US report violates Sri Lanka’s rights and sovereignty
AU.S. State Department report on the war in Sri Lanka was presented
to the US Congress on Monday, without giving Sri Lanka the right of
being heard on the report, prior to being presented.
Sri Lanka’s Ambassador to the US had reportedly been kept informed of
the presentation, though it appears Sri Lanka’s comments and
observations if any had not been obtained by the US executive before
making the report to its legislature.
Content is vague
|
Citizens,
away from terror. Picture by Kavindra Perera |
The contents of the report are not clear. But what is clear is that,
no US official had visited the warfront during the last and concluding
stages nor were anyone else able to visit in view of the dangers of
being caught in the cross - fire. It would not be difficult to surmise
that the report would be based invariably on hearsay material, third
party reports of pro-LTTE outfits and media hypes such as the London
Times report in May 2009 of 2,000 civilians being killed daily, without
its reporter having had any access to the war zone.
The right to be heard is recognized universally as a fundamental
human right. It is surprising that a report said to deal with alleged
violations of human rights and humanitarian laws has been concluded by
the State Department and tabled in the US Congress in violation of Sri
Lanka’s rights and its sovereignty based substantially on the proscribed
terror networks of pro-LTTE versions without extending the diplomatic
courtesy of calling for the comments of a legitimate Government with
which the US Government has the highest level of Ambassadorial level
relationship.
Damage to integrity
The US. Government cannot be heard to say that these are only
preliminary steps with no guarantee of consequences. A report of this
nature should not have gone before the US legislature without the
observations if any of the main stake-holder - the Sri Lankan
Government. Even if the US congress rejects the report, the damage to
Sri Lanka’s integrity would be an unacceptable infringement of the
country’s sovereignty. It is also an improper and wrongful interference
in the internal affairs of Sri Lanka.
It may be that the whole exercise is to embarrass the Sri Lankan
Government with a calculated politically motivated initiative. The
reasons are obvious and may also be, because President Mahinda Rajapaksa
is not willing to pawn the State as a puppet regime of foreign powers.
It may also be motivated as a counter strategy to silence ongoing
investigations following the arrest of persons closely linked to the
LTTE revealing the international terror links and alleged foreign
involvements in support of Tiger terrorism. It might even be an attempt
to circumvent the UN Security Council, where the prospects of a veto by
China and may be Russia are strong and support the creation of a special
court as in the case of former Yugoslavia or Rwanda or even provide
material for the International Criminal Court, which the Obama
administration has said it would cooperate with.
Whatever that be, the US had been closely involved in providing
support services for Sri Lanka’s Armed Forces on preventing the
violation of human rights by our forces for quite some time.
US training
Former Bush administration’s South Asian Affairs Chief Richard
Boucher who led a US observer mission to the SAARC Summit held in
Colombo said as recently as in August 2008 that “we are working with the
Sri Lankan Government, with the people of Sri Lanka to try to ensure
that human rights are respected”.
Military law professionals from the US Pacific Command Judge Advocate
Office, in partnership with the US Embassy in Colombo hosted the second
training program in August 2008 for operational commanders,
investigators and law enforcement officers on preventing and
investigating human rights violations. The program was opened by the
then US Ambassador to Colombo Robert Blake, who succeeded Richard
Boucher in Washington.
It would be no exaggeration to state that Sri Lanka’s top service
commanders were understandably inspired by their US colleagues to follow
the strategy of US Forces in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan,
circumscribed by techniques of precision attacks on terror targets,
minimum casualties of civilians notwithstanding greater danger to the
forces, quick end to terrorism and early restoration of democracy.
It is to the credit of Sri Lanka’s Armed Forces that civilian
casualties had been negligible compared to the wide spread occurrences
of civilian causalities and alleged violations of humanitarian laws
elsewhere. The bottom line is that our Forces were trained and inspired
by the US professionals for zero tolerance of civilian casualties, an
achievement which delayed the destruction of the LTTE originally
targeted for end 2008 to mid - May 2009. Sri Lanka is certainly in a
position to demonstrate that its performance in observing human rights
and humanitarian laws is excellent compared to many other international
operations! The US has a share in achieving that credit in Sri Lanka.
