LLRC and its implications

| by Robinhood

( April 01, 2012, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) When a country is a member state of a world body there are certain statutes the country is bound and obliged and agreed to respect. When a resolution is brought and passed through the UNHRC council it is subject for monitoring by the council and its member states. If the government is right minded in its approach and mission it will not have resentment over the resolution adopted by the UNHRC for the implementation of the said recommendations contained.

Prof. GL Pieris accused the UNHRC is a politicized and not a generalized body in the parliament of Sri Lanka so we are force to be disobedient to accept the resolution adopted. Presenting the LLRC proposal to implement and denying accepting and rejecting to implement the adopted resolutions by the GOSL is an overstated remark by Prof GL Pieris about the resolution adopted in the UNHRC. It implies that the government will not implement the recommendations in the LLRC simply it came through passing the resolution.

This resolution adopted simply urges the government to implement the recommendations made in its own LLRC. In other words the GOSL will be given technical assistance by the UNHRC to see the recommendations are duly implemented. In this circumstance the GOSL cannot have its usual casual approach in the process of the implementation of the LLRC. There is a difference between implementing the LLRC by the GOSL and implementing it after a formal resolution. If the LLRC and its recommendations have passed through the formal resolution, the recommendations implemented will be monitored and governed by the UNHRC and its members. In other words the GOSL is bound to show that the recommendations are implemented.

There is nothing serious for Prof. GL Pieris to oppose for this issue alleging this has taken wide publicity and focused internationally. If this is to remain as an issue not to be focused, the GOSL should not ratify such international conventions and remove its membership from the council. This resolution adopted does not have any impact, hindrance or any threat for the sovereignty of the country and is not a proposal brought against Sri Lanka.

The official announcement of the GOSL on its stance of not implementing the resolution adopted in the UNHRC is an obstinate opinion which is not cosmopolitan. This opinion clearly indicates the dislike and the reluctance of the government to implement its recommendations in the LLRC. In other words it is an indication to note that the GOSL is not bound to implement the recommendations in the LLRC.

This resolution adopted in the UNHRC is not at all an interference of any external sources to our domestic affairs as alleged by prof Pieris. Denying, to implement the recommendations is more likely exposing the reluctance or the inability of the government to implement the recommendations of the LLRC. If the LLRC is established with the genuine aim of implementing its recommendations there is no need for the GOSL to make a commotion out of nothing. However, it is the same recommendations which will be implemented by the GOSL whether it is resolute by the UNHRC or not.

Rejecting its own proposal made by the GOSL considering it to be harmful hence it came passing the resolution of the UNHRC is an irrational and a silly remark shown by prof GL Pieris which is a belligerent situation which could be very harmful. Rejecting to implement after the formal adoption further implies “We would have implemented the recommendations before but since the resolution passed through the UNHRC we will not implement it” Prof Pieris remark clearly demonstrates the governments unwillingness anybody monitoring and the government not bound to implement all the recommendations stated. This reiterates that we (GOSL) have its own way of implementing the recommendations. This statement further confirms that there is no genuine interest for the GOSL to implement all the recommendations therein.

The LLRC was made by President Mahinda Rajapakse subsequent for the Darusman report presented by the UN expert’s panel in a view to implement its recommendations there in. But stating something different after the resolution was adopted to implement the same recommendations in the LLRC is something conflicting.

If government plans to hold a referendum to implement the recommendations contained in the LLRC it is circumventing its own LLRC report. It further confirms the dislike and the resentment of implementing the LLRC. If pressident Rajapakse wishes to implement the contents in the LLRC it’s not necessary to go for referendum to take peoples mandate as the government already has two thirds majority in the parliament. At this circumstance president Rajapakse can take his own decision using his executive power vested to him from the constitution and there are immense situations he has used such in the past for his own benefit and to dominate his power. If president Rajapakse is having a genuine intention to find a political solution to the ethnic Tamil issue and investigate possible war crimes there it is very simple but to implement the LLRC.

It is the situation; the circumstance and the benefit of the Rajapakse regime which decides to implement the recommendations of the LLRC or not to implement but to sustain its government in power. If the Rajapakse regime decides the implementation of the LLRC can bring harmful effects for its existence it would simply find a way out to circumvent.

The editor learns that the GOSL has lot more to learn and much more to reconcile.