Advertisement ::

Enlarge Cartoon

Geneva, Switzerland (GenevaLunch) – World headlines about endless casualties and aid organizations being kept out of Sri Lanka’s conflict area have died away, last week’s news, but the battle to find out what really happened and how many died may be only beginning, media reports 29 May show. Le Temps and Le Monde jointly carry an article by reporter Philippe Bolopion in Colombo that accuses the Sri Lankan government of hiding the real number of deaths and the UN of collusion out of fear that its ability to work in the country would be compromised. In the UK, The Times front-page story Friday 29 May says that 20,000 civilians – three times the official number – were killed.

The Times story is based on photos taken on the beaches in the conflict area, UN documents as well as “witness accounts and expert testimony.” The numbers are in fact the same as those published a day earlier by Le Monde, which also cites UN sources. The photos were taken for The Times. Le Monde refers to satellite images taken by Unosat of the conflict area, which reportedly show shelling damage, possibly after the date when the Sri Lankan government said it had stopped.

In Geneva Wednesday 28 the Human Rights Council, an independent inter-UN organization, rejected a Swiss-European draft resolution to investigate possible war crimes in Sri Lanka and instead adopted a Sri Lankan counter-resolution. Human Rights Watch condemned the UNHRC move, saying it had “passed a deeply flawed resolution on Sri Lanka that ignores calls for an international investigation into alleged abuses during recent fighting and other pressing human rights concerns.”

The office of the Czech Presidency of the European Union 28 May issued a statement saying “We regret that the proposals presented by the EU to amend the Sri Lankan draft resolution could be neither discussed nor considered by the Council, as a ‘closure of debate’ rule was invoked by Cuba and supported by a majority of council members. Such motions contradict the very spirit in which the Human Rights Council was conceived.”

Switzerland has not issued an official reaction to the Council decision.

The UN office in New York, at its Thursday press briefing, fielded questions about Human Rights Watch claims Secretary General Ban Ki-moon “shares blame for the Human Rights Council poor showing on Sri Lanka.” In response a spokesperson noted that Ban has been forceful “on the issue of accountability” and Geneva-based High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay has been “very vocal in her call for an investigation.” Other options exist to explore what happened, she added. “The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, while noting that the Human Rights Council will not agree to set up such an inquiry at this point, says that more information will come out, more evidence will emerge about what did and did not happen. So an international inquiry could still happen further down the line. The Office also said that international human rights law is quite robust – there are different ways and means to get to the truth and provide some measure of accountabilty. Sometimes it takes years, but this Session and this Resolution do not close any avenues.”

AFP reported 28 May that Navi Pillay intends to pursue an investigation. “She still believes there needs to be an inquiry into very serious abuses,” spokesman Rupert Colville said on Thursday. “An international one would answer the question marks in the clearest way,” he told AFP reporter Peter Capella in Geneva.

Sri Lankan government troops in mid-May defeated the Tamil Tigers (LTTE) after 25 years of fighting.

Related:

“The UN adopt’s Sri Lanka’s resolution,” The Hindu, 29 May 2009

photo portfolio, Le Monde, 29 May and photo portfolio, The Times, 29 May

“UN rights chief presses for Sri Lanka probe,” AFP, 28 May

Czech Presidency of the EU Office statement, 28 May

Sri Lanka, United Nations joint statement at the end of UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s visit to Sri Lanka, 26 May