Gaddafi killing:

A violation of Geneva Convention?

This is a translation of a article published in the Silumina by Sarath Perera on October 30, 2011. Dr. Prathiba Mahanamahewa, Attorney-at-Law, Dean of the Faculty of Law, Kothalawala Defence University in an exclusive interview said that some Western countries insisting on an investigations into the alleged war crimes purported to have been committed by Sri Lanka looks a joke in the light of their behaviour to keep dead silence on real war crimes committed by them in broad day light in Libya.

The excerpts of the interview:

Q: While keeping a sloppy reaction on such brutal war crimes committed in Libya, Westerners are continuously pressurising Sri Lanka on the basis of a few unauthenticated rumours. What do you say in this regard?

A: This is a joke. In Libya, there were plenty of war crimes committed. In contrast, thousands of civilians were rescued in Sri Lanka. I believe, there should be a contra-force against this kind of double standards of the Western countries. There is no Western leader or media who says that the way the Libyan leader was killed was a crime against humanity. The non-governmental human rights organisations which claim that they are the watch dogs of human rights have not raised any noticeable voice against this issue.

"It is amusing to note that these Western leaders are trying to interpret the killing of terrorists by Sri Lankan forces in the battle field, while, at the same time keeping quiet on the killing of Gaddafi when he was caught alive."

Q: The Australian Prime Minister had also stated two or three days earlier that there must be an investigation on Sri Lanka?

A: Our President has given a good answer to this statement. These things happen because of the anti-Sri Lanka propaganda of the pro-LTTE's Western media is still striving to interpret the murder of Prabahkaran as a part of a mass killing. Today, these pro-LTTE Tamil diaspora are at a huge financial stake and could not sustain this dirty business without Prabhakaran any more. Perhaps, this would be the Waterloo of these anti-Sri Lankan movements. "It is only two or three weeks to issue the report of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC)"

Q: Since Gaddafi is condemned as a dictator, how could his assassination be a war crime?

A: It is very clear that Gaddafi was murdered after he was captured alive. This is evident from the video footages that were aired throughout the world by the Western Media. It is not a difficult thing to figure out my position when you watch these videos. "A person who is captured must not necessarily be a state leader at a time of a civil war to be entitled to entertain the privileges of the prisoners of war in terms of the Geneva Convention.

If anyone becomes a prisoner of war, there must be a way this particular prisoner must have been treated, as it is provided by the Geneva Convention which came into effect from October 21, 1950."

Q: It is said that Gaddafi was killed in a shoot-out?

A: "The videos that were taken by mobile phones prove how he was treated in captivity like a football when he was coming out from the hiding tunnel and afterword killed. However, he also ought to have similar rights like any other prisoner of war."

Q: One can argue that there are no laws for rebels?

A: There was a Western-backed interim-government with the departure of Gaddafi. Moreover, these so-called rebels are also a kind of an illusion misleading everybody. It is only to pretend to the outside world. All these rebel groups are receiving direct support and assistance from America and other Western countries.

"Who did fire the first shot, France, of course. How can one country shell against another sovereign and independent state while infringing the territorial integrity of that state?

This was done by France even without a resolution or mandate from the Security Council. They plotted to attack Gaddafi's convoy."

Q: Has not the UN Security Council passed a resolution to declare a no-fly zone over Libya and also to protect its civilians? It has.

A: Nothing has happened as such. There was no resolution to deploy outside armies into Libya and attack her. Where can we find such a resolution? What is happening here is the intention of the Western countries is being upheld everywhere without any respect or regard for law and order. Is it ethical to proceed in this kind of lawlessness? All these rebels are American puppets.

Who gave weapons to them? Who have distributed heavy artilleries and sophisticated weapons among them? In other words, who did arm them against the state army? All these evil-deeds were done by no one but American lead NATO.

Any rebel group cannot afford such expensive weapons at the inception. Even in Sri Lanka you saw, LTTE was strengthened with such weapons and artilleries after years of war.

They plundered those armouries from the Sri Lankan Army after some heavy battles. "In any country, the incumbent government is the exclusive holder of weapons in their armoury and to use them. They are the only party having this legal right despite the fact whether such government is liberal or otherwise. In Libyan conflict, all the festinate preparations in favour of the so-called Libyan rebels were provided by the Western countries."

Q: Now, even these Western rulers are also of the stance that the killing of Gaddafi is inhuman. Aren't they?

A: "What I am saying is that they had ample chances to stop this. Why did they evade from it. Gaddafi supporters were killed by binding their hands together. We all saw that. Why did they allow to commit such atrocious war crimes? There is no comment on what has happened to the civilians. I venture to say here, the rebels in Libya are not independent autonomous group from the Libyan soil per se. But, it is an army platoon who obeys only the Western commands.

