Many states flay flawed Darusman Report
Text of the Cabinet paper presented by
Plantation Industries Minister Mahinda Samarasinghe on Sri Lanka’s
participation at the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) 18th
session from September 12 to 30, 2011
Minister Mahinda Samarasinghe
|
The UNHRC held its 18th Regular Session from September 12 to 30, 2011
in Geneva. The Sri Lanka delegation to the UNHRC was led by me in my
capacity as the Special Envoy of the President on Human Rights.
The members of the delegation included, Irrigation and Water
Resources Management Minister Nimal Siripala de Silva, Environment
Minister Anura Priyadarshana Yapa, Sajin De Vass Gunawardena; monitoring
MP of the Ministry of External Affairs, Mohan Pieris, former
Attorney-General and Senior Advisor to the Cabinet of Ministers on Legal
Affairs, Ambassador Tamara Kunanayakam, Permanent Representative to the
UN in Geneva, Kshenuka Senewiratne, Additional Secretary of the Ministry
of Foreign Affairs, S B Divaratne Secretary, Presidential Task Force on
Resettlement, Development and Security, Imelda Sukumar, Government
Agent, Jaffna, W D G S Gunatilleke, Additional Government Analyst, Dr
Hemantha Beneragama, Director, Medical Supplies Division of the Health
Ministry, W J S Fernando, A H M D Nawaz, Additional Solicitors General
and N Pulle, Senior State Counsel of the Attorney-General’s Department,
M Keegel, Acting Director Political (West) of External Affairs Ministry
and Nishan Muthukrishna, Consultant, UN Joint Programme on Human Rights.
Western countries
Sri Lanka forestalled an attempt to discuss the final phases of the
armed conflict in 2009 and also precluded an attempt by certain Western
countries to focus on attempts to prejudge the national reconciliation
process pursuant to the hearings and forthcoming conclusions of the
Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC), at the next UN
Human Rights Council (HRC) in March 2012.
The delegation successfully countered an attempt to introduce the UN
Secretary-General’s (UNSG’s) Advisory Panel of Experts’ Report (known as
the Darusman Report) at the Council. When it learnt that the UNSG had
communicated the report to the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights,
Navanethem Pillay, and also to the President of the Human Rights
Council, Sri Lanka expressed its reservations as to the formality and
procedural propriety of such communication by way of a written
intimation of our displeasure.
This was followed by intense diplomatic engagement, under my
direction, by the Sri Lankan delegation, which protested the fact that
the report was communicated by UNSG Ban ki-Moon’s office to Geneva
without advice to the country concerned. Sri Lanka’s stand won the
support of most members and observer nations at the Council.
Darusman Report
Moreover, Sri Lanka pointed out the impropriety in UN High
Commissioner for Human Rights, Navanethem Pillay communicating the fact
(of the transmission of the report to Geneva) to a grouping of Western
nations before informing Sri Lanka of this development. Due to these
procedural deficiencies and anomalies relating to customary practice,
many Member States and observers of the HRC expressed their opposition,
along with Sri Lanka, to any attempt to introduce the flawed Darusman
Report to the Council. The delegation also pointed out the lack of any
intergovernmental body calling for, or mandating, such a report.
Post-conflict development
The many fallacies, false assumptions and informities of the report
which is based on hearsay and secondary sources without being verified
or tested against any evidentiary standards, was pointed out by the
delegation.
A final attempt to introduce the report as a mere information
document in the HRC was also successfully resisted due to the procedural
and substantive weaknesses in the report and the appreciation of the
national position.
G L Peiris, Minister of External Affairs who joined the Sri Lankan
delegation in Geneva in advance of the Sessions, met with Ambassadors
and senior representatives of Council Member States at two briefing
sessions on September 9 where Sri Lanka’s progress in post war
reconstruction and initiatives to bring about reconciliation were
explained, in addition to other current developments in the post-armed
conflict era. These points were reiterated during my address to the
plenary of the HRC on September 12.
Consequently, Sri Lanka hosted a ‘side event’ chaired by me with the
participation of Irrigation and Water Resources Management Minister
Nimal Siripala de Silva, Environment Minister Anura Priyadharshana Yapa,
and Sajin De Vaas Gunawardena MP, Monitoring MP for Ministry of External
Affairs and Mohan Peiris, Senior Advisor to the Cabinet of Ministers on
Legal Affairs and other experts from Sri Lanka and the Permanent
Representative of UN/Geneva on the post-conflict development of conflict
affected areas and the achievements in the past two years to restore
normality and civilian life in those areas.
The presentation was themed ‘Sri Lanka - Humanitarian Operations: A
Factual Analysis’ and based on material provided by the Ministries of
Defence and Economic Development. The centerpiece of the Sri Lankan
presentation was the Defence Ministry video: ‘Lies Agreed Upon’ -
selected excerpts of which were shown to the audience.
