HRCSL painstakingly vets 204 troops for UN peacekeeping

The Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka is now vetting a list of 204 military personnel nominated by the Sri Lanka Army for UN peacekeeping missions. This includes a contingent of 49 sent to Lebanon in February without review by the Commission, which hadn’t been told these officers were required to be released early.

Sri Lanka’s deployment of soldiers to the United Nationas Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) without vetting was raised again by journalists at the UN headquarters in New York this week. It was last brought up in April.

A journalist questioned the S e c re t a r y - G e n e r a l ’ s Dep u t y Spokesman about “a long, outstanding issue raised to DPKO [Department of Peacekeeping Operations] about Sri Lankans who were sent un-vetted by the Government to Lebanon and another commander that was sent to one of the missions in Africa”.

The HRCSL was conducting an “additional tier” of vetting for 49 Sri Lankan officers who have already been deployed to UNIFIL, he replied. The Commission is also undertaking the vetting of the remaining 101 military personnel who are scheduled to be deployed, he said.

“We are working together with the Government of Sri Lanka to ensure that the screening arrangements with the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka comply with UN policy,” he said. “Compliance with these arrangements will be required before the UN can receive any further deployments or rotations from Sri Lanka.”

HRCSL Chairperson Deepika Udagama said, however, that she did not know what was meant by an “additional tier”--when the 49 military personnel had not been vetted to begin with.

“There is no additional tier because there was never any vetting done before they left and the vetting is being done only now,” Dr Udagama told the Sunday Times. It was not immediately clear whether anyone found unsuitable would be recalled.

The Chairperson also said the Commission had only undertaken to carry out this process at the invitation of the Sri Lankan Government because “we felt we add value by giving credibility to the contingents from Sri Lanka and that, by the HRCSL providing a thorough vetting within a proper structure would encourage the members of the tri-forces and police to be professional and compliant with standards”.

All UN Member States that nominate or provide personnel to serve with the UN must screen and certify that such personnel have not committed, or are alleged to have committed, criminal offences and/or violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law. Those who seek to serve with the UN must attest the same and, where necessary, provide relevant information. The processes by which this can be done are outlined in Decision 2012/18 of the UN SecretaryGeneral’s Policy Committee.

According to the UN, Sri Lanka is the first nation to be granted the opportunity to vet military personnel for peacekeeping operations by a national Human Rights Commission. But despite the Army agreeing to clear its nominees through the HRCSL, one group was despatched to Lebanon without scrutiny.

“We are still trying to figure out how the DPKO deployed them,” Dr Udagama said. “They are the final arbiters.” It is learnt that the DPKO is in direct contact, not with the HRCSL, but the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

The 204 names are the first to be submitted for vetting since it was agreed in June 2016 between the Sri Lanka Government, the UN and the HRCSL that the Commission will review the records of military personnel to be deployed on peacekeeping operations.

The HRCSL, since starting the process, has struggled to get specific input needed for thorough vetting from the military regarding personnel nominated for missions. For instance, required information it sought regarding the group of 204, including the ones that were sent to Lebanon, only came in the middle of April.

However, the Commission does have a mechanism in place to conduct the vetting--provided the necessary information is given, she said. HRCSL had been accused of delaying the process but it is a painstaking task.

“To do the type of vetting anticipated and from an objective point of view, we need comprehensive information and time,” she said. If the wrong personnel are cleared, the Commission will have to bear the brunt of it.