Opinion:

Hussein, another Navi Pillay?

By K.M.H.C.B. Kulatunga

United Nations human rights spokesman Rupert Colville had said Sri Lanka was attempting to ‘sabotage’ the UNHRC inquiry and it raises questions about the government's integrity and are an affront to the UN body that mandated the inquiry.

Colville told a regular briefing of the UN in Geneva that Sri Lanka was refusing to cooperate with an inquiry to investigate war crimes allegedly committed by both Sri Lanka and LTTE terrorists during the humanitarian battle, and had intimidated witnesses who may wish to testify. This is a high-handed statement against the sovereignty and integrity of a member country of the UN.

Meanwhile, UN Human Rights Chief Zeid Ra’ad Al-Hussein has said that the statements made by the government of Sri Lanka casting doubts on the integrity of the OHCHR (Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights) investigation on Sri Lanka (OISL) were an insult to the UN mandated investigation.

Puzzle

Hussein has said that Sri Lanka’s continuing campaign of distortion and disinformation about the OISL and attempts to prevent witnesses from submitting information to it was an affront to the UNHRC mandated investigation. He said the government’s refusal to cooperate with the investigation should not be used to undermine its integrity.

Hussein has questioned why would governments that have nothing to hide go to such “extraordinary lengths to sabotage an impartial international investigation”. But what puzzles us is why should the UNHRC threaten the sovereignty of a member state which has nothing to hide and force that country to agree to a controversial investigation by the UNHRC? What right does Hussein has got to intimidate Sri Lanka.

Going by what he has stated and his conduct during his first few months in office, it seems that Hussein is fast turning into another Navi Pillay.

He has no right whatsoever to challenge the right of a sovereign State to raise concern regarding procedural aspects of an investigation.

Vigilance

It is deplorable that a high official of the UN system, has resorted to the use of intemperate language to attack and vilify a sovereign member of the United Nations. It is only reasonable for the OHCHR to have explained this fact in a professional manner while assuring the Government that the investigation will exercise vigilance regarding attempts by parties to manipulate the system.

Instead of doing so, the new UNHRC chief has gone to the extent of challenging the right of a sovereign State to raise concerns regarding procedural aspects of an Investigation which impacts its people and their future in the context of the ongoing sensitive reconciliation process.

The Government’s categorical rejection of the investigation established by the Human Rights Council is not tantamount to concealing information.

The Government has steadfastly maintained that it owes to the country’s dignity not to subject its people to an investigation that does not conform to even the minimum requisites of justice and fair play.

This position has been overwhelmingly endorsed by the Parliament.

The UNHRC has no right to challenge a decision taken by the Parliament, the legislature of the country.

It is a principled position which the Government chose to take that was supported by many countries in the Council.

Integrity

Sri Lanka’s Permanent Representative to the UN in Geneva Ravinatha Aryasinha, in a letter to the High Commissioner for Human Rights Prince Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, has regretted that a news release should have been issued on the matter questioning the integrity of the Government of a sovereign nation which has been a member of the United Nations since 1955.

Sri Lanka has contributed consistently to the United Nations system in numerous capacities by taking a lead in norm setting processes including the Law of the Sea Conference, disarmament and human rights.

Hence, it is unfortunate that the UNHRC has issued a news release without making any attempt to understand the context or content apparent from the media release of the Ministry of External Affairs on November 5, 2014.

In fact, the OHCHR has been inept in comprehending for reasons best known to it that the thrust of the concerns expressed by the Government of Sri Lanka related to the flawed procedure of the OHCHR Investigation on Sri Lanka (OISL).

LTTE cadre

The Government, its departments and agencies have made no attempt whatsoever to prevent bona fide witnesses from submitting information to the investigation team. Neither was any attempt made to deter and intimidate individuals from submitting evidence. The submissions that the Investigation would have received by now would stand to prove this fact.

The Government has informed a selected group of Ambassadors and diplomatic representatives based in Colombo, about the revelations made by an individual who was apprehended on the grounds of being a non-rehabilitated LTTE cadre.

