{"id":115557,"date":"2021-06-26T17:44:53","date_gmt":"2021-06-27T00:44:53","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/?p=115557"},"modified":"2021-06-28T15:33:17","modified_gmt":"2021-06-28T22:33:17","slug":"erasing-the-eelam-victory-pt-20-c8-b","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/2021\/06\/26\/erasing-the-eelam-victory-pt-20-c8-b\/","title":{"rendered":"ERASING THE EELAM VICTORY Part 20 C8 B"},"content":{"rendered":"

KAMALIKA PIERIS<\/em><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n

United\nKingdom led a global offensive at the United Nations Human Rights Council\n(UNHRC) in Geneva to prosecute \u2018war crimes\u2019 against Sri Lankan soldiers. <\/strong>Critics are now going at UK for its own\nviolation of human rights and they are starting with the British Empire. Jallianwallah\nBagh massacre of 1919,   Peshawar massacre\nof 1930, Batang kali massacre in Malaysia and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

UK suppressed\nthe Mau Mau rebellion in Kenya with great severity. 30,000 were massacred. There\nwas torture. There were   concentration\nstyle camps. One million rebels were forcibly settled in heavily policed new\nvillages where many died of starvation and illness, said critics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The British\nconducted a \u2018dirty war\u2019 In Northern Ireland. British intelligence set up loyalist\nterror groups against the IRA. UK army carried out targeted assassinations on\nsuspected IRA operatives. The campaign was directed by British intelligence. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Britain participated\nin the US-Iraq war, conducted without UN sanction. ICC investigated\nand found that that there is a reasonable basis to believe that members of the\nBritish armed forces committed the war crimes of willful killing, torture,\ninhuman\/cruel treatment, outrages upon personal dignity, and rape and\/or other\nforms of sexual violence in Iraq. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

 UK soldiers in Iraq had committed crimes\nagainst detainees. There were\nhundreds of testimonies of allegations of torture.  There was brutality, cruelty and sadism,\nincluding sexual abuse and religious humiliation. There was deprivation of food\nand water.    They used brutal violence\nwhich at time resulted in the death of detainees while in custody. ICC found\nthat the cause of some of this was military command failures.\u201d\nThe head of British army and former defense minister were among those named. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

ICC laid out\nthe findings of its preliminary examination in a 184-page\nreport<\/a>.  But in 2006, prosecutor of\nthe International Criminal Court, Fatou Bensouda said she was dropping the\npreliminary investigation into alleged war crimes by British troops in Iraq,\neven though she found a reasonable basis to believe they committed atrocities. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

There was\nlittle doubt that war crimes had been committed but the number of cases\nsubmitted were too low for investigation. The case\nwould now be closed and no full-scale investigation would be launched. If fresh\nevidence emerged, she would reconsider her decision. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The ICC withdrawal\nwas met with dismay. Human Rights Watch said this closing down of the UK\ninquiry will indicate the existence of double standards at the ICC, one\napproach for powerful state and another approach for the less powerful states. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

A devastating\n250 page dossier titled \u2018The responsibility of UK officials for war crimes\ninvolving systematic detainee abuse in Iraq 2003-2008\u2019 was presented to the ICC\nin 2014.  This was prepared by Public Interest Lawyers (PIL)\nand the European Centre for Constitutional and Human rights (ECCHR). It called\nfor an investigation into the alleged war crimes of Britain. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

