For international probe

High Commissioner for Human Rights in April 2011 for a country visit. Thereafter according to her Report, she indicated in May 2012 that the visit to Sri Lanka will be undertaken after an advance visit by a team of officials from the OHCHR to explore possible areas for cooperation, and I quote: to help prepare the ground for an eventual country visit by the High Commissioner herself; unquote. The High Commissioner expressed her satisfaction with the cooperation extended by the GoSL to the OHCHR delegation whose visit in September 2012 was facilitated in close consultation with the UN Country Office. In granting the team unfettered access, the Government acted in the good faith expectation that it would in fact prepare the ground for her visit.

"Subsequently the High Commissioner addressed a letter in November 2012 proposing possible areas of technical cooperation between the GoSL and the OHCHR. She also chose to introduce a new conditionality: stating that meaningful progress needs to be achieved in areas outlined for technical cooperation, before visiting Sri Lanka at some time in the first half of 2013. Thus it now appears the team's agenda was purely to collect material for her present Report and not to "help prepare the ground" for a visit. The GoSL's reply in December 2012 was to emphasize that, since the implementation of the NPoA (National Plan of Action) and the NHRAP (National Human Rights Action Plan), are continuously evolving national processes which were being monitored, in order to arrive at a considered opinion on the progress of human rights related issues, that there is no substitute for experiencing, at first hand, the ground situation.

"We reiterate that, therefore, a visit by the High Commissioner would be an ideal opportunity to view the developments objectively and holistically, imperative for the discharge of her mandate. As such, the bona fides of the High Commissioner's objectives may be called into question, by virtue of her shifting the goalposts and seeking to impose new conditionalities.

"We also note that an inordinate amount of attention is paid to Sri Lanka in the High Commissioner's statements within and outside UN forums. Whether it be in the UN Security Council or successive sessions of the Human Rights Council, democracy conferences or merely comments from her on incidents or events in Sri Lanka ranging from economic migrants to the judiciary, the High Commissioner, has had, from around the end of the conflict in May 2009, a regular negative observation to make. Her frequent comments to the media, some in close proximity to sessions of the Council, could well have the effect of influencing delegations, especially when there are Resolutions contemplated.

"This runs counter to the detachment, objectivity and impartiality expected from the holder of such an exalted office. Sweeping generalizations using such terms as "massive violations" of human rights and the constant targeting of Sri Lanka - based on unsubstantiated evidence founded on conjecture and supposition only supports the impression of a lack of objectivity."

During the UNHRC sessions, as revealed in these columns, the remarks drew an immediate response from Germany's Ambassador to the UN in Geneva. Germany felt that Sri Lanka's criticism of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights was unjustified, said Ambassador Hans H. Schumacher. The matter did not end there. A provision which was not present in greater detail in the first draft of the US resolution was thereafter included in subsequent drafts. This is how the latest draft describes it:

"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; Encourages the Government of Sri Lanka to implement the recommendations in the OHCHR report;…."

In the first draft in mid-February, there was only a sentence which said the resolution "Welcomes the report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on the human rights situation in Sri Lanka." The enlarged version, a diplomatic source in Geneva said on grounds of anonymity, was to express support for Human Rights High Commissioner Pillay by US and co-sponsors of the resolution. This is by welcoming the report of her office as well as taking note of her call "for an independent and credible international investigation into alleged violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law." The source added, "in the light of Sri Lanka Government's official position spelt out in their National Statement at the Council, an elaboration to acknowledge the actions of the High Commissioner became necessary."

On Friday, Sri Lanka figured for two hours at the Council sessions. This was when the country's case was taken up under the Universal Periodic Review (UPR). Every four years, all member countries of the UN subject their human rights record for review. Besides Sri Lanka, the UPR of Peru was also taken up on the same day. As is the custom, the reports of both countries were adopted without a division being called. Speaking at the Sri Lanka event, Minister Samarasinghe said, "In the overall process of accountability which was the subject of some interventions during the working group session, the first issue that must be addressed is that of the 40,000 so-called civilian victims. This figure has been repeated by several sources without once verifying the facts. This is why our national census of 2012 and the enumeration in the North preceding it in 2011 were of such importance. Ground verification of facts is continuing into the results of these processes. We believe we will be able to gain an accurate picture of the several causes of civilian deaths.

