{"id":76867,"date":"2018-04-26T16:24:38","date_gmt":"2018-04-26T23:24:38","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/?p=76867"},"modified":"2019-03-18T16:07:01","modified_gmt":"2019-03-18T23:07:01","slug":"war-crimes-and-eelam-war-iv-part-1-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/2018\/04\/26\/war-crimes-and-eelam-war-iv-part-1-2\/","title":{"rendered":"\u2018WAR CRIMES\u2019 AND EELAM WAR IV (Part 1)"},"content":{"rendered":"

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

REVISED 26.4.18 <\/strong><\/p>\n

The\u00a0\u00a0 war crimes\u201d charge against the Sri Lanka army is that the army killed hundreds and hundreds of \u00a0\u00a0innocent\u201d Tamil civilians instead of killing off the LTTE. This \u2018war crimes\u2019 charge is part of a calculated strategy carried out by the western countries that support Tamil Eelam. A bogus \u2018body count\u2019 was created at the end of Eelam War IV. The first estimate was 20,000 civilians killed.<\/p>\n

The Paranagama Commission reported \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0that\u00a0 \u00a0\u2018privately UN staff were puzzled by the new death toll, then alleged to be 20,000 and wondered how it had been calculated. UN staff were reported as saying someone has made an imaginative leap and that is at odds with what we have been saying before\u201d. One official said. It is a very dangerous thing to start making extrapolations.\u201d\u2019<\/p>\n

Upul Wijewardena had been told by a relative, who was a diplomat that a newspaper reporter from Times (UK) had flown over Nandikadal area in a helicopter soon after Eelam War IV ended. She had told Wijewardena\u2019s relative that she had seen bodies and thought it may be around 20,000. When asked why other UN officials who were on the same helicopter denied seeing that many bodies, she had no explanation. (Island 21.11.17 p 8). \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0This shows that the figure of 20,000 had been decided by then.<\/p>\n

Then the figure started to rise. \u2018Amnesty International\u2019s conclusions, derived independently from eyewitness testimony and information from aid workers, are that at least 10,000 civilians were killed.\u2019 Louise Arbour, former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and now the President of the International Crisis Group told Channel 4 News earlier this year she believed that it was not implausible\u201d that more than 30,000 civilians had been killed.<\/p>\n

Gordon Weiss, UN spokesman in Sri Lanka during the final phase of the war, said on Australian television, that \u2018I believe that between 10,000 and 40,000 is a reasonable estimate. I think most likely it\u2019s somewhere between 30,000 and 40,000\u2019.<\/p>\n

This was not considered sensational enough and it was soon displaced by a far\u00a0\u00a0 more impressive total. The Darusman report ( 2011) said \u00a0that there is no authoritative figure for civilian deaths in the Vanni in the final phase of the war but a number of credible sources have estimated, that due to <\/em>wide spread shelling by the Sri Lanka\u00a0 army, There could have been as many as 40,000 civilian deaths. \u00a0This figure of 40,000 deaths \u2018 was eagerly picked up by the Tamil Separatist Movement, for whom it was intended and broadcast around the world,\u00a0 as an accusation against the Sri Lanka army.<\/p>\n

The arbitrary figure of 40,000 sudden deaths has been treated with great suspicion in Sri Lanka. \u00a0\u2018Where are the bodies? \u2018asked one of Sri Lanka\u2018s leading criminal lawyers. \u2018Such a large number of bodies cannot be hidden easily\u2019. No evidence has been presented justify this astronomically high death toll, said Chandraprema. The \u2018credible sources\u2019 used by the Darusman Report are not named. These figures are not corroborated anywhere, not by the any of the missions in Colombo who were noting down deaths. \u201840,000 civilian deaths\u2019 has been calculated by simply subtracting the number of \u00a0registered IDPs (290,000) from the Darusman estimate of the number of civilians caught up in the final months of the war (330,000), said the Paranagama Report.<\/p>\n

Critics pointed out\u00a0\u00a0 that this highly questionable estimate has not taken in to account the wounded and their next of kin evacuated by the ICRC or those who escaped from the LTTE into the jungles and across waterways. None of them would appear among those registered at the end of the war. The estimate could also include LTTE fighters not in uniform and civilians who\u00a0\u00a0 had been helping the LTTE.<\/p>\n