But then, it is all about a thief accused in an original court of law
negativing evidence of guilt and demonstrating his innocence. He cannot
escape by trying to prove that the prosecuting Inspector is the bigger
thief! To do so would be proving one’s guilt!
An accused
The US is not even a signatory to the Rome Statute adopted on July
17, 1998 creating the International Criminal Court, whereas Sri Lanka is
a signatory. The Rome Stature came into force on July 1, 2002 after
ratification by 60 countries.
The ICC tries only those accused of the gravest crimes. What
constitutes “gravest-crimes” is a matter of interpretation by
international courts’ chief prosecutor, then accused by the US as an
“unaccountable” prosecutor of a Court with ‘unacceptable powers of
interpretation that are essentially political and legislative in
nature’.
The ICC will not act if allegations are investigated or prosecuted by
a national judicial system, unless the proceedings are considered by the
ICC as not being genuine.
Violators
The US supported the creation of the International Criminal Tribunal
for the Former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Tribunal for
Rwanda under the American Service-Members’ Protection Act nicknamed the
Hague Invasion Act, passed by US congress in 2002, which prohibited the
US cooperating with the ICC in many areas (in respect of its citizens)
but provided for US authorities cooperating to bring to trial (foreign)
violators of human rights and humanitarian laws. Former Chief prosecutor
for the Special Court for Sierra Leone Stephen Rapp, now U.S.
Ambassador-at-large for war crimes issues under President Obama has in
an interview to the Time Magazine of September 14, 2009, refers to some
of these matters.
Terrorism in Sri Lanka had affected many in the region, including our
giant neighbour India and also the Maldives. LTTE’s key strategy of
suicide missions had spread to other regional terror groups. Sri Lanka
had successfully eliminated terrorism in this country. Any
investigations of the nature contemplated by the US State Department
would necessarily reactivate the dormant cells and pro-LTTE groups in
other countries. This would be counter productive to the war on
terrorism that the US launched following 9/11.
The US must make available allegations against the State authorities
if any to the Sri Lanka Government, which may advise itself on
investigating and responding to such allegations. Sri Lanka has the
capacity to investigate on its own, any such complaint and deal with
them within its jurisdiction.
An attempt to mislead
But to present a partisan and incomplete report to the US congress
would be an attempt to mislead the Congress. The Congress should rightly
reject any such attempt.
Here in Sri Lanka, this is an issue on which the country must stand
together. Opposition political parties in Sri Lanka, seeking to exploit
foreign missiles aimed at the country’s Armed Forces for their petty
advantage would lose their political clout amongst the people if they
think of regime change here through foreign manoeuvres!
One good reason for the grand old party, the UNP being reduced to eat
humble pie in the opposition for the last 15 years, has been attributed
to the party pandering to foreign elements, even when the country was
threatened to be divided.
If the party is to rise again from the ashes, it must stand with the
Government when national interests are threatened. That alone will
enhance its image in the electorate, naturally sensitive to foreign
dictation.
The UNP must seriously consider re-energizing the MoU it entered into
with the SLFP on October 23, 2006 to cooperate on key issues vital for
the nation’s well-being.
It was then agreed, in both capacities as the leaders of their
respective parties as well as in their official positions of President
of the country and the Leader of the Opposition to cooperate with each
other on matters relating to the conflict in the North and East,
electoral reforms, good governance and social development.
The UNP must ride on the strength of the major party which is at the
zenith of its popularity instead of allowing parties smaller than the
UNP to ride on its back at the expense of the UNP!
Freedom Watch is a voluntary group of Sri Lankans seeking to
participate in promoting greater political awareness on current issues
of interest in the country. |