PM assures security forces chiefs over

Geneva resolution

By Our Political Editor

Champika, Ruwan pledge that Army will be protected

Ranil concerned about attitude of pro-Rajapaksa official; issues to be sorted

out on his return from Japan

President says international community now supports Lanka, calls all-party
conference to discuss reconciliation issues
UN office in Colombo hits back at Wigneswaran; tells him to come through
the central government
Placed on the table as they took their seats at the
conference room of Temple Trees was the English text of
the US backed resolution on Sri Lanka together with a
translated Sinhala text. Army officers of two-star rank or
Majors General and above were there. So were the
equivalent counterparts, Rear Admirals of the Sri Lanka
Navy and Air Vice Marshals of the Sri Lanka Air Force.
From the Police there were those above the rank of
Deputy Inspectors General.

Even before the resolution was adopted without a vote at

the 30th sessions of the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) on Thursday, the
Government has initiated a dialogue to reach out to the armed forces and the Police.
Those among their ranks are ones who will become the subject of investigations over
alleged war crimes. The others are the remnants of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil
Eelam (LTTE). Army officials say over 3,000 LTTE cadres are still at large and did not

surrender and submit themselves to a process of rehabilitation.

Those who surrendered and were subject to rehabilitation were 12,383 guerrilla
cadres. Of them, 12,105, according to the office of the Commissioner General for
Rehabilitation, were rehabilitated. The number remaining, they said, was sixty. Some
26 cadres had deserted, 13 had died due to natural causes and 179 had been handed
over to Police over on-going investigations, they said.

Unlike probes against troops and Police, where allegations against them were
recorded from reported victims by the OISL, the charges of war crimes by Tiger
guerrillas have only been documented mostly in general terms. An example is how
they prevented civilians from leaving areas where they were cornered by security
forces advance or expressly targeted them. Such instances may require further
investigation like all others. A bigger question would be finding the alleged
perpetrators.

Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe spoke to the senior officers of the armed forces
and the Police for forty minutes and took their questions thereafter. He gave them an
overview of the events that led to the investigation by the Office of the UN High
Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). He said the copies of the resolution
before them gave an idea and declared that a domestic investigative process would
get under way. The Premier pointed out that the previous Government had not acted
on the reports before it. Hence the pressure had now begun to mount on the present
Government. He referred to the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission
(LLRC) report and the recommendations therein.

Commission reports to be tabled

He said the report of the Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry into Complaints
regarding Missing Persons (PCICMP) (headed by retired High Court Judge Maxwell

Paranagama) would be tabled in Parliament soon. It was appointed by former

President Mahinda Rajapaksa to probe complaints regarding missing persons,
resident in the Northern and Eastern Provinces. It covers the period from June 10,
1990 to May 19, 2009. Premier Wickremesinghe said he had learnt that the report of
this Commission had named some Army officers but he could not say who they were.
Commenting on this commission, during the debate on the resolution on Wednesday
in Geneva Human Rights Commissioner Zeid Raad al-Hussein said there were
widespread concerns raised about its credibility and effectiveness. We believe this
Commission should be disbanded and its pending cases transferred to a credible and
independent institution established in consultation with families of the disappeared.
Also to be tabled in Parliament soon, the
Premier said, would be the report of the
Commission of Inquiry headed by Nissanka
Udalagama, a former Supreme Court Judge.
President Maithripala Sirisena makes a statement at a news
conference at Presidents House in Colombo on Friday which was
also televised after returning from the United Nations General
Assembly sessions in New York. Also present was Prime Minister
Ranil Wickremesinghe.

This Commission concluded probes into

seven cases by 2009. This included inquiries
into the assassination of former Foreign

Minister Lakshman Kadirgamar, the killing of 17 aid workers of the French INGO
Action Contre Le Faim in Mutur, the killing of five youths in Trincomalee and the
disappearance of Rev. Fr. Nihal Jim Brown of Philip Neris Church at Allaipidi on
August 28, 2006.
Associated with Premier Wickremesinghe were Megapolis and Western Development
Minister Patali Champika Ranawaka, Acting Foreign Minister Harsha de Silva and
Acting Defence Minister Ruwan Wijewardene. Earlier, ahead of his departure to attend
the 70th sessions of the UN General Assembly, President Sirisena and Premier
Wickremesinghe discussed with armed forces commanders and the Police Chief the
contents of the OISL report. Upon his return to Colombo on Friday evening, Sirisena
made a statement at a news conference but did not take any questions. He said the
domestic mechanism the Government would establish to investigate alleged war
crimes was in accordance with the Constitution. He would soon call an All Party

