Peace for the World

Peace for the World
First democratic leader of Justice the Godfather of the Sri Lankan Tamil Struggle: Honourable Samuel James Veluppillai Chelvanayakam

Thursday, November 28, 2013

International And Legal Implications Of Weli Oya And Its Aftermath

By Rajan Hoole -November 28, 2013 
Rajan Hoole
Rajan Hoole
Colombo TelegraphThe Rise and Fall of the Tamil Militancy and the International Legal Implications of the Government’s Counter-Insurgency – Part 4
In late 1984, India, which was helping the Tamil militant groups, was in a position to bring the conflict to an end, had the Sri Lankan Government come up with an adequate political arrangement. But the Government was still talking about cosmetic variations on the District Development Councils of 1981, which had been thoroughly discredited by its intemperate actions at their very birth. Moreover, India was far from hostile to Sinhalese interests. Only, the wisdom to deal with India advantageously was lacking. Mr. R. Sampanthan recalls Mrs. Indira Gandhi telling the TULF leaders, “I will help the Tamils, but I will not harm the Sinhalese.”
By escalating the conflict instead with projects like ‘Weli Oya’, which quickly led to mass killing, the Government was inadvertently moving the ethnic conflict into a legal status, which it badly wanted to avoid. There are two Protocols of 10th June 1977 additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12th August 1949. Protocol II relates to Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts, such as ‘which take place in the territory of a High Contracting Party (i.e. the Sri Lankan State) between its armed forces and dissident armed forces or other organised armed groups,…which exercise control over part of its territory…’ It forbids collective punishment, acts of terrorism and reprisals.
Article 17 of Protocol II stipulates in Paragraph 2 that ‘civilians shall not be compelled to leave their own territory for reasons connected with the conflict’. Paragraph 1 allows for ‘displacement’ with satisfactory relief measures only when the security of the civilians is involved or for ‘imperative military reasons’. Such displacement must of necessity be temporary. It certainly does not allow for the forced evacuation of civilians in order to introduce those of a different ethnicity.                                 Read More
From Rajan Hoole‘s “Sri Lanka: Arrogance of Power  - Myth, Decadence and Murder”. Thanks to Rajan for giving us permission to republish. To read earlier parts click here