‘Post-conflict recovery at a steady pace’ - Part II:

The importance of the LLRC

Text of address by Minister of Plantation Industries and Special Envoy of the President on Human Rights on ‘Reconciliation’, Mahinda Samarasinghe M.P. at the ‘Defence Seminar - 2012’ - ‘Towards Lasting Peace and Stability’ on August 10, 2012, Colombo

As Archbishop Desmond Tutu states: "As our experience in South Africa has taught us, each society must discover its own route to reconciliation. Reconciliation cannot be imposed from outside, nor can someone else's map get us to our destination: it must be our own solution. This involves a very long and painful journey, addressing the pain and suffering of the victims, understanding the motivations of offenders, bringing together estranged communities, trying to find a path to justice, truth and, ultimately, peace. Faced with each new instance of violent conflict, new solutions must be devised that are appropriate to the particular context, history and culture in question."

Minister Mahinda Samarasinghe

All the experts agree that there is no 'cookie cutter', one-size-fits-all solution. Sri Lanka must learn as it goes along and evolve solutions by itself. Of course we look to other countries and regions for ideas. The approaches adopted in Rwanda with regard to poverty eradication and development in the process of reconciliation are interesting. South Africa's Truth and Reconciliation Commission was a model we studied carefully. Many policy makers made in depth studies of the still evolving situation in Northern Ireland.

For our part we must rely on the work of our Commission, comprised of persons of goodwill, integrity and experience and a clear vision of the government to ensure a better future for all Sri Lankans. The work of the Commission proceeded, acknowledging a clear need to heal the wounds of the past and to make recommendations to reconcile the nation by recognizing all victims of conflict, providing redress to them and thereby promoting national unity, peace and harmony.

It is not something that the LLRC overlooked or ignored but the question of accountability from a perspective of retributive justice is all that seems to occupy the minds of some of our interlocutors in the international community of nations. This appears to be the main thrust of their view in Sri Lanka's reconciliation process. While acknowledging that credible allegations must be looked into, the LLRC found specific information and referred it to the government for action. The government established tribunals within the scope of its military laws and is proceeding with these matters. This is no more or no less than others accused of indiscriminate bombing, killing of civilians and other violations of human rights and humanitarian law do in the course of their military operations in various parts of the world. Why then is Sri Lanka expected to chart a different course?

LLRC Report

Another reason that the government places reliance on the finding of the LLRC is the methodology that it adopted in its work. In all the LLRC Report was compiled following interviews with over 1,000 persons who gave evidence before the Commission, and over 5,000 written submissions received. To paraphrase relevant portions of the LLRC Report: The hearings were held in public and open to the print and electronic media unless the person making representations before the Commission requested otherwise. The procedure adopted at the public hearings was to first inform the person that he or she could be heard in public or in camera. Some elected to make submissions in camera. Thereafter the Commissioners proceeded to interact through questions with the person to clarify any matters that arose consequent to the representations made or which they felt were relevant to the terms of their mandate.

The Commission provided every opportunity to persons to make representations in a language of their choice, while providing for simultaneous translation to English. The Commission thus recognized the salutary effect, particularly on affected persons, of being able to relate their stories in a language of their choice. For the purposes of the Report the Commission utilized the English scripts of the simultaneous English translation. The Commission decided to consult and hear the views of persons who would have personal experience and knowledge on different aspects of matters referred to in the Warrant.

Constructive dialogue

Invitations were also extended to local NGOs as well as NGOs based outside Sri Lanka, that have produced reports on the situation in this country pertaining to matters relevant to the Warrant. However, it is a matter of regret that despite the invitation extended in good faith, seeking a constructive dialogue on what the Commission considered as issues of common concern falling under the purview of its Mandate, this invitation has not been reciprocated by three organizations (I specify Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and the International Crisis Group). As the public sittings progressed and consequent to the wide media coverage, there was a keen response from members of the public to express their views before the Commission.

The Commission facilitated the media to video and audio tape the public proceedings. In addition the Commission maintained a web site, since August 2010, where the schedule of Commission visits and transcripts of public hearings, public representations and other information regarding the Commission were published. Among those who made representations before the Commission were members of the public, public servants including those who had served in the affected areas during the conflict period, affected individuals, representatives of the armed forces, senior officials who were associated with the peace process, political leaders, religious leaders, members of civil society, journalists, academics and other professionals, former LTTE cadres and former members of other armed groups.

The Commission undertook field visits to areas affected by the conflict as it was of the view that in order to ascertain first-hand the ground realities, it was imperative to have public sittings in situ. This was also with a view to reaching out to the people in the affected areas and to enable them to highlight their grievances. These people would otherwise have faced considerable difficulties in travelling to Colombo to make their representations. Through this process it was able to acknowledge the suffering of the people in the affected areas and provide an opportunity for them to tell their stories in familiar surroundings.

This approach focused on the restorative dimensions of the Commission's Mandate. The Warrant of the Commission required it to report on matters that may have taken place during the period between February 21, 2002 and May 19, 2009. At the same time it also recognized that the causes underlying the grievances of different communities had its genesis in the period prior to the time frame referred to in the Warrant. The Commission accordingly provided a degree of flexibility to persons making representations in this regard.

