Post-conflict phase in Sri Lanka

The Right of Reply exercised by Mohan Peiris PC, Attorney General of Sri Lanka during the general debate under agenda item 4 of the UN Human Rights Council Geneva, 08 June 2009

By Mohan Peiris

(June 09, Geneva, Sri Lanka Guardian) Sri Lanka has taken serious note of the observations made during the debate on Item 4. We are encouraged by the fact that the majority of the members have commended our commitment to post-conflict nation-building, instead of being unfairly castigated repeatedly by a few States hell-bent on pursuing their agendas, and their agendas alone, at all cost. We are however more than conscious that there is no room for triumphalism.

We have seen in some States a whole license of interference by way of a plethora of powerful pressurizing tactics at which even the hardest of critics might want to blush. We want those States to know that we will continue our engagement with them nonetheless and welcome working together in a spirit of true partnership as our equal and friend.

You may note and appreciate that the deliberate targeting of civilians never formed part of the military strategy of our forces. This is not to deny civilian casualties which may have occurred as collateral damage. This is not peculiar only to Sri Lanka. Such casualties do occur particularly when one party uses the civilians and civilian centers and establishments as a central part of its combat strategy. You will appreciate that in such situations the contours of the traditional battlefields recedes into the background with unfortunate consequences to civilians. However, the principles of distinction and proportionality which form the cornerstone of the principles of IHL were observed by our security forces. Our military strategies ensured that civilian population and civilian establishments were never made the target of deliberate attack. The commanders on the ground have been thoroughly trained in the requirements of international humanitarian law and its governing principles. The strict observance of these principles and the law as developed in the context of an inter-State conflict and clearly demarcated battle lines is not, you will appreciate, an easy task when engaging a terrorist group. However, the conduct of our security forces to ensure minimum casualties was better than any in the world, and should be commended.

Sri Lanka’s priority now is reconstruction, reintegration and rehabilitation in the post-conflict phase which we propose to approach in a spirit of true reconciliation. What is therefore required is the constructive engagement by the international community in our efforts to achieve these objectives which are already underway. We are tirelessly working towards a comprehensive solution to the problems of our internally displaced inclusive of a political process.

We have already re-settled more than 10,000 persons who have been re-united with their families. We have permitted the host families to receive persons over 60 years and children wherever the host families have the economic capacity to accommodate such persons. The UNHCR and the ICRC have been given ample access and more to the IDP camps together with over 50 NGOs. We will continue to ensure that the Tamil community will live side by side in dignity with others and enjoy the freedoms as guaranteed by our constitution. It is regrettable that these same concerns were not directed to the LTTE with the same vigor at the appropriate time.We are approaching the political process with equally great care. You will appreciate that elections alone do not make a true democracy. It is therefore necessary to insist that those who seek the benefits of democratic process accept its underlying principles as well.

We are currently engaged in a programme to restore our displaced population to their original habitats and livelihoods with the assistance of the international community. Isn’t it then of paramount importance that we unconditionally support that process and not distract ourselves by indulging in counter-productive rhetoric, undue pressure and the posturing of other multifarious measures? To indulge in the latter would only make the domestic situation in Sri Lanka more difficult.

It is therefore regrettable that the principle of majority intergovernmental ecisions making process does not appear to be fully appreciated by the EU. Are we then to pay lip service to these procedures that would be rendered useless and academic? To give into this unsavory practice would be only opening the window to a serious departure from the procedures established in the intergovernmental decision-making process.

It is therefore our humble plea that Sri Lanka be given space to continue with the on-going reconciliation process and not allow ourselves to be overcome by the agenda of some States.

-Sri Lanka Guardian