Nice and Dixon criticized the Darusman Report for not discussing the estimates that were less than 40,000. A UN report should set out the various competing accounts, they said. \u00a0They point out that the UN Country Team figure of 7,721 for 13 May 2009 is mentioned in the Darusman Report with no explanation for the considerable leap of 30,000 additional people killed by 18 May 2009. There is no clear breakdown given in the Report of where and how these alleged deaths occurred. Whether they were actually civilian deaths and who was responsible for each of these deaths, concluded Nice and Dixon.<\/p>\n

Several other estimates are available for the final phase of Eelam War IV. Many of these estimates are from agencies\u00a0 \u00a0that were present in Sri Lanka at the time. These estimates\u00a0\u00a0 confirm that the correct tally of deaths is around 7,000 not 40,000. <\/strong><\/p>\n

Here are these estimates.<\/p>\n

    \n
  • An unpublished report from the UN Country Team (received by Lord Naseby) stated that from August 2008 up to May 2009, the number of civilians killed was 7,721. The war ended six days later, so it cannot possibly have gone up to 40,000.<\/li>\n
  • A N. working document, a copy of which was obtained by Reuters, says 6,432 civilians have been killed and 13,946 wounded in fighting since the end of January, 2009. Reuters reported this some three weeks before the war ended.<\/li>\n
  • \u2018British Defence Attach\u00e9 in Colombo Lt. Col Anton Gash said in his report that the civilians killed from Feb 1 \u2013 26 April 2009 is 6432. The figure could be higher with the civilian deaths occurring within next 3 weeks.<\/li>\n
  • US Ambassador Blake stated on 7 April 2009 that there were deaths of 4,164 from January to 6 April.<\/li>\n
  • US Department of State in its unclassified Report to Congress on Incidents during the Recent Conflict in Sri Lanka, 2009 said \u2018The State Department has not received casualty estimates covering the entire reporting period from January to May However, one organization, which did not differentiate between civilians and LTTE cadres, recorded 6,710 people killed and 15,102 people injured between January 20 to April 20. These numbers were presented with a caveat, supported by other sources, that the numbers actually killed and injured are probably higher.\u2019<\/li>\n
  • International Crisis Group said \u2018UN agencies, working closely with officials and aid workers located in the conflict zone, documented nearly 7,000 civilians killed from January to April 2009. Those who compiled these internal numbers deemed them reliable to the extent they reflected actual conflict deaths but said that the\u00a0 calculations were still in progress and<\/li>\n
  • Major General Holmes in his expert military report of March 2015 thought the figure would be between 7,000 to 8,000.<\/li>\n
  • Department of Census and Statistics had calculated that all civilian deaths, those killed by LTTE and those killed by army, plus LTTE dressed in civilian clothing totaled 7,934.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

    Therefore we now have a clear estimate of around 7000 deaths at the end of Eelam War IV. The \u201840,000 deaths\u2019 accusation can be discarded. <\/strong><\/p>\n

    Analysts have provided further clarification about some of these calculations. The UN report should be 98% accurate, said Lt. Colonel (Retd) Athula Lankadeva. The UN “Crisis Operation Group” which was formed to collect reliable information regarding civilian casualties took figures from Regional Directors of Health Services majority who were Tamil persons as the base line, Sri Lankan staff of UN who were deployed in Wanni again majority who were Tamil persons and NGOs deployed inside Vanni, the ICRC, religious authorities and other sources to cross check and verify the baseline.<\/p>\n

    Lankadeva also said that there was another report titled “Fatalities in terrorist violence in Sri Lanka 2002- 2015\u201d from South-Asia-Terrorism-Portal which said 3,139 LTTE cadres were killed in 2009. However, only 1,346 individual graves were identified by satellite imagery. Therefore, 1,793 (3,139 \u2013 1,346) LTTE cadre who got killed may have posed as civilians. When an Army is fighting a war operating within civilian population, \u00a0an average of 1,371 civilians ( as indicated in the Darusman Report )\u00a0 killed in cross fire during the period of 4 \u00bd months is not a war crime, \u00a0he added<\/p>\n