The full video and several informational materials were distributed
to those attending the event. The event was well-attended with several
national delegations, international non-governmental organizations and
special interest groups (representing the LTTE agenda, Tamil and anti-LTTE
diaspora) also participating.
The former Attorney-General and present Senior Advisor to the Cabinet
on Legal Affairs extensively briefed the gathering on the legal
implications and practical effect of the lifting of the state of
emergency as at September 1 and the consequential provisions made.
Different perspectives
During the event, the Sri Lankan delegation emphasized that the
government needed the time and space to bring to fruition the many
efforts - political, social and economic - that it had commenced. An
interactive session ensued during which there was open and candid
discussion on different perspectives of the situation in Sri Lanka.
The delegation also held discussions with the Maldivian delegation
headed by its President Mohamed Nasheed, President of the HRC Laura
Dupuy Lassere (Uruguay), UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Pillay,
the Member States of the Latin American Countries and the Caribbean (GRULAC)
Chaired by Cuba, the organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) Chaired
by Pakistan, the Asian Group at the HRC Chaired by Japan, the
Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) Chaired by Egypt as well as the African
Group, during the first week of the HRC Session (between September 12
and 15).
Due to the Sri Lankan delegation’s efforts exemplified by Ambassador
Kunanayakam’s communication of September 14 to the President of the HRC
per my advice, the delegation of Pakistan addressed a letter co-signed
by Cuba, Algeria, Bangladesh, Malaysia, Philippines, the Russian
Federation and China, to the President of the HRC on September 15
stressing that the ‘Darusman Report’ had no ‘status whatsoever’ and
urging “that any initiative to introduce this even as a document for
information, be clearly resisted as it would only give legitimacy and
standing to an unverified, unsubstantiated and manifestly flawed
document. We would like to inform you that any attempt to do so is
likely to be challenged in the Council on procedural grounds”.
The Sri Lankan stand on this issue was thus resoundingly endorsed and
supported by many countries. Thus, any attempt to communicate the
‘Darusman Report’ officially to the HRC was successfully forestalled.
The next issue to be addressed was an initiative taken by the
Canadian delegation (a move first proposed by the United States in June
2011) to request an interactive dialogue based on the forthcoming report
of the LLRC during the upcoming 19th Session of the HRC in March 2012.
I returned to join Sri Lanka’s delegation to Geneva and held wide
consultations on the proposal. On my advice, Senior Advisor to the
Cabinet of Ministers on Legal Affairs Mohan Pieris addressed an informal
consultative meeting convened by the Canadian delegation at which the
Sri Lankan position was fully explained setting out the substantive and
procedural inconsistencies and the potential for undue and unwarranted
pre-judgement of an established domestic process following an internal
conflict.
Pakistan, Cuba, China, the Russian Federation, Thailand, Chile,
Malaysia and Algeria among many other countries were supportive of Sri
Lanka’s position. Consequently, the Canadian initiative did not
materialize as they were aware that they would not receive the majority
support of the countries to carry it through.
Political negotiations
I then also led discussions with several high level representatives
at which the Sri Lankan delegation explained its position on several
issues including, post-armed conflict reconstruction, ongoing political
negotiations, rehabilitation of ex-combatants, the lifting of the
Emergency and broadly the many faceted efforts of the government to
restore normality, peace and economic development in Sri Lanka.
Between September 22 and 29 senior members of the delegation and I
met with representatives of India, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Thailand,
Pakistan, Uganda, Indonesia, Algeria, South Africa, Malaysia, the
Philippines, Cuba, Kuwait, Botswana, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Chile, Benin,
Senegal and Djibouti, to further elucidate Sri Lanka’s position based on
the factual achievements on the ground and realistic prospects for
sustainable peace, economic development and national integration. Most
meetings were at the Ambassadorial level (denotes CDA or Deputy Head of
Mission).
The meetings were also aimed at maintaining the level of support that
Sri Lanka will require to withstand any further Western initiatives
during the 19th Sessions of the HRC in March 2012 and to stress that Sri
Lanka welcomes the opportunity to engage in an open and full dialogue on
all relevant matters during the upcoming Universal Periodic Review in
October 2012.
The delegation explained that political initiatives presently under
way and the implementation of the LLRC recommendations (0nce they are
known in November 2011) would show considerable progress by October
2012.
Sri Lanka’s position was also greatly strengthened by the
interactions of the President at the UN General Assembly in New York
with several Heads of State and Government, at which the current
situation in the country was extensively discussed.
External Affairs Minister, Professor G L Peiris, also held several
meetings with his counterparts in the international community and
communicated our position in writing, which also assisted in clarifying
Sri Lanka’s position. |