These rebels were lead according to the agendas of western rulers. Therefore, they had a strong motive to kill Gaddafi by hook or by crook."

Two days before the Gaddafi's slaughter the Secretary of State to America, Hillary Clinton was in Libya.

How did she arrive in a country that anyone can prima facie be seen this country is running through an enormous turmoil in every aspect. As such, we saw a ready-made plan that came from no one but America.

The people who were conscripted by them and the weapons which were given by them caused to kill the Libyan ruler. In such a context, shutting up their mouths now is bloody wrong. It is pertinent to say, these Western countries are the vigilant parties who have been advocating the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights since its commencement from 1948.

This same people definitely make a hue and cry against Human Rights violations in Africa or Asia. But here, it was otherwise, Dr. Mahanamahewa says.

Q: So you say, after the arrest of the enemy commander, killing him is an incorrect thing?

A: That is a sheer violation of the Geneva Convention. Gaddafi would have committed plenty of offences. But, those must be proved through a court.

If it happened so, then these human rights activists of Western countries would have received a chance to support their case. Because, at every point of time their advices would have been endorsed. However, law and order was not honoured and instead human rights were violated thoughtlessly. Predictably, though the powerful Westerners who defend the terrorists and insist some inquiries in favour of them did not practice the same stance against this Libyan leader who had got into custody.

In terms of the Geneva Convention, how the prisoners of war must be treated? First and foremost thing is to comply with the Convention by the state parties.

All parties must honour and foster the Convention. It is stated by Section one of the Convention.

All NATO countries have given their consent and signed the Convention. Unfortunately, what has happened now is all most all of them have dishonoured to it. "Section 12 of the Convention says how a prisoner of war should be protected by the rival party. If such an enemy has been caught, he or she must be detained in a camp. There is no section that allows the enemy to be dragged while trampling him nastily as Gaddafi experienced. If a prisoner is injured he must be even provided medication as stated in the Convention" "Section 15 declares that providing healthcare is an obligation of the party who takes the fighter into custody.

But, there was nothing as such here. Further, this Convention goes to say, after a prisoner is caught he should not be kept in the same place where he was found. He must be taken to a safe location."

Q: If the execution of Gaddafi is a war crime by which institutions can proceed to take action ? "The International Criminal Court (ICC) was the tribunal which took the initiatives against Gaddafi at first.

I think the same court should dispense justice in this scenario too." The primary and the predominant purpose of Human Rights Council is to safeguard human rights in the world.

Q: Will this Council be doing anything in the light of violation of human rights in Libya?

A:The answer would be "No".

Q: Will the Secretary General be active on this matter? Again it is "No". "Russia had said that Gaddafi must be treated like a prisoner of war under the Geneva Convention.

A: That is what ought to be done. If it took place in that manner case could have been tried against him in the ICC. Additionally, the Foreign Minister of Russia had emphasized that there is no right to take the life of Gaddafi and there must be an immediate investigation on this regard. Nevertheless, we can see, the very Convention for the name of Humanitarian Law has been violated at every point.

Q: Did the Red Cross help victimized civilians?

A: No." There is a grey area which has not yet been debated much. That is, the damage caused by civilians of Libya throughout the air-strikes from the NATO.

They paid the ultimate price of their lives and the wealth. These factors are hidden or forced to be hidden by those in power. In this context, it must be mentioned that not only the Geneva Convention but also the UN Security Council resolution 1973 (2011) on Libya of a no-fly zone, 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Third Geneva Convention on prisoners of war have been violated. After Gaddafi was striped off from power, the interim-government succeeded.

There was even a Prime Minister named Mohamed Jibril. They were the ones who had to observe in human rights laws in the country.

To kill, Gaddafi when he pleaded for life is a violation of human rights. The cardinal principle is, the law must be equal to everyone.

Q: The British Prime Minister said that there is no necessity for further inquiries from the UN regarding the elimination of Gaddafi?

A: The statement is incorrect. There should not be separate laws to the parties who support them and oppose them. If the Libyan ruler committed any offence the people had the right to decide the fate of their leader.

Westerners crafted this war because of the hunger for the Libyan oil refineries and due to the grudge with Libya. With the absence of Gaddafi, Libya and its people are in a worse situation.

"Most of the governments in the Western world are also going through some unprecedented quandaries today. The popularity of many leaders has dwindled.

However, we cannot under-estimate the fact that there won't be a sudden uprising in America due to the economic crisis.

Translated by: Galagama Nanayakkarage Ashan Thilanga Final Year Student of the Faculty of Law, University of Colombo.