    Shamindra Ferdinando also commented on the UN report. There cannot be a better \u2018source\u2019 than the UN report that dealt with fighting on multiple fronts in the Vanni region, both west and east of the Kandy-Jaffna road from August 2008 to May 13, 2009, he said. The project was supervised by the head of the UN mission in Sri Lanka, Neil Bhune \u00a0\u00a0and approved by the UN mission in Colombo. he UN had accurately covered the ground situation for almost 10 months (Aug 2008 to May 2009). Also, unlike the Darusman report, the UN report defined the period of the \u2018final phase\u2019.<\/p>\n

    The UN report was based on information provided by local staff of the UN and other NGOs in the LTTE-held area, the ICRC, religious authorities, and other sources. As the UN mission in Colombo can still get in touch with those who had contributed to the report, the UN investigators have an opportunity to verify facts, said Shamindra. Darusman Panel and the OISL team had opportunities to examine the UN dossier. There is no reason for any party to object to its release now.<\/p>\n

    Major General Homes told the Paranagama Commission that according to the\u00a0 \u00a0imagery analysis given in the Darusman Report, there are 1,332 obvious graves. These might be LTTE gravesites, but let us assume that they are IDP ones and that there are 4 bodies to each grave. That gives a total of 5,328 bodies. There would, of course, be unmarked graves invisible to imagery and a large number of bodies were never recovered because they died by drowning, were buried in LTTE bunkers and fortifications, or just decomposed quickly in the monsoon climate. However, in most wars the number of missing presumed dead is lower than the number of bodies recovered. The figure of 40,000 civilians killed, which has been repeatedly published is, in my view,<\/em> extremely difficult to sustain on the evidence which I have seen, continued Holmes.<\/p>\n

    A cable from US Ambassador Blake to the State Department on 7 April 2009 states that the UN estimate of deaths for the period 20 January to 6 April was 4,164 with a further 10,002 wounded. The cable also states that the estimated daily kill rate was 33 a day in January and 63 a day in February and March. To reach 40,000 deaths would require a kill ratio of 287 per day over 139 days from 1 January to 19 May, concluded Holmes.<\/p>\n

    The Paranagama Report paid special attention to \u201940,000 dead\u2019 accusation. One of the most explosive findings of the Darusman Report is the allegation of civilian deaths in \u2018a range of up to 40,000\u2019, said the Paranagama Report. This Commission finds that there was no reliable body of information which says that 40,000 civilians were killed in the final phase of the war. This figure has now become the \u2018North Star\u2019 of calculations. It has been accepted as fact. The figure of 40,000 dead has even been mentioned in the British Houses of Parliament. The Tamil Seperatist movement has seized upon this figure and has even sought to increase it\u00a0 Sri Lanka Campaign for Peace and Justice said in December 2017 that the figure was 40,000- 70,000.<\/p>\n

    The\u00a0\u00a0 Paranagama Commission listed several factors that have to be taken into account in any calculation as to whether deaths were those of civilians or combatants.\u00a0 LTTE concealed their uniforms beneath sarongs. \u00a0LTTE also removed the uniform from a dead LTTE cadre and put civilian clothes on the body, to create the impression that it was a civilian. LTTE cadres wearing suicide vests detonated themselves, killing themselves and civilians. LTTE used a vast number of the civilian hostages as human shields, made them dig trenches and prepare other defences, also forced some into the front line carrying guns. This blurred the distinction between combatants and civilians\u2019. It is almost impossible in these circumstances to work out, how many civilians were killed by the army.<\/p>\n

    Dharshan Weerasekera in his critical assessment of the OISL report\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 expanded on the<\/p>\n

    Census Department findings. The Census Department is run by professionals whose work can be evaluated and assessed by other professionals, he said.<\/p>\n

    In November 2011, the Department of Census and Statistics of Sri Lanka completed a full census of the Northern Province. There were a total of 22,329 deaths between the years 2005-2009, about half of which occurred in 2009. Of this, 2,523 were due to natural causes, while 7,934 are classified as other deaths, this means that, roughly 8,000 persons died in the first five months of 2009 as a result of the conflict, and this is inclusive of LTTE combatants. It is generally understood that around 5,000 LTTE combatants died in the closing phase of the war. That means that, at most 3,000 civilians died in the last phases of the war.<\/p>\n

