Sri Lanka responds to Pillay-NO INT’L PROBE
Posted on February 26th, 2014

Pillay relentlessly pursuing Sri Lanka Working to politicised and prejudiced agenda

The Sri Lankan government has rejected the call by UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navanethem Pillay “to establish an international inquiry mechanism to further investigate the alleged violations of International Human Rights Law and International Humanitarian Law and monitor any domestic accountability process in Sri Lanka”, claiming “it gives scant or no regard to the domestic processes ongoing in Sri Lanka within the framework of the LLRC NPOA, and is politicised in premise”.

Sri Lanka’s Permanent Envoy in Geneva conveying the Sri Lankan Government’s response to Navi Pillay stated that the UN High Commissioner’s recommendations, “reflect the preconceived, politicised and prejudicial agenda which she has relentlessly pursued with regard to Sri Lanka”, since just a week following the defeat of terrorism in Sri Lanka, on May 26, 2009 at the 11th Special Session of the UNHRC on Sri Lanka, and at subsequent sessions and reports. It is noted that the reference in the current report that the High Commissioner is adamant about an independent, international inquiry demonstrates her persistent efforts against Sri Lanka.

The Permanent Mission filing Sri Lanka’s response to the UN in Geneva stated: “It is pertinent to question the factual basis for the High Commissioner’s initial formal call to the HRC for an independent, international investigation in May 2009 and its continuation, in order that the international community not be misled”.

The government submitted these observations in “comments” made in response to the draft report of the High Commissioner on February 12, ahead of the High Commissioner’s (HC) final report on Sri Lanka to the 25th Session of the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) which was placed on the OHCHR website on Monday.

Although on the last occasion when the HC reported on Sri Lanka to the 22nd Session of the HRC in March 2013, the Sri Lankan government’s “comments” were placed as an addendum to the report, ensuring the integrity of the HC’s report and the Sri Lankan government’s comments, and also that they were equally visible, the government’s request this year that its comments be published as an addendum to the HC’s Report has been refused, and have instead been placed at a separate link under “Communications from Governments” which contains an assortment of correspondence from governments on a broad range of matters of specific concern to respective governments.

In its “comments” the Sri Lankan government noting its “non-recognition and categorically rejected of resolution 22/1 that mandated the HC’s report”, observes that “it has nevertheless continued to make significant progress in its own reconciliation process, and has continued to regularly update the Council on such progress.

In this context, the Sri Lankan government rejects, without prejudice to its position of non-recognition of resolution 22/1, the High Commissioner’s claim that most of the recommendations made in her previous report to the Human Rights Council remain unimplemented”.

The Sri Lankan government has also “reiterated its categorical rejection of the conclusions and recommendations contained in the HC’s Report, which reflects bias and is tantamount to an unwarranted interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign state”. In its detailed point by point “comments” on the HC’s report, the Sri Lankan government has regretted that “the HC had raised concerns regarding a range of issues based on information of questionable veracity and arrived at conclusions in a selective and arbitrary manner”.

It added that this included many she had raised during her August 2013 week long visit to Sri Lanka, “where the Sri Lankan government had requested the High Commissioner to provide factual evidence to substantiate allegations” and “to refrain from making general comments without a degree of specificity which would allow the GOSL to investigate and respond in a comprehensive manner”, which however had not been forthcoming.

– See more at: http://www.dailynews.lk/local/no-int-l-probe#sthash.44t5NXRC.dpuf

10 Responses to “Sri Lanka responds to Pillay-NO INT’L PROBE”

  1. Lorenzo Says:

    Good.

    We should push the matter to the security council where it will be DEFEATED.

    That is the way to go.

  2. Lorenzo Says:

    MR is wetting his pants.

    “Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa has invited Tamil Nadu fishermen who were released from Sri Lankan custody and repatriated to come and get their boats back, an Indian media report said.

    The President has asked the Indian fishermen to come to the island and take charge of their released vessels that are still in the possession of the Sri Lankan Navy, New Indian express reported.

    Presidential spokesman Mohan Samaranayake has said that 49 boats which were released earlier are still in the possession of Sri Lankan authorities and the President has noted that it is time the fishermen concerned came over and took charge of them.”

    – colombopage

  3. Sunil Mahattaya Says:

    Lanka To Pillay ” Ver Ondum Illai !
    Finally a defiant stand with appropriate reasoning. Well done GOSL!
    The UN should be given pointers about the oversteppong of her mandate and job description implicitly enough to caution her.
    Amnesty International and Channel Four should be refered to a global audit to find out who is financing them and it could well be that the LTTE rump aka the Tamil Diaspora have a hand in it and the cat would be out of the bag! TNA the next recipients of a slating and warning about possible repercussions towards their existence and zero tolerance of Eelam posturing and UN pursuit for HR violations , the main item on the agenda!

  4. Mr. Bernard Wijeyasingha Says:

    No international probe by the UN can take place without the permission of the government and sanctions usually are a Security Council issue. If individual nations want to apply Sanctions on Sri Lanka then evaluate what is their economic impact?

    Timbuktu can impose sanctions on Sri Lanka and have almost no effect. Nations like the UK, US, Norway and Canada could impose individual sanctions but trade with these nations are at its nascent since the war prevented a more comprehensive trade relations with these nations. Their negligible trade makes any sanctions from these nations worthless.

    On the other hand the US and the UK are in a geopolitical wrangle with both Russia in the Middle East and China in East Asia. Most of the development in Sri Lanka is either financed by China or Japan or by the world bank. Furthermore the size of Sri Lanka’s economy does not require hundreds of Billions of dollars to sustain a high growth trajectory.

