Sri Lanka’s parliament rejects UN probe

23 July 2014 by IJT

Sri Lankan MPs last week rejected, by a large majority, a new investigation launched by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) into crimes committed during the quarter-century-long armed conflict between the government and the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, which ended in 2009.

The international investigation team, supervised by three international experts, consists of 12 staff, including investigators, forensics experts, a gender specialist and a legal analyst, according to the OHCHR. It was set up after a US-sponsored resolution was approved, in March, by the UN Human Rights Council.

Such probe “should not be carried out on the ground that such a course of action is detrimental to the process of reconciliation and peace and that it erodes the sovereignty, dignity and stature of Sri Lanka,” reads the parliament’s motion, according to AP press agency. An ethnic minority Tamil party voted against the motion. One of the two main opposition parties abstained, emphasizing the need to have a credible local mechanism to probe the rights violations. In May 2010, a Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission was set up. Human Rights Watch, the International Crisis Group and Amnesty International dismissed the initiative, saying it did not meet the minimum standards for reconciliation commissions.

Between 80,000 and 100,000 people were killed in the conflict.

Want to read more?

If you subscribe to a free membership, you can read this article and explore our full archive, dating back to 1997.

Subscribe now

Related articles

article
19 February 2007 by Laetitia Grotti

One year ago on January 6, 2006, the 17 members of Morocco's Equity and Reconciliation Commission (IER) were closing up shop after submitting their final report to King Mohammed VI. The Moroccan truth commission had received a flood of compliments from the international community praising the recommendations in its report, especially those advocating legislative and constitutional reforms. One year later, however, the results have been rather mixed.

article
11 September 2006 by our correspondent in Arusha

After having tried high-ranking officers, ministers, businessmen, priests, journalists, local officials and militiamen, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) is in uncharted waters. On September 11, the most famous rwandese troubadour of his generation will stand trial for genocide. 

article
23 October 2006 by Christine Chaumeau

China is keeping a polite distance from international criminal justice. Beijing is hardly disinterested, but China does want to make sure that these new global mechanisms are not going to infringe upon its sovereignty by delving into particularly sensitive cases such as Tibet. 

article
United Nations Operation in Burundi disarms rebel forces in Mbanda in February 2005 (Photo: Flickr/UN Photo/Martine Perret)
03 June 2015 by Janet H. Anderson, The Hague (The Netherlands)

Over the last month, Burundi has hit the headlines as the president put himself forward to be elected for a controversial third term, resulting in street protests, thousands of refugees who fled instability and an attempted coup. Behind the issues of elections and constitutionalism are also those of justice following Burundi’s long-running civil war. The international community supported an intensive process of negotiation and the signing of the Arusha Accord in 2000. But in the decade and a half since, its provisions on justice have been debated though never fully implemented.

article
06 November 2006 by Pierre Hazan

France's attitude towards international criminal justice is marked by ambiguity. Paris subscribes to a vision of the world in which international humanitarian law is considered a way to curb violence against civilian populations, but at the same time it is wary of an unchecked judicial system that could end up prosecuting French soldiers engaged in areas where it has old and deep-rooted interests.