Conference of registered political parties to seek their views. The views of religious
leaders and intellectuals would also be sought, he said. The President declared that
the Government was able to turn international opinion in its favour with the outcome
of the January 8 presidential election. Sirisena had planned to address the nation on
Friday night. However, he was not quite happy with the text of the speech that had
been prepared for delivery. Hence, he decided he would make a statement at a news
conference.

Champika, Ruwan vow to protect Army

An even more important meeting came when Minister Patali Champika Ranawaka
addressed top Army officers who were involved in the humanitarian operation or the
final stages of the May 2009 offensive to militarily defeat Tiger guerrillas. The officers
raised questions whether they would face punishment in the event an investigation
determined that they were at fault. Ranawaka who said that the meeting was informal
urged those present to speak out frankly. He said that the Army was a national
institution and it was the responsibility of the Government to protect it. The Army had
engaged in anti-terrorist operations which was a legitimate exercise the world over. As
made clear, the responsibility of finding out who was responsible for certain alleged
acts had fallen on the Government. Thus, the idea was to identify only wrong doers
who acted on illegal orders. There was no cause for worry since there would be no
witch hunt. When one of the officers who attended Premier Wickremesinghes briefing
said some of his remarks were inaudible to him since he sat a distance away, acting
Foreign Minister Harsha de Silva gave the highlights of what had been said. Acting
Defence Minister Ruwan Wijewardene declared that nowhere in the OISL report was it
said that the Sri Lanka Army as a whole was responsible for committing alleged war
crimes. He said it was the full responsibility of this Government to protect the Army
and the good reputation it had maintained. Defence sources said senior officers would
soon speak to groups of other ranks to explain issues.

The resolution on Sri Lanka came up for debate in Geneva on Wednesday and was
adopted without a vote on Thursday. The six page-document was co-sponsored by 13
countries Albania, Australia, Germany, Greece, Latvia, Montenegro, Poland,
Romania, Sri Lanka, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, the United Kingdom
and the United States. Most significant among the 23 preambular paragraphs is one
which said: Recognizing that the investigation into alleged serious violations and
abuses of human rights and related crimes in Sri Lanka requested in Human Rights
Resolution 25/1 was necessitated by the absence of a credible national process of
accountability.

This was complemented by one of the 20 operative paragraphs which form the crux of
the resolution. It said: Welcomes the Governments recognition that accountability is
essential to uphold the rule of law and build confidence in the people of all
communities of Sri Lanka in the justice system, takes note with appreciation of the
Government of Sri Lankas proposal to establish a Judicial Mechanism with Special
Counsel to investigate allegations of violations and abuses of human rights and
violations of international humanitarian law, as applicable; and affirms that a credible
justice process should include independent judicial and prosecutorial institutions led by
individuals known for integrity and impartiality; and further affirms in this regard the
importance of participation in a Sri Lankan judicial mechanism, including the Special
Counsels office, of Commonwealth and other foreign judges, defence lawyers, and
authorized prosecutors and investigators.

It has been agreed that the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights would present
an oral update to the Council at its 32nd session (in June next year) and a
comprehensive report at the 34th session in March 2017. These are over how the
provisions of the resolution are being implemented.

