implement the recommendations in the OHCHR report;

its call upon the Government of Sri Lanka to expeditiously and effectively implement the constructive recommendations made in the LLRC report and to take all necessary additional steps to fulfil its relevant legal obligations and commitment to initiate credible and independent actions to ensure justice, equity, accountability, including investigations of violations of

2.

3.

5. international law, and reconciliation for all Sri Lankans; (OP1 19/2, modified)

the Government of Sri Lanka to cooperate with special procedures mandate holders and formally respond to outstanding requests, including by providing unfettered access to the Special Rapporteurs on independence of judges and lawyers; human rights defenders; freedom of expression; freedom of association and assembly; extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions; minority issues; and the Working Group on enforced or involuntary disappearances; and discrimination against women; 4. Encourages the OHCHR and relevant special procedures mandate holders to provide, in consultation with, and with the concurrence of, the Government of Sri Lanka, advice and technical assistance on implementing the above-mentioned steps; (OP3 19/2, modified)

the OHCHR, with input from relevant special procedures mandate holders, as appropriate, to present an interim report at the twenty-fourth session and a report in an interactive dialogue at the twenty-fifth session of the Human Rights Council, on the implementation of the resolution. One of the contentious areas for New Delhi is a provision that calls upon Sri Lanka to provide "unfettered access" to UN special procedures mandate holders. This includes Rapporteurs on independence of the judges and lawyers; human rights defenders; freedom of expression; freedom of association and assembly; extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions; minority issues; and the Working Group on enforced or involuntary disappearances; and discrimination against women. This provision has remained in the resolution until yesterday.

The use of the words "unfettered access," Indian diplomats argued bordered on the resolution being intrusive. Their worry, quite apart from Sri Lanka, centred on whether India would, by voting for such a provision, set a precedent that could be used against it. An example, a diplomatic source said, was how the Indian Government would react in the unlikely event of a resolution against that country over Kashmir. They would not be in favour of an 'outside' agency having "unfettered access" to deal with the Government of India," the source argued.India and Pakistan have fought two wars over Kashmir. Around half of the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir is in Indian hands whilst Pakistan controls a third of the region, the Northern Areas and the Azad Kashmir.

Another is a call in the resolution - which has become even stronger than the previous drafts -- that notes that the High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay's call for "an independent and credible international investigation into alleged violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law." However, it follows immediately thereafter with a call that the UNHRC "Urges the Government of Sri Lanka to implement the recommendations in the OHCHR report." In other words it makes clear there is no call for an international investigation in the resolution.

Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh went public to confirm reports that there were still differences between New Delhi and Washington over the wording of the new resolution. He declared on Wednesday in New Delhi that whether India votes against Sri Lanka would depend on the wording of the US resolution. However, diplomatic sources in Colombo said there was little doubt India would eventually decide to vote for the resolution with the United States accommodating the changes it seeks in the wording. This is on the basis that the US would want to carry India along in any steps it would take in the region. On the other hand, the question still remained whether the text of the resolution, as it remained yesterday, would be further modified to exclude areas of Indian concerm.

Pressure from the state government in Tamil Nadu extended to the Lok Sabha in New Delhi last Thursday. Parliamentarians of the opposition as well as partners of the Congress Government staged a walkout in the afternoon after making demands that India should take the lead in the USbacked resolution. Among them were the leader of the Dravida Munnetra Kazhakam (DMK), a partner in the Congress Government and leader of the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhakam (AIADMK) S. Thangathurai. The DMK and the AIDMK are arch rivals in Tamil Nadu politics.

External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid who interrupted a speaker to respond to queries explained that no decision had been taken with regard to the vote at UNHRC. However, he added that the Government would take into consideration the sentiments expressed in the House when it arrived at a decision. "We must be effective and clear, not lukewarm. What we do has to be done in a proper manner, diplomatically so that it can be most effective," he declared. When an Indian External Affairs Minister speaks, it is often said that his remarks are well calibrated and represents official Government policy. For this purpose, the Minister receives up-to-the-minute briefings from his own officials. It is indeed a marked contrast from Sri Lanka where contradictions lead to confusion and later to diplomatic disaster. Minister Khurshid's remarks to the Lok Sabha leave no doubt about what India plans to do though it does reflect a message that it would heed diplomatic niceties.