"A Cabinet Memorandum titled "Assistance and Protection of Victims of Crime and Witnesses Bill" was submitted by the Ministry of Justice and was taken up for policy approval at the Meeting of the Cabinet of Ministers held on 07 February 2013. It was decided to obtain the views of the Attorney General on this matter to aid in the deliberations of the Cabinet.

"Subsequent to the recommendations of the LLRC, the Attorney-General reviewed the cases relating to the five (5) students from Trincomalee and of the Action Contre La Faime (ACF) workers. Having concluded the work on the five students from Trincomalee, the Attorney-General has directed the Police to commence NonSummary Judicial proceedings. The review with regard to the ACF case is also ongoing.

"Also on the question of accountability, inquiries are in train by the military authorities as to questions of civilian casualties during the humanitarian operation including the Channel 4 video footage irrespective of its authenticity.

Further to the recommendation of the LLRC, the database on detainees is available to next of kin (NoK) who are able to obtain details in response to their inquiries. The investigations into those allegedly disappeared are ongoing through national mechanisms………"

US Ambassador Donahue made some strong comments after Samarasinghe spoke. She charged that "the Sri Lankan delegation attempted to reframe Sri Lanka's human rights commitments in terms of the government's National Plan of Action, which does not address the broad spectrum of recommendations put forward by the LLRC report, and by lobbying other delegations to revise their UPR recommendations to exclude reference to the LLRC report after they had been orally presented. Major changes were made to the substance of recommendations after the interactive dialogue. This is inconsistent with the transparent, interactive character of the UPR. We are also disappointed that the Government rejected nearly all recommendations regarding engagement and cooperation with UN special procedures mandate holders. We urge the government to expeditiously implement both the UPR and LLRC recommendations."

A media statement from the UNHRC Secretariat gives an account of how the UPR on Sri Lanka went. Here are excerpts:

Oman said that Sri Lanka had accepted most of the recommendations made, which demonstrated its willingness to cooperate with the Council and showed its determination to comply with human rights obligations.

Pakistan said that it was encouraging to see that Sri Lanka had made 19 voluntary commitments, including for the protection of the rights of women and children, the advancement of the reconciliation process, and the reintegration of ex-combatants in society.

Philippines said that Sri Lanka had shown deep commitment to the advancement of human rights. The Philippines welcomed in particular acceptance by Sri Lanka of the recommendation pertaining to the National Action Plan and the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission. Concern was expressed at the situation of migrant workers and their families, and the Philippines looked forward to the ratification by Sri Lanka of International Labour Organization Convention 189.

Russia said that Sri Lanka's second cycle of the Universal Periodic Review had again confirmed its readiness and openness to engage in open dialogue. Sri Lanka had agreed to the majority of recommendations made and those accepted were truly constructive and non-politicised in nature. Russia appreciated Sri Lanka's list of voluntary commitments on many aspects of human rights.

Sudan said that Sri Lanka had accepted a great number of recommendations, most of which were positive and constructive. Sudan welcomed the acceptance of two recommendations on consolidation of law enforcement and resettlement of internally displaced persons. It was important to create an environment that made it possible for citizens to enjoy their rights.

United Arab Emirates welcomed positive measures undertaken by the Government to implement the recommendations from the first cycle of the Universal Periodic Review. The United Arab Emirates took note of Sri Lanka's statement on giving new impetus to the human rights system and promoting human rights. It was fully confident that Sri Lanka would move forward and hoped it would be supported in this.

United Kingdom expressed serious concern about freedom of expression in Sri Lanka and asked why the recommendation to invite the Special Rapporteur on freedom of expression and opinion to visit the country was rejected. Sri Lanka gave no justification for the rejection of the recommendations relating to the independence of the judiciary. The impeachment of the Chief Justice ran contrary to the clear rulings of Sri Lanka's highest courts and contravened principles of fairness, due process and respect for the independence of the judiciary.