Protection of human rights

Let us compare this methodology with that of the Report made by the UN Secretary-General's (UNSG's) Advisory Panel (known as the Darusman Report). It is also worth noting that the UNSG appointed his panel after the LLRC was appointed by our President. The Secretary-General's Advisory Panel held closed door hearings with unnamed witnesses who were guaranteed 20 years anonymity to secure their statements. They also received documentation from a variety of sources. This method of gathering information meant that the testimony could not be verified or tested for its probative value. The Panel never visited Sri Lanka even though it was open to them to place the information at their disposal before the properly constituted Commission of Inquiry established under Sri Lankan law. Thus the process and content of the Darusman Report is at best questionable. Several attempts were made to legitimize this personal act of the UNSG to advise himself. Efforts were made to bring the Panel Report before the Human Rights Council though it was procedurally improper. However, wiser counsel prevailed and Sri Lanka was able to successfully halt those endeavours.

When we go before international human rights forums such as the UN Human Rights Council in September for the 21st Regular Session and in November for the Universal Periodic Review of Sri Lanka, we will share the progress we have made in all aspects of the promotion and protection of human rights. We can do no more than present our case and ask for a fair and impartial hearing. This is no more than we have always demanded.

Peace building and reconciliation

One last aspect that I must mention is that of constitutional and legal reforms to sustain the process of peace building and reconciliation. The peace won at such cost will not be a stable peace until and unless the legitimate aspirations of all communities are met in a substantive and satisfactory manner. The consensus formula to the national question thus evolved, needs to be democratic, pragmatic and home grown, in order to be sustainable.

As a central feature of the government's approach to evolving such a process, a Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) is contemplated to achieve multi-party consensus in respect of constitutional changes, to fulfil the legitimate aspirations of the Sri Lankan people enabling them to work in unison and with a sense of national identity for a better tomorrow. The relevant motion was adopted by Parliament in November last year. We are optimistic that the Parliamentary Select Committee process would help achieve such a consensus, given its inclusivity and transparency, and commitment to democratic ideals. The government has already nominated its members to the PSC and is awaiting the nomination of members representing the opposition, after which its sittings can commence.

Parallel with this multi-party mechanism, the Government is committed to bilateral discussions with Tamil political parties as well as Muslim representation. We are mindful that all previous attempts at evolving a constitutional formula have failed due to lack of broad national consensus.

Another key to restoration of normality was the holding of elections in the North and East soon after the areas were brought under government control. Provincial Council elections were held in the Eastern Province even before the Humanitarian Operation ended in the North, and Local Authority elections were held for the Jaffna Municipal Council and Vavuniya Urban Council as early as August 2009. Presidential and General Elections were held island wide in 2010. Local authority elections, held last year, saw elections held throughout the country including in the North and East. Many former LTTE combatants are now in active politics.

The LTTE's one time Eastern Province Commander is a Deputy Minister. A former LTTE child soldier, was the Chief Minister of the Eastern Province. A number of former LTTE cadres have also become members of local government bodies. In the areas formerly occupied by the LTTE, people exercised their franchise without fear for the first time in three decades. The fact that political plurality has returned to these areas is clear from the results of these elections. The swift restoration of democracy to those parts of Sri Lanka is a significant achievement. Elections for the Northern Provincial Council are envisaged to be held in 2013.

Defeated LTTE agenda

Another concern is the concerted campaign of disinformation and pressure exerted by the so called 'anti-Sri Lanka Diaspora' on host countries around the world to question our record. We call on those countries who express an interest in reconciliation in Sri Lanka to focus on the activities of these groups which are aimed at creating instability and undermining reconciliation. We note that, in the recent past, some progress was made by countries to arrest LTTE fund-raising to purchase arms and further its campaign of terrorism. Similarly we request these countries to cooperate with the government of Sri Lanka to arrest this campaign of disinformation which ultimately will have an adverse impact on the peace-building and recovery process if allowed to continue unchecked. We are also taking steps to engage with these groups and wean them away from the defeated LTTE agenda of separatism and terrorism.

It only remains for me to acknowledge with thanks the patronage of the President who in his capacity as Commander in Chief and Minister of Defence brought about the conditions under which terrorism could be defeated after nearly 30 years of armed conflict.

That defeat paved the way for the Sri Lankan people to move forward as one nation, under one banner towards a better future. The leadership of the Secretary to the Ministry of Defence, supported wholeheartedly by the officers, men and women of the tri-forces and the Police, also contributed significantly and without them this victory would not have been possible. The Government wholly appreciates the sacrifice and dedication of those in uniform especially those who sacrificed life and limb for the motherland.

In conclusion, I hope that these few days of deliberations - which is a continuing exercise on the part of the Sri Lanka Army, the armed services and the Government to share with our partners the experience and lessons of fighting terrorism - will prove useful.

Unfortunately the reality today is that terrorism has many forms and manifestations that afflict so many of the world's nations. It is only through cooperation, information sharing and collective action that this scourge could be eliminated.