These revelations included him being employed to collect signatures of persons affected by the LTTE terror on blank forms by deceiving them into believing that they would be granted monetary compensation by the UN.

The forms were to then be used to submit false and fabricated information to the OISL.

This information was shared by the Government in order to caution the interlocutors on attempts being made at manipulating the investigation process. Connected to this issue was the Government’s concern regarding the response of the OHCHR spokesperson to a local newspaper that although officially the deadline for submissions was October 30 and will not be extended, submissions arriving late would not be necessarily refused as some material may take time to arrive.

The recent statement by the UNHRC spokesperson Colville implies that only some material arriving late would be admitted, the basis for which is unknown.

However, it is astonishing that the controversial news release seeks to confirm the said deadline for submissions and the closure of the e-mail address. Such conflicting positions only serve to call into question the integrity of the OISL process.

The Commission to Investigate Complaints Regarding Missing Persons in the Northern and Eastern Provinces whose mandate was expanded in July 2014 operates on the same basis. It is in this context that the Government expected the OISL which claims to be the embodiment of best practices with regard to conducting investigations to at least maintain the same level of transparency to facilitate access to the public.

The Government’s categorical rejection of the investigation established by the Human Rights Council is not tantamount to concealing information. The Government has steadfastly maintained that it owes to the country’s dignity not to subject its people to an investigation that does not conform to even the minimum requisites of justice and fair play - a position that has been overwhelmingly endorsed by the Parliament.

It is unfortunate that the UNHRC chief has chosen to cast aspersions and denigrate a democratically elected Government for which the masses have reposed implicit faith at every election since 2005. That matters is the mandate of the masses and no outside force could challenge that inalienable right.

Double standards

The President and the Government is only answerable to the people of the country who had elected them and not to Hussein or his spokesman.

In fact, some countries have, on extremely cogent grounds, rejected mandates of the UNHRC previously in much stronger ways, and have not been censured in the manner as in this instance. This undoubtedly confirms the Western hypocrisy and the double standards of the UN human rights body which was at a faster asleep when Sri Lanka was at the receiving end due to the barbaric terror unleashed by the LTTE.

Be it Pillay or her successor Hussein, none of those godfathers of human rights were there when human rights of 21 million Sri Lankans were abused in broad daylight by the Tiger terrorists. Hardly anybody uttered a word of comfort when the LTTE exploded mass scale bombs and disrupted normal life, killing hundreds of civilians.

Where were these champions of human rights when the LTTE stormed to Sinhala and Muslim villages and butchered hapless people? The Tigers showed no mercy and totally ignored all accepted norms in shooting even the breast-feeding infants to death. Where were those godfathers of human rights? Not a single champion of human rights came to our rescue when we were at the receiving end.

Leadership

It was only the leaders of Sri Lanka, especially President Mahinda Rajapaksa, who came to the rescue of his fellow citizens.

If not for his political sagacity and unmatched leadership to the Security Forces, we would still have been subjected to LTTE terror. Now that the country has been liberated from the clutches of the LTTE terror due to supreme sacrifices of the Security Forces, these prophets of human rights have emerged from everywhere to pontificate to us on human rights. The UNHRC has no right to force us on any investigation as we are not duty bound to honour all what he says. The country’s sovereignty and territorial integrity should be protected at all times and we cannot do anything that undermines the brave acts of the Security Forces and rob the country’s hard-earned peace.

The UN is there to unite the nations, bring all ethnic and religious groups under one umbrella and not to pamper terrorism under the guise of protecting human rights. While respecting the principles of the UN and the pure intentions of founding the movement, Sri Lanka would not let anyone undermine the country’s sovereignty.

If the UNHRC is sincere and transparent with its conduct, they must adopt the same yardstick to the recent operations of the US-led NATO forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. If the UNHRC has bit adopted double standards, there should have been many investigations on the civilian killings in Pakistan due to US drone attacks.

There are no two types of terrorism – one to the West and another to this part of the world!