Geneva envoys statement

Unlike his previous statement, Sri Lankas Permanent Representative at the UN in

Geneva, Ravinatha Aryasinha, made two different speeches, one during Wednesdays
debate and another after the adoption of the resolution on Thursday. Both have been
cleared earlier by the Foreign Ministry in Colombo and was supportive of the
resolution. On Friday, however, the Foreign Ministry issued a news release. It said
The attention of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has been drawn to news reports and
commentaries appearing over the past few days suggesting that the statement made
by Sri Lankas Permanent Representative to the UN in Geneva Ambassador
Ravinatha Aryasinha at the 1st informal meeting on the draft resolution on Sri Lanka
held on 21 September in Geneva, and the subsequent moving of amendments to the
draft resolution at the 2nd informal meeting on 22 September by the Sri Lanka
delegation, was inconsistent with the position of the Government of Sri Lanka. The
Ministry wishes to state categorically that both the interventions by Ambassador
Aryasinha, and the moving of amendments to the draft resolution in Geneva, had the
approval of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
The Sunday Times is aware that Ambassador Aryasinha was not successful in issuing
his own detailed statement to the Sunday Times. This was not made possible by the
Foreign Ministry of Colombo. He then found himself lucky in persuading the Ministry to
issue a ghost news release. It was not signed and it is not clear who in particular
issued it. Nobody in the Ministry seems to have wanted to put his or her name to it.
Nowhere in last weeks political commentary was it said that Aryasinha had or had not
obtained the approval of the Foreign Ministry to make the remarks referred to. In fact
the news release he issued directly from Geneva, a practice he had followed from past
years, was quoted in the political commentary other than a news release issued by the
Human Rights Watch. He has in fact now confirmed that he moved amendments to the
resolution. As is very clear, there was little or no success.

Now, it makes matters worse when Aryasinha says he had the approval of the Foreign
Ministry since it puts the Government of Sri Lankas credibility at stake in the eyes of
the international community. On the one hand, his own Foreign Minister Mangala

Samaraweera in his speech during the high level segment of UNHRC inaugural
sessions provided all the answers to issues raised in the OISL report. He offered to set
up different mechanisms to meet with the demands in the resolution. He also declared
trust me.. Dont judge us by the broken promises, experiences and u-turns of the
past. Here is Sri Lankas envoy doing something different. If the claim is true, other
than the Foreign Ministry, all others at the informal event had been made to believe
here was another u-turn from Sri Lanka. The amendments meant they were not in
agreement. That is now official. No matter whether the meeting was informal or
otherwise. All those clauses in the resolution Aryasinha tried to change remained and
Sri Lanka became a co-sponsor of the same resolution. The change in the tenor and
language in the resolution was the result of efforts by Premier Wickremesinghes direct
intervention as revealed last week.

These developments did not go unnoticed. A highly placed Government source said it
was the subject of a top level discussion where Premier Wickremesinghe was present.
The source declined to elaborate but said it came up after another issue was raised.
The subject was an offer by the US Government of US$ 2.6 million (over Rs. 365
million) to enhance the capabilities of Sri Lankas criminal justice authorities. This
offer was to have expired within days if it had not been utilised. The source said the
Prime Minister, who made inquiries, had learnt why it was pigeon holed from officials in
the Foreign Ministry. Firstly, they had pointed out that such a programme has not been
approved by the Cabinet of Ministers. Secondly, it is alleged that it was not protocol for
a Deputy Minister, who was only acting, to place his signature. An angry Prime
Minister Wickremesinghe, the source said, directed that acting Foreign Minister
Harsha de Silva to go ahead and place his signature. He wanted to ensure the
agreement was in place before the deadline for the offer ended and Sri Lanka was not
deprived of such assistance. The signing took place.

Later, a US Embassy statement quoted Ambassador Atul Keshap as saying: The

United States looks forward to sharing its experiences to help raise professionalism

and transparency in Sri Lanka in a way consistent with international standards.

As Secretary Kerry announced during his visit to Sri Lanka in May, these new
programs will help reform the justice system and include training to improve individual
skills, promoting policies to professionalize criminal justice institutions and
practitioners, and ensuring better co-ordination between police and prosecutors. In
addition, the statement said: separate programs will help build Sri Lankas capacity to
handle complex crimes such as corruption, narcotics trafficking, financial and
organized crimes.

Premier Wickremesinghe, the high ranking Government source revealed, is deeply

concerned that some officials in the Foreign Ministry, reportedly loyal to the previous
Government, were not co-operating with the present administration. His office was
earlier disappointed over a report given to him ahead of his official visit to India. The
Premier then declared that he will not seek any help from the Foreign Ministry but ask
the Ministry of Development Strategies and International Trade to assist him in his
foreign visits. Upon his return from the visit to Japan, he will have a discussion on the
matter with Minister Samaraweera, the source added.

Wickremesinghe leaves today for Kyoto where he will address the Science and
Technology Forum (STF). Thereafter, he will arrive in Tokyo to begin a three-day
official visit which will include talks with his Japanese counterpart, Shinzo Abe.