    Weerasekera then drew attention to a study by the American Association for the Advancement of Science of aerial photographs of the conflict-zone at the very peak of the fighting. The purpose of the study was to find out, among other things, if there was evidence of a rapid expansion of gravesites, or evidence of mass graves, which would indicate that large numbers of people were in fact being killed. The study found little or no expansion of gravesites, and no evidence of mass graves. This establishes that the Census Department\u2018s numbers are correct, The actual number of civilians deaths is roughly 3,000.<\/p>\n

    However, local critics, were not interested in decisively squashing the \u201840,000 dead\u2019 statement. They were happy to keep the figure going, by engaging in knee jerk reactions. The person who took action to crush the statement was not a Sri Lankan, it was a Britisher, Lord Naseby.<\/p>\n

    Sir Michael Morris, now Lord Naseby, former Royal Air Force pilot, has long been an ally to Sri Lanka in the West. A member of the British House of Lords, he founded the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Sri Lanka in 1975 and was its elected president. He has visited Sri Lanka many times, the last was in February 2017. In 2005 he was awarded the Sri Lanka Ratna, the highest national honour bestowed upon foreigners for exceptional and outstanding service to the nation.<\/p>\n

    For years Lord Naseby has defended the reputation of Sri Lanka, regarding conduct during the Eelam war, in UK and before the international forum. Naseby\u00a0\u00a0 decided that the figure of 40,000 civilian deaths given in the Darusman report was nonsense. In 2014, using the Freedom of Information Act\u00a0 , Naseby requested the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office to release the dispatches sent between 1 January to 19 May 2009, sent from Colombo, by British Defence attach\u00e9, Lieutenant Colonel Anton Gash. This attempt to get official data was blocked at every turn. His request was refused twice. Appeals to higher authorities at the Foreign Office were also rejected.<\/p>\n

    He then appealed to the Information Commissioner who, having understood Lord Naseby\u2019s purpose, ordered release of the pertinent documents. Naseby then he received 26 pages of redacted documents, none which covered the crucial last six weeks of war. \u00a0A further appeal to the Information Commissioner brought in 12 more dispatches, yielding a total of 39 highly edited (redacted) dispatches.<\/p>\n

    Lord Naseby referred to these documents when on Oct 12, 2017 he addressed the House of Lords at the Parliamentary debate on Sri Lanka\u2019s progress towards reconciliation . He stated that British Defence Attach\u00e9 in Colombo Lt. Col Anton Gash had said in his dispatches \u00a0that the total number of civilian deaths was around 7,000. At least a quarter of that figure were probably \u2018Tigers\u2019 who had shed their uniforms. Gash also said that that the Government of Sri Lanka never targeted civilians. Gash was knowledgeable, independent and would be accurate in his dispatches about the war. This information was never changed. If a mistake had been made, it would, surely, have been corrected, said Naseby.<\/p>\n

    Lord Naseby continued, I have discovered an unpublished report from the United Nations Country Team, which stated that from August 2008 up to May 2009, the number of civilians killed was 7,721. The war ended six days later, so it cannot possibly have got up to 40,000. Then I looked at what Gordon Weiss, the former UN spokesman said. He produced an estimate in 2009 of 7,000 civilian deaths. US Ambassador Blake stated on 7 April that there were deaths of 4,164 from January to 6 April. Major General Holmes in his expert military report of March 2015 concurs with 7,000 to 8,000. The Sri Lankan Government\u2019s census department issued an in-depth census leading to the conclusion that 7,000 to 8,000 were missing. Lord Naseby says he also consulted some \u2018mostly left-leaning\u2019 university academics. Their figure too was very similar. All the people I have cited stated that there was no policy to kill civilians \u2013 in fact the opposite, added Naseby.<\/p>\n

    Lord Naseby then said, “I hope and pray that as a result of this debate, the UK will recognize the truth that no one in the Sri Lankan government ever wanted to kill Tamil civilians. Furthermore, the UK must now get the UN and the UNHCR in Geneva to accept a civilian casualty level of 7,000 to 8,000, not 40,000. The west and in particular the US and UK must remove the threat of war crimes and foreign judges that hang over Sri Lanka. UK must recognize that this was a war against terrorism. We in the UK should reflect on the sacrifices of thousands of young Sri Lankan soldiers who died to create peace in that country.”<\/p>\n

    President Sirisena wrote Lord Naseby a letter of appreciation, which took 19 days to reach Naseby. The letter was also tabled in Parliament. Beyond that Sirisena took no interest in the matter. \u00a0Parliament was also not interested. Naseby\u2019s observations were\u00a0 not discussed at the cabinet meeting.<\/p>\n