    Colombo must make it clear any investigations regarding human rights violations or crimes against humanity that may have been committed during the war can be handled by Colombo and does not need the interference of outside forces with a vested interest to paint Colombo in a negative light.

  5. S de Silva Says:

    Having read the complete rebuttal of Pillai’s allegations by the GoSL, I am both surprised and pleased at the level of competence shown this time against these allegations – GoSL, Well Done at last! But to nail these allegations completely two more actions are needed:- (a) As I had commented earlier in these columns, it is absolutely necessary to have a majority vote in the SL Parliament comprehensively rejecting Pillai’s allegations reinforcing the position taken by the GoSL as “the will of the Sri Lankan people”, and (b) in view of the evidence, Sri Lanka should immediately state that the GoSL has “no Confidence” in m/s Pillai’s conduct of affairs at the UNHRC due to her clear bias against Sri Lanka arising from a conflict of interests. She should not be permitted to deal with matters pertaining to Sri Lanka no more than the United States allowing an HR investigation into Israel my a Muslim!! – S de Silva – London

  6. Ratanapala Says:

    Finally GOSL has found the nerve to confront the Ugly Beast at the UNHRC. Well done and keep it up! Whole of the 30 year war and more of Racist Tamil politics will need to be investigated if an investigation be carried out at all. It also should bring into the equation the role of the TNA as a Terrorist proxy, the other LTTE proxy organisations (made up mostly of rich and well SrI Lanka educated Tamils who left for greener pastures now erroneously called the Diaspora) and the 11,000 now pardoned LTTE cadre.

    For over 4 years GOSL failed to address pertinent issues at the behest of her “advisors”.

  7. Sooriarachi Says:

    Appended is an extract from the Editorial of the Ceylon Daily News dated 27/02/14, which carries credible comments on Navi Pillai’s conduct.

    ” Ms. Navi Pillai has been used to the role of facilitating US intervention through the agency of the UN system, and almost as a rule, this kind of interference has been facilitated by basing a case against a country on rank falsehoods. In these pages we did carry during the course of this week, contributions detailing how in various countries the office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights has been used to justify attacks on fellow member nations of the UN. In this regard, Ms. Navi Pillai’s own record is something that ought to bear scrutiny. Her track record in the Rwandan tribunal for instance is a textbook case for a malicious prosecution launched via a UN tribunal. But the worst aspect is that her office has been used to peddle lies about member states, and this was apparent in the case of Libya — as it is now apparent in the case of Syria. With Sri Lanka, she has followed the pattern, and in this case she has been well aided and abetted by the Tamil diaspora LTTE rump whose stock in trade has been fabrication.

    What else would be expected from UN lobbyists and activists who went around the UNHRC premises distributing leaflets

    that had photographs of Sinhala children killed by the LTTE, being passed off as pictures Tamil children

    killed by Sri Lankan government forces?!”

    Above is from today’s editorial, which carries more allegations about her motives.

  8. Sarath W Says:

    Bring a no confidence motion against Tamil Pillai

  9. Dilrook Says:

    Sri Lankan government must state very clearly Navi Pillay being a Tamil is ethnically biased towards Tamils and against Sri Lanka, and, therefore the state has no confidence in her; and it would be a miscarriage of justice and human rights to allow a Tamil to look into matters affecting Tamils.

    However, this is not going to sway UNHRC members and the resolution will go ahead. Nevertheless, it will serve as a reminder to future endeavours the bias inherent in the process. This will become very important if the matter ever goes to an international tribunal. It must be documented and formally conveyed.

    The US resolution will be passed as it will have the majority support.

    However, UNHRC cannot force its way to the island to do an investigation. The matter must be referred to the UN Security Council as Sri Lanka is not a signatory to the Rome Statute (2003). Maintaining very good relations with China and Russia is the only way out. Meanwhile the country must brace for possible (emphasised) US and EU sanctions which will severely affect garment exports.

    However, the economy as a whole will not be affected in the long run because the garment industry as a whole has a very small contribution to the trade balance. Most inputs are imported. A labour structural adjustment will be needed. Even if this doesn’t happen now, it will happen soon even if USA does not impose any restrictions.

    On the other hand, Sri Lanka is one of very few Asia countries of which USA is the largest trading partner. Any US sanctions will change it with strategic implications for USA. Due to this USA may not impose sanctions.

    The collapse of US influence in Sri Lanka is dramatic. Ceylon was a defence partner with USA in the 1940s and 1950s. Then US food aid program PL480 kept Sri Lanka under its influence. Sri Lanka came out of it due to rapid increase in food production through Mahaweli (despite no US aid for it). Then USA became a Co-Chair of lenders. Until 2007 it held power over the island as the leader of the donor group. Afterwards China replaced Co-Chairs as the biggest lender. Now USA has only Sri Lankan exports to it as leverage. If this too is broken, Sri Lanka will not be manipulated by USA anymore. We have seen this happening to most countries. It is in American interests not to impose sanctions.

    Commendable start from the government in rejecting UNHRC demands.

  10. SA Kumar Says:

    MR is wetting his pants? NO not agreed ! this is Great Sinhala Buddhism way of dealing any problem !
    vey soon TN/ TE Tamils will realise their own foolishness .

    Jaldevi on it way to Jalpanam & Uridra devi on it way Anuratapura !!!

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

 

 


Copyright © 2018 LankaWeb.com. All Rights Reserved. Powered by Wordpress