Sri Lanka’s Ability To Deliver Transitional Justice Grim

By Usha S Sri-Skanda-Rajah –April 12, 2016

Usha S Sri-Skanda-Rajah

Sri Lanka’s Ability To Deliver Transitional Justice Grim – Without Fundamental Change

Experts in the field, expect fundamental change on the ground plus in the state apparatus, systems and laws if Sri Lanka is to move towards delivering transitional justice to adhere to and implement the resolution on, ‘Promoting Reconciliation, Accountability and Human Rights in Sri Lanka’ – one that it co-sponsored last October 2015. And more specifically, according to the member of the Sri Lanka Monitoring and Accountability Panel MAP this would also entail creating “an independent and impartial victim centered accountability mechanism.”

Invited to speak at the annual human rights conference on transitional justice convened by the Transnational Government of Tamil Eelam (TGTE) on Sunday April 3rd, 2016 at the Delta Toronto East Hotel, Canada, an esteemed panel of lawyers expressed serious concerns at the “environment that currently exists in the North and East” and the lack of progress made thus far in implementing the resolution passed at UNHRC’s 30th session – given the High Commissioner for Human Rights is scheduled “to present an oral update to the Human Rights Council at its 32nd session” on June 2016, and “a comprehensive report followed by discussion on its implementation at its thirty-fourth session” on March 2017.

The striking parallels that could be drawn from the discourse that transpired was the need for fundamental, meaningful, substantial, significant and far reaching changes on a range of issues pertaining to the delivery of transitional justice in Sri Lanka.

Among the concerns identified in this in-depth, high calibre panel discussion, which made transitional justice impossible now in Sri Lanka are:

• The Sri Lankan military’s fierce grip on the Tamil people of the North and East in the island of Sri Lanka including its civilian and “institutionalised extortion” activities – akin to a “sophisticated” form of control over them
• The Sinhala Buddhist nationalist nature of the state
• The ways in which the Sri Lankan government has obfuscated the issue of accountability both internationally and domestically when speaking to the Sinhala population
• The large discrepancy between what the Sri Lankan government is telling the international community it’s doing on accountability and rule of law initiatives and what is actually taking place on the ground
• Government’s lack of transparency and sincerity to enact reforms – to enable trust and build confidence
• The still ongoing human rights violations and surveillance operations in the North East
• The absence of necessary measures for genuine reconciliation vis-a-vis the Sri Lankan government’s failure to return private lands, abolish the Prevention of Terrorism Act, review the Victims and Witness Protection Act and honour its promise to release political prisoners still languishing without charge
• The fact that torture and sexual violence against Tamils still continue
• The absence of answers for the families of the disappeared
• The occupation of public land and the army’s involvement in civilian activities, such as running shops, farms, hotels and even pre-schools
• The military’s continued distribution of goods to school children and other civilians widely regarded as its attempt to normalise its presence in the North East
• The continued harassment and intimidation of civil society and human rights activists, of families of the disappeared and former members of the LTTE as well as other Tamils
• The fact that testifying before any judicial mechanism would be difficult when the security forces are living next door
• The Sri Lankan government’s lack of honesty as evidenced by its statements post resolution, inconsistent with its obligations it was committed to carry out -for international involvement in any ‘credible judicial process’
• The fact that the Sri Lankan government has so far not demonstrated the political will to ensure an independent, impartial, victim centred accountability mechanism
• That many people in Sri Lanka have been victimised horribly – and if impunity for those crimes continue they’re going to be victimised further

Participants at the panel discussion were, Ms. Barbara Jackman – a Canadian lawyer specialising in immigration and refugee law and US lawyers – Ms. Tasha Manoranjan, an associate in the Litigation practice in the Washington D.C. Office, Prof. Ali Beydoun, Director, UNROW Human Rights Impact Litigation Clinic at the Washington College of Law and Ms. Heather Ryan, currently member of the Sri Lanka Monitoring and Accountability Panel (MAP) and also special consultant for the Open Society Justice Initiative monitoring the Extra-ordinary Chambers of the Courts in Cambodia (ECCC).

Read More