    Ministry of Foreign Affairs, when asked by Island,<\/em>\u00a0 dismissed\u00a0 the Naseby assertions. Engaging in debates over the number of civilian dead is a meaningless exercise, said the Ministry,\u00a0 except for a feel good factor for the individuals concerned.\u00a0 Those engaged in this “meaningless exercise”\u00a0 did not do so to feel good,\u00a0 replied critics. They did it because they were concerned about the\u00a0 spuriously concocted numbers,<\/p>\n

    Island<\/em> spoke to several persons to obtain their views on the Naseby claim. International Committee of the Red Cross , Sri Lanka office said that they would not inquire into Lord Naseby\u2019s claims.\u2019 We are a humanitarian organization not an investigative agency\u2019,. British High Commissioner in Colombo James Dauris said that we must not get distracted by numbers, because figures can get in the way of the truth. Erik Solheim refused to comment. Mark Salter said the\u00a0 evidence on which Naseby bases his allegations must become publicly available first before any comments could be made. Channel 4 News\u00a0presenter, Jon Snow, who had repeatedly accused Sri Lanka of massacring 40,000 civilians during the Vanni offensive did not respond, though the Channel acknowledged receiving\u00a0 Island<\/em>\u00a0request.<\/p>\n

    Global Tamil Forum spokesperson, Suren Surendiran, dismissed Lord Naseby\u2019s statements. Naseby is just one of 800 Lords in the House of Lords, he said. Further, Lord Naseby does not represent the Foreign and Commonwealth \u00a0Office or the British Government\u2019s policy on Sri Lanka. Britain was one of the main sponsors of the Geneva Resolutions and Britain still insists that the resolutions must be fully implemented, said Surendiran.<\/p>\n

    Sri Lanka Campaign for Peace and Justice has strongly condemned Lord Naseby for throwing his weight behind Sri Lanka. The NGO said that Naseby did not send them the full dispatches, as\u00a0 requested so they cannot comment on them. But the death figures given by Gash are not new, they are the same UN figures mentioned in the Darusman Report. But Darusman Panel, with\u00a0 the benefit of hindsight, witness testimony, and access to a far broader range of information\u00a0 give the better\u00a0 \u00a0figure of 40,000. An internal UN\u00a0report\u00a0of\u00a0 2012\u00a0 said 70,000 people are missing.\u00a0 Therefore the \u00a0dead \u00a0count will probably lie between 40,000 and 70,000.\u00a0 \u00a0The full statement \u00a0of the Sri Lanka Campaign for Peace and Justice is given\u00a0 at the end of this essay as an Appendix.<\/p>\n

    Lord Naseby however continued his efforts. He met President Sirisena, in April 2018 when President Sirisena was in London to attend the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting.\u00a0 It is clear that this visit took place at Naseby\u2019s request not Sirisena\u2019s . Lord Naseby assured the President of his continued support to Sri Lanka. Lord Naseby has told President Sirisena said that Sri Lanka\u2019s post-war reconciliation process was much better than those of other countries.\u00a0 UN and the European countries had not been properly briefed about the war in Sri Lanka.\u00a0 President Sirisena does not seem to have said anything in return.<\/p>\n

    Since Britain was not taking any action on his declaration, Naseby went directly to the UN. Lord Naseby forwarded a full set of papers consisting of the Hansard transcript of the debate he initiated in the House of Lords , all copies of the heavily redacted pages of British Defense Attach\u00e9 Lt. Col Gash\u2019s dispatches, his interpretation of the un-redacted parts and the substantial corroborative evidence from many other sources,\u00a0 to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Antonio Guterres, the Human Rights team at the UNHRC in Geneva, \u00a0including High Commissioner, Prince Zeid Ra\u2019ad AI Hussein and the nine UN Special Procedures mandate holders along with a personal letter stating his intention of further pursuing the matter. Lord Naseby\u2019s office had sent a copy of his statement to the Island <\/em>newspaper as well. I have\u00a0 included this as an appendix to this essay.<\/p>\n

