Sri Lanka seeks unconditional support
Homegrown solution the key:
Statement by Attorney-General Mohan Peiris, P.C. at the 12th Session
of the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva on Tuesday |
It is respectfully highlighted that with the dismantling of the LTTE
in May 2009, there is not even a semblance of a conflict in Sri Lanka.
Sri Lanka has restored normality in all parts of the country and is
looking forward with renewed hope and optimism for a brighter future for
our people.
It is quite inaccurate to state that internally displaced persons are
detained under conditions of internment. During the conflict and
afterwards the people of the North who were wrongfully confined and
restrained by the LTTE, voluntarily sought the solace and safety of the
relief villages and welfare centres and in the aftermath of the
liberation of the people from the LTTE.
Moral duty
They are our people and the Government has a constitutional and moral
duty to sustain in safety till they are resettled in proper conditions
fit for peaceful human habitation.
The Government has launched numerous programs including disarmament,
demobilization, and reintegration that has, as one of its key
components, transitional justice. We have put in place a national
framework on reintegration with the objective of safeguarding their
human rights to ensure sustainable peace, reconciliation and social
cohesion also to enhance their capacity to employability and in the case
of ex- combatants to minimize the risk of marginalization in the post -
conflict phase.
Resettlement
As at September 10, 2009 around 40,000 IDPs of different categories
have been resettled. The resettlement programs have been speeded up and
we are confident that by end of January 2010, a bulk of those displaced
would be resettled in keeping with our pledges to this Council. This is
made possible with the de-mining program being put in high gear with the
procurement of a large number of state-of-the-art de-mining vehicles
that have been rapidly deployed in the former conflict areas. From the
date the conflict ended, the Government has spent nearly 150 million US
dollars on infrastructure for IDPs and connected activities. We have to
balance the interests of all stakeholders to the conflict namely victims
and the families affected by the conflict as well as ex-combatants. In
this process, international humanitarian agencies are extending their
help and participating in all earnest. Sri Lanka is in substantial
compliance with its treaty obligations governing IDPs.
Fair trial
Let me now turn to the question of the conviction of Tissainayagam.
It is submitted that he was accorded a fair trial in respect of the
offences for which he was indicted. He was represented by a senior
defence attorney of his choice and afforded all guarantees that an
accused is entitled to under Article 14 of the ICCPR.
Tissainayagam made use of the facilities available under the law,
faced his trial, called evidence on his behalf and was given panoply of
rights in rebuttal of the prosecution case.
The High Commissioner in her reference to the Tissainayagam case said
she was dismayed by the sentence of 20 years handed to Tissainayagam for
critiquing Sri Lanka’s Army in two articles he published. This
observation I regret to state is inaccurate and appears to be a result
of a misappreciation of the indictment against Tissainayagam, which
contained three charges.
It would suffice to say that the High Commissioner has failed to make
reference to the third and most serious of the charges, that is the
receipt of LTTE funds by Tissainayagam and the application of those
funds to propagate the LTTE cause of terrorism. These facts have never
been denied by Tissainayagam at his trial.
Misleading
|
An IDP
woman engaged in vocational training. File photo |
It is therefore unfair and misleading to insinuate that Tissainayagam
was convicted merely for criticizing the Army in two publications and
should not have, if properly appreciated, given rise to any dismay as
observed by the High Commissioner. At the end of the trial, the court
found him guilty and the minimum punishment that could have been imposed
under the provision of law for such crimes had been imposed on him.
Govt and judiciary
We have from colonial times recognized the doctrine of separation of
powers and it is not in the common law tradition for other branches of
the government to interfere with the workings of the judiciary. Like in
any other established jurisdiction, Tissainayagam is entitled to invoke
as of right appellate procedures and the constitutional rights in the
review process. I would like to observe that even the European
Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) does not confer unfettered freedom of
expression which grants a licence to indulge in sedition and terrorism.
I would invite the Council’s attention to the case of Brogan v United
Kingdom (1998) 11 European Human Rights Reports (EHRR) where the United
Kingdom used derogation in relation to the Prevention of Terrorism
(Temporary Provisions) Acts 1974-1989, permitting the detention of
terrorist suspects without access to a court of law, which was otherwise
in contravention of Article 5 (the right of liberty).
Thus, derogable rights are quite common in the EU and it is
preposterous that double standard have to be applied when it comes to
Sri Lanka. Even the Inter-American Commission, in October 2002, had
occasion to comment that freedom of expression is qualified and
derogable in times when terrorism has to be combated.
Similar procedures
We see similar procedures used in ample measure in the treatment of
such matters in other jurisdictions as well.
We ask the International Community to cooperate with us in a true
sense of partnership and desist from indulging in a consistent and
systematic scheme of criticism intended to tarnish our image which at
this time would be counter productive to achieving development in a
country which has emerged from a conflict that has plagued our people
for more than 25 years.
We at this juncture are entitled to enjoy the full dividends of peace
and urge that Sri Lanka be supported unconditionally in achieving this
end by its homegrown solutions within our cultural, religious and social
values that have a history of over 2,500 years.
|