There is no gainsaying that Foreign Minister Samaraweera is doing an excellent job.

He has been very successful in dealing with the international community and placing
Sri Lankas case, the source pointed out. Hence, any claim that moves to make
effective changes in the Foreign Ministry to weed out those stalling or sabotaging
progress is by no means a political clash or a battle of wits between the Premier and
his Foreign Minister, the source insisted. Among matters that are to come up for
discussion, the source revealed, was the role of Ambassador Aryasinha. There have

also been concerns at the highest levels of the Government over attempts by an
official to have material over events in Geneva containing unfounded accusations on
the Government being published in a local language newspaper. It was halted at the
eleventh hour after we learnt of it, said the same source.

Wednesdays debate saw a variety of views being expressed by envoys of different

countries. One of the countries that spoke out strongly in favour of Sri Lanka was
Pakistan. Its envoy Zameer Akram said: We believe that after the end of struggle
against terrorism, the people of Sri Lanka deserve the support and assistance of
international community to rebuild the country.. Those who have been critical of Sri
Lankas efforts to overcome terrorism and separatism funded from abroad would do
well to look at their own track record on the so-called war on terror.

Indian envoy Dileep Sinha made a brief speech after the resolution was adopted. He
avoided references to a probe into alleged war crimes but said his country hoped Tamil
grievances would be addressed within a united Sri Lanka. He noted that any
development in Sri Lanka had its impact on India.

TNA sharply divided

The event at Palais de Naciones in Geneva clearly showed that the opposition Tamil
National Alliance (TNA) is sharply divided. Two of its parliamentarians and a Provincial
Councillor used the good offices of UNHRC-recognised organisations to make
speeches during the debate. M.K. Shivajilingam spoke as a representative of the
League of Persons with Disabilities. The Tamil people, he said, are disappointed that
the OISL Report did not fully refer the issue to the ICC (International Criminal Court) or
a full international mechanism. Suresh Kandiah Premachandran who represented the
Association des jeurnes pour PAgriculture au Mali declared that as long as military
occupation and Sinhala settlements remain in the North and East, it is very difficult to
work on genuine reconciliation and accountability. Gajendrakumar Ponnambalam

(Tamil National Peoples Front) who represented the Alliance Creative Community
Project said, Criminal investigations must make sure that the current distorted and
corrupted Sri Lankan judicial structures be excluded till such time comprehensive
reforms have been undertaken, or at the very least, kept to a bare minimum in what
should be UN controlled and run criminal justice system.

Ananthi Sashitharan who spoke as a representative of the Association Mauritanienne

pour La Promotion du droit declared that the Northern Provincial Council has
demanded an independent international investigation on all crimes including genocide.
She claimed that the unitary state system in the island denies Tamils nationhood,
sovereignty and the right to self-determination. Without these being addressed, there
can be no political solution, no justice, no security, and no reconciliation for the Tamil
people. However, there was embarrassment for her after the overarching 261 page
report of the Human Rights Commissioner, released with the OISL report, made some
strong indictments on her late husband Elilan reported missing after the military
arrested him. Here is one such reference: One of the most serious incidents of forced
recruitment reported during the last few months of the conflict was the alleged
abduction of several hundred adults and children who had sought refuge at
Valayarmadam church towards the end of March 2009 by LTTE cadres led by Elilan
and Ilamparithy.
Ananthi is a staunch supporter of Northern Province Chief Minister C.V. Wigneswaran.
The NPC has adopted a string of resolutions including ones alleging genocide during
the separatist war an allegation that has not been established even during the OISL
probe.

It was only weeks earlier that the UN Resident Co-ordinator in Sri Lanka snubbed
Wigneswaran after he tried to establish direct links with the world body bypassing the
Government, his own Tamil National Alliance (TNA) and the NPC ministers . That was
by appointing a Special Advisor (he named his own nephew to the position), seeking a
UN Joint Needs Assessment (JNA) team and millions of dollars from the

Peacebuilding Programme. This was with the military defeat of Tiger guerrillas.