    The Yahapalana government of Sri Lanka has not wanted to \u00a0\u00a0pursue the matter at the UN. Yahapalana government did not refer to Lord Naseby\u2019s disclosure at the Universal Periodic review at the HRC in December 2017 \u00a0\u00a0or at the 37th Geneva sessions of 2018. However, Sarath Weerasekera observed that the UN and UNHRC hadn\u2019t so far disputed Lord Naseby\u2019s assertion.<\/p>\n

    In the wake of Lord Naseby\u2019s representations to the UN, Sri Lanka should have immediately called for a thorough reappraisal of\u00a0 the Geneva Resolution 30\/1, co-sponsored by Sri Lanka, commented Shamindra Ferdinando.. UN must now take into consideration (1) Gash reports that dealt with the January-May 2009 situation in the Vanni region (2) Amnesty International report titled \u2018When will they get justice? (Sept 2011), Evaluation of Norwegian peace efforts (Sept 2011), (3) minutes of the Consultative Committee on Humanitarian Assistance (CCHA) comprising government officials as well as top level diplomats.\u00a0 (4) But the most important report that should be compared with the Darusman Report is the confidential UN document on the Vanni war prepared during Aug 2008 to May 13, 2009.<\/p>\n

    UN should now call for a thorough review of all available information gathered since the conclusion of the war in May 2009, In addition to the reports and documents mentioned above, the UN can also examine the entire set of US diplomatic cables leaked by Wiki leaks that had dealt with the Vanni situation and if necessary compare it with Gash missives, concluded Shamindra. ( continued)<\/p>\n

    APPENDIX 1.<\/p>\n

    Sri Lanka Campaign for Peace and Justice has strongly condemned Lord Naseby for throwing his weight behind Sri Lanka. The following is the full text of the statement issued by Sri Lanka Campaign for Peace and Justice:<\/p>\n

    UK Government, and other members of the international community, should abandon their long-standing and hard-fought push for accountability in Sri Lanka.\u00a0 Over half a decade of work for the creation of a mechanism that would bring to justice the perpetrators of war crimes and mass atrocities had, the member suggested, been based on a misapprehension.; the Peer also claimed to have unearthed ground-breaking new information, from a reliable source, that ought to demolish the very foundations of the call for justice \u2013 specifically, figures from a UK military official placing the total number of estimated civilian casualties during the final stages of the war at a mere fraction of the most widely accepted range of 40,000-70,000, as well as statements suggesting that members of the Sri Lankan armed forces be exonerated of criminal wrong-doing.<\/p>\n

    statement issued by Sri Lanka Campaign for Peace and Justice: Unfortunately, an email invitation to Lord Naseby to share the full dispatches with us was not taken up, so we are left only with those quotes from the dispatches selected by him during his speech[1]. We address them in turn below.<\/p>\n

    Most significantly, the Defence Attach\u00e9 is quoted by Lord Naseby as stating, on 26th April 2009, that the total number of civilians killed between 1st\u00a0February and 26th\u00a0April stood at\u00a06,432.\u00a0The Defence Attache\u2019s figure is presented by Naseby as new and distinct from other estimates of civilian casualties to date. However, it is not.\u00a0 In fact, as evidenced by\u00a0this Guardian report\u00a0from 2009, it is merely a snapshot of figures compiled over a much broader time-frame by the UN Country Team in Sri Lanka, which placed the total number of civilians killed between August 2008 and 13th\u00a0May 2009 at\u00a07,721.\u00a0This estimate has been in the public domain at least since 2011, when it was cited by a Panel of Experts appointed by the UN Secretary-General to look into the final stages of war.<\/p>\n

    The Panel of Experts, with both the benefit of hindsight, and access to a far broader range of information and witness testimony not available to the UN Country Team during the final stages of the war, went on to state that “multiple sources of information indicate that a range of up to 40,000 civilian deaths cannot be ruled out at this stage”. A further internal UN\u00a0report\u00a0in 2012 highlighted credible information “indicating that over 70,000 people are unaccounted for”.These later UN estimates, which together indicate that that the range of civilian deaths probably lies somewhere in the range of 40,000-70,000, remain the most credible to date we lack the totality of the dispatches needed to properly contextualise and evaluate the statements,<\/p>\n

    For example, on cluster bombs, the October 2015 report of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (\u2018OISL\u2019) cited multiple witnesses, including medical professionals, as testifying to their use, and on that basis stated that “further investigation needs to be carried out.” That call gained renewed intensity in 2016 after images of cluster munitions unearthed in the so-called \u2018No Fire Zones\u2019 were\u00a0leaked\u00a0by a former employee of the Halo Trust, a de-mining organisation<\/p>\n