ICC called\nthe document a damaging dossier that draws on thousand of allegations of\nmistreatment amount to war crimes of torture, of cruel inhuman or degrading\ntreatment. This ranged from hooding prisoners to electric shocks, threats to\nkill, sexual assault, threats of rape. The sheer scale and seriousness of the\nallegations passes the threshold to justify an investigation. British military\ncommanders knew or should have known that forces under their control were\ncommitting or about to commit war crimes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Since a lot\nmore information has come to light, ICC  \nformally reopened its inquiry in 2014.  UK said that allegations are being\ninvestigated and there is no need for the ICC to get involved.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The UK has a\nlamentable record of failing to prosecute war crimes committed by its nationals\noverseas, said  Human Rights Watch.  UK government has repeatedly shown little\ninterest in investigating and prosecuting atrocities committed abroad by\nBritish troops. There has just been one prosecution of UK forces for war crimes\nin Iraq and Afghanistan in the last 20 years. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The UK\ngovernment has blatantly interfered in the military justice system to prevent investigations\nand prosecutions. Special Air Service soldiers have been charged   executing  33 civilians in Afghanistan<\/a> in a series\nof raids in Helmand province in early 2011. One incident, involved the deaths\nof four men in one family. The case was investigated but there were no\nprosecutions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The UK\nmilitary has been accused of covering up credible evidence of war crimes by\nsoldiers against civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq, according to leaks last\nyear from two government-ordered inquiries, said critics. Phil Shiner, who\ninvestigated the Iraq issue was found guilty of misconduct and dishonesty and\nwas struck off the register.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Britain is\nnow getting worried that it may have to face war crimes charges in the near\nfuture. Therefore the government needed to take precautions. In 2020, it\nintroduced Overseas Operations (Service Personnel and Veterans Bill, which subsequently\nwas passed as Overseas Operations (Service Personnel and Veterans) Act, 2021.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This Act was\nintended to protect British soldiers from investigations for acts carried out\nin operations outside the British Islands, including peacekeeping operations\nand terrorist operations. A statute of\nlimitations was set down. The Act said no charges may be laid after the lapse\nof five years from the date of the incident. Permission of\nthe Attorney General must be obtained before any prosecution can be made.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The\nprosecutor must also  keep in mind the\nexceptional demands and stresses to which  soldiers are likely to be subject while\ndeployed on overseas operations .Prosecutor must also take note of the likely\nimpact of the  prosecution on the mental\nhealth of the accused. Prosecution must also take into account the limitations\nof recall, the ability of persons to remember events accurately.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This Bill was\nstrongly opposed by the legal community in Britain. They were shocked at the\ninclusion of \u2018heinous\u2019 crimes in this evasive Bill. They saw this inclusion as\na serious breach of Human Rights Law. <\/em>TheHouse<\/em> of Lords\ntook note of this and when the Bill came to them, in Parliament, they saw to it\nthat the following serious crimes, namely, sexual offences, torture, crimes\nagainst humanity, genocide and war crimes were removed from this Act. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Bill\nincluded provisions which appeared to pervert natural justice. Lawyers objected\nto conferring an unprecedented statutory \u2018presumption against prosecution\u2019 on\nBritish troops in regard to \u2018historic\u2019 crimes. Such a quasi-statute of\nlimitation\u201d is unprecedented\u201d in the criminal law. It will pervert justice\nthey said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why does this\nBill think that it is utterly exceptional for a British soldier to be\nprosecuted for offences committed when he was on an overseas operation,   critics asked. Why create a special\ncategory of defendant, members of the Armed Forces, and give them greater\nimpunity for crimes<\/strong>. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

We do not understand why cases should not be brought against this\ncategory of defendant where there is sufficient evidence of a crime having been\ncommitted and where it is in the public interest to prosecute. The fact that\na person has been deployed on operations overseas is   irrelevant for prosecutions<\/strong>.<\/strong> <\/strong><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The clause\nregarding the mental state of the person to be charged gave rise to much\nsarcastic comment. The Bill suggests that a soldier whose judgment may\nbe impaired, who lacks adequate self-control or whose mental health may have\nbeen affected should not be prosecuted, observed critics.<\/strong> <\/strong><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Ministry\nof Defence should not be deploying service personnel in overseas operations if\nthose individuals are unable to make sound judgments or have difficulty in\nexercising self-control. If a member of the Armed Forces develops an inability\nto make sound judgments or difficulty in exercising self-control whilst they\nare deployed in operations overseas, they should be promptly removed. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Armed Forces\npersonnel are routinely called upon to make snap decisions in exceptionally\ndifficult, often life-threatening, situations. This is what they are trained to\ndo. Further, Armed Forces personnel are trained to use force and do not use\nforce unjustifiably. They should not be permitted to use unjustified force and\nthen get away with it. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Lawyers\npointed out that this Act would damage the standing of the British armed forces\nbecause it is contrary to established legal norms, both domestic and\ninternational.  Also, it would give the\nimpression that UK is unwilling or unable to investigate and prosecute for war\ncrimes. The time period of five years given in the Act <\/strong>is near\nimpossible to meet. If so, then British armed forces are at risk of being prosecuted under\nuniversal jurisdiction or before the International Criminal Court.  Lastly,<\/strong> the Bill goes against\nall international legal instruments. (Continued) <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

KAMALIKA PIERIS United Kingdom led a global offensive at the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) in Geneva to prosecute \u2018war crimes\u2019 against Sri Lankan soldiers. Critics are now going at UK for its own violation of human rights and they are starting with the British Empire. Jallianwallah Bagh massacre of 1919,   Peshawar massacre of […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":true,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[104],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-115557","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-kamalika-pieris"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/115557","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=115557"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/115557\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=115557"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=115557"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=115557"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}