Former External Affairs Minister and BharatiyaJanatha Party (BJP) leader Yashwant Sinha said that India should caution other neighbours against interfering in Sri Lankan affairs and also caution them not to interfere in Indo-Lanka relations. "Let India not merely vote…. In the UNHRC but take the lead in drafting the resolution and carry it through the Council," he said. Some members said they were not satisfied with Khurshid's reply. Others faulted the Government for allowing President Rajapaksa to travel to Tirupati on a private visit. Saugato Roy of the Trinamool Congress withstood repeated interruptions, to say that the late Tiger guerrilla leader, Velupillai Prabhakaran did more harm than good to the Tamil people in Sri Lanka. He charged that the guerrilla leader used Tamils as human shields.

The Sri Lankan Government is yet to work out its final strategy at voting time or the days before it. It is likely to be formulated before delegation leader and President's Special Human Rights Envoy Mahinda Samarasinghe flies to Geneva on Tuesday. It is highly likely that the Government will take up the position that the second US resolution is unjustified and irrelevant. It is also expected to say it would serve no purpose except to persecute Sri Lanka. It has also not taken a firm decision over not calling for a vote when the resolution is moved on March 21. However, any member country of the Human Rights Council is entitled to call for a vote.

These developments come as some leading countries of the Commonwealth, both members of its Ministerial Action Group and others, made preparations for a conference call. Though diplomatic circles in London say it is likely to materialise next week, no firm date has yet been fixed. This event is ahead of the Action Group's meeting scheduled for early next month. Sri Lanka is likely to be on the agenda.

External Affairs Minister G.L. Peiris told Parliament last Tuesday,"I would like to assure the Hon. Leader of the Opposition at the very onset, that one thing is crystal clear.There is not a shadow of doubt about that, namely that CHOGM 2013 will be held in Sri Lanka in November this year. The Government is investing a great deal of time, effort and resources in elaborate and meticulous preparations in order to ensure that the outcome is entirely positive." That strong and categorical assertion came after Opposition Leader, Ranil Wickremesinghe raised a question.

Wickremesinghe said,"…. media reports have stated that Sri Lanka will be discussed at the next CMAG meeting. The news release of the Ministry of External Affairs titled "Sri Lankan Issues have no place in CMAG Agenda - GL tells Chair of CMAG" states that "the exhaustion of the good offices role of the Secretary-General is a condition precedent of any specific country situation to be included in the agenda of CMAG. This is clear from the rules relating to CMAG, adopted by the Commonwealth Heads of Government at their meeting in Perth, Western Australia, in October 2011. Another news release issued by the National News Agency of Bangladesh (BSS) states Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, the chair of Commonwealth Ministers Action Group called upon Colombo to take some positive steps to uphold the Commonwealth values and principles.

"Therefore in the background of these statements, will the Minister make a full statement disclosing to this House the present position regarding CMAG and the discussions with the Secretary-General in relation to the good offices engagement pertaining to the Sri Lankan situation referred to in the External Affairs Ministry newsrelease."

With barely a month to go for the National New Year, the priority areas for the Government have become two pronged. One is to lower prices of essential consumer items, at least for a limited period, and ensure most Sri Lankans enjoy the festivities. On the international front, two major issues remain. One is the events against Sri Lanka at the UN Human Rights Council which will begin unfolding in the coming weeks. The other is the CIMAG sessions which are sure to list Sri Lanka on the agenda. Notwithstanding his bold and categorical assertion that "there is not a shadow of doubt" that the Commonwealth summit would be held in Colombo, there still remains a gloomy uncertainty. Whatever is now being called Sri Lanka's foreign policy is being put to test. A nation awaits the answer.