    Similarly, on internally displaced persons, the contrary evidence presented by subsequent UN investigations with regards to their mistreatment, and indeed targeting, is overwhelming. To take but one of many examples, the OISL report describes the repeated shelling between 21-22 April 2009 of a church compound and medical facility packed with over 1,000 sheltering IDPs. A humanitarian worker described the aftermath of the attacks: “it was a terrible sight: There were body parts blown everywhere. I even saw hands hanging on the trees. I saw human body parts all over the vehicles.” The report goes on to describe in detail the government\u2019s systematic denial of life-saving food and medical supplies from those fleeing the conflict zone, in clear breach of international humanitarian law.<\/p>\n

    APPENDIX 2.<\/p>\n

    The following is the full text of Lord Naseby\u2019s statement received by The Island:”The resolution\u00a030\/1\u00a0entitled \u2018Promoting reconciliation, accountability and human rights in Sri Lanka\u2019 emphasized the need for truth-seeking, among others, as an important element in the overall quest to promote reconciliation, accountability and human rights in Sri Lanka. The UK government was one of the initiators and a co-sponsor of the resolution. The despatches by Col Anton Gash, the former defence attach\u00e9 of the British High Commission, constitutes an important element in the process of truth-seeking and should be of interest to all those who genuinely seek a clear picture of what happened during the final stages of the conflict in Sri Lanka. It is therefore disappointing that the British High Commission fails to acknowledge the importance of the despatches of its own former defence attach\u00e9 and the insight that is provided by his communications with the British Government. \u00a0.<\/p>\n

    “While not expressly stated so in the resolution, those who have closely followed events in Sri Lanka after the end of the conflict would agree that the basis for the successive resolutions on Sri Lanka at the UN Human Rights Council stemmed from the allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity (and in some quarters \u2018genocide\u2019) said to have been committed by the Sri Lankan armed forces and the LTTE. Especially, the Report of the UN Secretary General\u2019s Panel of Experts on Accountability in Sri Lanka, commonly known as the \u2018Darusman Report\u2019, alleged that \u2018a number of credible sources have estimated that there could have been as many as 40,000 civilian deaths\u2019 (para 137), mostly as a result of indiscriminate shelling by the Sri Lankan military. Therefore, the number of civilians killed forms a very important element in truth-seeking especially when the difference is over 30,000. .<\/p>\n

    “While Lord Naseby does not take issue with those advocating reconciliation and accountability in Sri Lanka including the need to investigate any allegations of human rights violations, Lord Naseby does take issue with those in authority be they the UK government or any other Government as well as the UN and particularly the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Human Rights Council in Geneva if they appear to be ignoring the above context behind the resolution as well as circumvent the significance of the insight provided by Col. Anton Gash which corroborate a large number of other sources that confirm a casualty figure of around 7,000-8,000 (of which about 20% were LTTE cadres who are said to have thrown away their uniforms resulting in Tamil civilian casualties of about 6,500). .<\/p>\n

    “Lord Naseby is concerned that the principles of natural justice are possibly being disregarded as the Gash Despatches reveal that British authorities knew that the estimates propagated by the Darusman Report were based on flawed information. The FCO had this information at their disposal to disprove some of the Darusman Report\u2019s contentions, especially to counter that the estimated casualty figures could not have been as high as 40,000. Almost every western media report to this day, continues to quote this high estimate of 40,000 for war casualties, without questioning its reliability, whilst failing to mention the numerous other independent assessments, from sources who were present on the ground in Sri Lanka during 2009, that consistently point to an estimated death toll in the region of 7,000 – 8,000. In its search for the truth, it would seem morally improper that UK should have allowed the Darusman Report to have been used without contention and facilitated subsequent resolutions on Sri Lanka to have been formulated using estimates that starkly contradicted Britain\u2019s own evidence. After not disclosing its own military attach\u00e9\u2019s evidence to the Human Rights Commission, the FCO then took the unhelpful step of attempting to suppress this information when Lord Naseby sought a Freedom of Information request. Britain\u2019s motives in playing a prominent role in seeking and encouraging UNHRC Resolutions on Sri Lanka since 2009 that sought to establish the truth regarding allegations of Human Rights violations, whilst at the same time effectively prohibiting its own relevant information from being considered by the Human Rights Commission, may need to be called into question. Lord Naseby fought for the full disclosure of the Gash Despatches, yet this was not finally granted as the Information Commission Tribunal sided with the FCO, which insisted on heavy redactions being maintained. Nevertheless the redacted Gash Despatches do provide an invaluable insight. .<\/p>\n