A Peacebuilding Support Office (PBSO) was established by the UN to assist and

support the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) with strategic advice and policy
guidance, administer the Peacebuilding Fund (PBF) and to serve the SecretaryGeneral in coordinating United Nations agencies in their peacebuilding efforts.
Wigneswaran had named Nimalan Karthikeyan, who lives in Melbourne, Australia, to
work with him and the NPC ministers. He was previously an employee of the Tamil
Refugees Rehabilitation Organisation (TRRO) which was later banned.
Chief Minister Wigneswaran in a letter addressed to the UN Resident Co-ordinator in
Sri Lanka Subinay Nandy dated August 15 said, With regard to your reference to
briefing TNA Representatives, as Chief Minister of Northern Province (CM-NP), I have
stated the nature and type of approach UN Resident Co-ordinators Office should have
adopted in his interactions with CM-NP and Northern Provincial Council bearing in
mind UN values, good governance principles and protocols that need to be adhered to
by UN without interference in the Government aspects of NPC.

Needless to say that it should have been borne in mind that NPC came into being as
a new governance structure within the framework of the Thirteenth Amendment after
the absence of democratic governance for more than a quarter of a century. It should
also have been borne in mind that since the dissolution of the North-East Provincial
Council by the President in March 1990, the Northern Province was directly under the
Governors rule mainly spearheaded by military commanders.
.. I wish to re-iterate that it is important that UN Sri Lanka adopts a conflict
sensitive, lessons learned approach based on UN Values and Good Governance
Principles with NPC to establish future co-operation to serve the needs and priorities
of the post war communities in Northern Province. What happened at the closing
stages of the war and the part played by the UN at that time is fresh in the minds of
the people.

Nandy replied in a letter to Wigneswaran dated August 28 that the UN on numerous

occasions advised you that there was no donor willing to fund a standalone advisory
position for a pre-selected candidate without following standard competitive process
for recruitment. The Sunday Times learnt that a monthly fee of US$ 5,000 had been
sought in addition to expenses. .the excessive canvassing by the proposed Special
Advisor made it even more untenable for the UN to consider such an appointment,
Nandy said.

Here are other significant points made in Nandys letter: You are noting that . You
urged my office to advocate with the Government of Sri Lanka to enable equal
partnership of NPC in the JNA process. perhaps aptly describes the misperception
that you convey about the role of the UN. What you do not know in your response is
that we advise you to directly communicate with the Central Government like you did
while pursuing central government approval for the proposed Special Advisor. I offered
to arrange for you and your board of ministers a comprehensive briefing on the JNA
(Joint Needs Assessment), including elaborating on the scope, purpose and key
outcomes. Unfortunately you never responded to the request. This offer of the UN
stands to-date.

We therefore were surprised that after your meetings in New York in July, different
media channels were presenting the draft concept note that we shared with you as
something that was leaked. Given that the draft concept note was shared with
stakeholders including yourself in addition to me making a public statement setting out
the peacebuilding framework on 4 June, there was nothing to be leaked. This, in our
view, does not meet the standards of transparency that is expected of any high office.
The Peacebuilding Fund concept note setting out the initial thinking of the Government
of Sri Lanka and the UN has been discussed extensively with Government
stakeholders and civil society organisations.

Henceforth, I strongly encourage you to convey all your concerns and comments to
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, given that the ministry represents the Government of Sri
Lanka to formally seek support from the Peacebuilding Fund. I would also like to clarify
that there is no direct connection between the JNA and the Peacebuilding Programme
as you allude to in your letter to other UN officials. Nandy has told Chief Minister
Wigneswaran that the UN, in its operations, will continue to be guided by its core
mandate in all its programmes and will not be subordinate to any specific political
agenda. He has also made clear that the overall concept and framework of
Peacebuilding Fund the UN will liaise with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which will coordinate inputs from different implementing agencies, including the Northern Provincial
Administration. He has added that Wigneswarans nominated representative should
undertake future interactions with the UN with the Assistant Representative,
Governance Empowerment and Social Inclusion Team at the UNDP.

Wigneswarans efforts to obtain funds directly from the UN for peace building and
other efforts have now assumed a new dimension. This is with the passage of the US
sponsored resolution at the Human Rights Council where matters related to
development activity, reconciliation and reconstruction would fall on the Central
Government. With the Northern Province Chief Minister showing signs of non-cooperation with either the Government or with his own party, the TNA, the issue will be
a dilemma. That adds to the Governments responsibilities in the wake of the UNHRC
resolution.

Posted by Thavam