Venezuela welcomed the spirit of openness and cooperation that Sri Lanka had demonstrated in the second Universal Periodic Review process and urged it to implement the recommendations of its Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission. Venezuela recognized the efforts of Sri Lanka to implement recommendations from its first Review, notably those relating to the improvement of the enjoyment of human rights and those related to peace.

Vietnam said that serious efforts had been made by Sri Lanka in relation to the national reconstruction and reconciliation process, and noted with satisfaction the ongoing implementation of 19 voluntary commitments made by Sri Lanka. Nevertheless, challenges and hardships remained to be overcome, for which an environment favourable to creating a stable and peaceful Sri Lanka was crucial.

Algeria said that Sri Lanka had actively shown it was willing to further advance human rights by intensifying the policies it was undertaking for the protection of the human rights of women and children in particular.

Belarus commended Sri Lanka on the adoption of a National Action Plan and the measures taken to reform and enhances national legislation, and said that Sri Lanka had shown strong commitment to the promotion and protection of human rights.

China said that it appreciated Sri Lanka's important achievements in advancing domestic reconciliation. China called on the international community to respect Sri Lanka's sovereignty, objectively look at its advancements, provide constructive assistance, and avoid interfering in its domestic affairs. China supported the adoption of the outcome.

A member of the delegation of Sri Lanka, in response to a statement made by the United Kingdom with reference to the impeachment of the Chief Justice, stated that the Constitution and procedural matrix involved in the impeachment of judges of the Superior Court was not some process invented on a person-centric, ad hoc manner. In that context it was correct to state that the invocation of that procedure to meet requirements that emerged consequent to facts to the case concerned was justifiable. However, the entire process and a ruling by a division by the Supreme Court on the matter had now been brought under judicial review.

Representatives of several INGOs recognised by the UN system also spoke.

Events related to Sri Lanka continue to unfold in Geneva at a time when there will also be some attention abroad over an event in the country. Tomorrow, President Mahinda Rajapaksa will declare open the Mattala Rajapaksa International Airport. He returned to Colombo after a four day visit to Japan. There, he and Prime Minister Shinzo Abe decided on closer maritime cooperation. Japan also showered Rajapaksa with 41.1 billion Yen (Rs. 55 billion) in loans and 2.7 billion Yen (Rs. 3 billion) as grant aid. Sri Lanka diplomatic missions abroad have been advised to help in Government efforts to develop the new airport as an important hub in Asia. The Sri Lanka Embassy in Washington has also been somewhat distracted with the event with little time to focus on the US-backed resolution. Ambassador Jaliya Wickremesuriya is heading a group of expatriate Sri Lankans and journalists who will arrive in Dubai to board a Sri Lankan Airlines flight that will land in Mattala tomorrow morning. The visitors have been offered concessionary travel to places of interest in Sri Lanka or free transport from Mattala to Colombo after the event is over.

Last month, the Embassy offered free travel to Sri Lanka for US Senators, a perfectly legal exercise. However, the only one who accepted was Eni Fa'aua'a Hunkin Faleomavaega, Jr. He is a nonvoting member of the House of Representatives and represents American Samoa. He serves in a Sub Committee of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. During a visit to Sri Lanka last month, Faleomavaega declared that the United States should not bully a small country like Sri Lanka, considering the difficulties it has had to face during a 30-year conflict. He asked whether it was moral for the US to look at other countries when its own situation is yet to be cleared, for example even in Viet Nam.

Now, another Senator of the ruling Democrats has reacted. Eliot Engel (DNY), the top legislator on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, wrote to Secretary of State John Kerry on Tuesday expressing "serious concern" over what he calls "the deterioration of democracy and the lack of progress on reconciliation and accountability in Sri Lanka." Here are highlights of his letter:

"I am writing to express my concern about the continued erosion of democracy in Sri Lanka and to urge you to call for an independent international investigation into allegations of war crimes by both the Government of Sri Lanka and the terrorist group, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), during their final battles.