    “Lord Naseby acknowledges that the death of any civilians is deeply regrettable however, it is noted that this was an armed conflict between a democratically elected government and a terrorist outfit, the Tamil Tigers, who were proscribed by leading nations including most of those supporting the resolution. It is inevitable that armed conflicts create casualties, made worse in this case by 300,000 Tamil civilians being herded into a war zone against their will by the Tamil Tigers. In effect, this was a mass hostage situation and the Sri Lankan armed forces took action to release the Tamil civilians. Despite this evidence, the casualties remained remarkably low. Moreover, there is nothing from the UK\u2019s own defence specialist, who was allowed access to the theatres of the conflict in 2009, which indicates that Sri Lanka\u2019s security forces were directed by their government to break the principles of conducting operations in a way that was beyond the bounds of military necessity, nor that Sri Lanka\u2019s armed forces did not take due diligence to avoid civilian casualties by conducting their operations with regard for distinction and proportionality. The British government should acknowledge the evidence of their own military attach\u00e9 whilst continuing to wholeheartedly support the UN Resolution in collaboration with Sri Lanka to secure a long term sustainable peace for all communities on the island. .<\/p>\n

    “Therefore, Lord Naseby wishes to reiterate that the context is vital to any possible war crime prosecution that may arise and 40,000 or more civilian deaths could be tantamount to genocide and\/or crimes against humanity if proven that it was part of government policy to do so. However, a casualty figure of 6,500 is a totally different scale beyond the scope of such atrocities, while acknowledging that there may have been certain individual incidents that may perhaps constitute to be a violation of the Geneva Conventions.<\/p>\n

    “It should be noted that at no stage has Lord Naseby attempted to claim that the Gash Despatches show that the civilian casualties were “trivial” or that these matters should not be investigated. On the contrary, in common with most observers and other nations who supported the resolution, Lord Naseby urges Sri Lanka\u2019s authorities to honour their commitments to the UN Human Rights Council by conducting credible investigations and where there are incidents that their security forces may have committed alleged violations, then the appropriate due processes of justice should follow. .<\/p>\n

    “It is against this background that Lord Naseby last week forwarded a full set of papers consisting of: the Hansard transcript of the debate he initiated in the House of Lords on October 12th, the entire copies of the heavily redacted pages of Col Gash\u2019s despatches, in itself only available after nearly 3 years of persistent challenging of the UK Foreign & Commonwealth Office, his interpretation of the un-redacted parts and the substantial corroborative evidence from many other sources. These were all sent to the Secretary General of the United Nations, Ant\u00f3nio Guterres; the Human Rights team at the UNHRC in Geneva, namely the High Commissioner, Prince Zeid Ra\u2019ad Al Hussein and the nine UN Special Procedures mandate holders, each of whom have visited Sri Lanka in their official capacity. They all received a personal letter from Lord Naseby outlining the key issue of the hugely misleading figure in the Darusman Report of 40,000 Tamil civilians killed whereas the truth is about 6,500 and seeking their support for a correction. .<\/p>\n

    “Lord Naseby makes it quite clear that he shall pursue every organisation and the persons involved to ensure that the Darusman Report figure on civilian casualties is publicly amended to reflect that the truth about an estimated 6,500 Tamil civilians who died at the end of the Sri Lanka conflict. Truth must and will win out however inconvenient that may be to the authorities.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    KAMALIKA PIERIS REVISED 26.4.18 The\u00a0\u00a0 war crimes\u201d charge against the Sri Lanka army is that the army killed hundreds and hundreds of \u00a0\u00a0innocent\u201d Tamil civilians instead of killing off the LTTE. This \u2018war crimes\u2019 charge is part of a calculated strategy carried out by the western countries that support Tamil Eelam. A bogus \u2018body count\u2019 […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[104],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-76867","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\/76867","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=76867"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/76867\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=76867"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=76867"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=76867"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}