OHCHR should refer Sri Lanka case to ICC: TN Activist
[TamilNet, Sunday, 13 September 2015, 14:04 GMT]
International power centers, including US and India, have begun their last phase of enactment to save the perpetrators of Tamil Genocide from sentencing, by advocating for a domestic mechanism in Sri Lanka. And OHCHR, without any hesitation is collaborating with those vested interests in supporting a domestic investigation. But, a prudent analysis presents a compelling picture that OHCHR should refer the case to ICC. In addition, litigation against Sri Lanka in Western courts that accommodate universal jurisdiction should also continue in parallel making use of the evidence likely to be provided in the OISL report, which should be exposing the criminality of genocidal Sri Lanka.
Full text of the article by the Tamil Nadu activist follows:
UN, as a system, is supposed to take past records into account before making any recommendations. In the case of Sri Lanka, we have seen that domestic mechanisms have consistently failed in bringing justice.
The Army Court of Inquiry, which gave its verdict on Feb 15, 2013 observed that there were no civilian casualties caused by Sri Lankan Armed Forces and this past record sums up how the end result of any domestic mechanism would turn up. Sri Lanka's internal judicial verdict which is in direct contradiction with UN’s own Experts Panel’s Report and Internal Review Panel Report is not taken into account by The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.
The UN High Commissioner refers to Chapter 3 of Geneva Conventions, which primarily deals with armed conflicts of non-international status, in referring the case for domestic investigation. But, OHCHR [Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights] has ignored the role of International Actors, as observed in Para 56 by Experts Panel’s Report which describes it as a conflict with active participation of International Actors, in terming the war as non-international armed conflict.
Besides the active role of International Actors, the conflict was also of international nature based on the territory on which the crimes have taken place. The conflict was not bound to the Island of Sri Lanka, but it spread beyond Sri Lankan Waters and extended towards the maritime border of Indonesia and Australia. Conflict with active participation of international actors and on international waters cannot be construed to be dealt under Chapter 3 and it can be investigated only in ICC.
International power centers, including US and India, have begun their last phase of enactment to save the perpetrators of Tamil Genocide from sentencing, by advocating for a domestic mechanism in Sri Lanka. And OHCHR, without any hesitation is collaborating with those vested interests in supporting a domestic investigation. But, a prudent analysis presents a compelling picture that OHCHR should refer the case to ICC. In addition, litigation against Sri Lanka in Western courts that accommodate universal jurisdiction should also continue in parallel making use of the evidence likely to be provided in the OISL report, which should be exposing the criminality of genocidal Sri Lanka.
Full text of the article by the Tamil Nadu activist follows:
UN, as a system, is supposed to take past records into account before making any recommendations. In the case of Sri Lanka, we have seen that domestic mechanisms have consistently failed in bringing justice.
The Army Court of Inquiry, which gave its verdict on Feb 15, 2013 observed that there were no civilian casualties caused by Sri Lankan Armed Forces and this past record sums up how the end result of any domestic mechanism would turn up. Sri Lanka's internal judicial verdict which is in direct contradiction with UN’s own Experts Panel’s Report and Internal Review Panel Report is not taken into account by The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.
The UN High Commissioner refers to Chapter 3 of Geneva Conventions, which primarily deals with armed conflicts of non-international status, in referring the case for domestic investigation. But, OHCHR [Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights] has ignored the role of International Actors, as observed in Para 56 by Experts Panel’s Report which describes it as a conflict with active participation of International Actors, in terming the war as non-international armed conflict.
Besides the active role of International Actors, the conflict was also of international nature based on the territory on which the crimes have taken place. The conflict was not bound to the Island of Sri Lanka, but it spread beyond Sri Lankan Waters and extended towards the maritime border of Indonesia and Australia. Conflict with active participation of international actors and on international waters cannot be construed to be dealt under Chapter 3 and it can be investigated only in ICC.
If
OHCHR concedes to the resolutions by US in support of Sri Lanka, and
recommends domestic investigation in its report to be tabled in its 30th
Session, it will be another ‘systemic failure’ of UN. The Internal
Review Panel Report documented UN’s inaction in Sri Lanka in 2008 and
2009 and the follow up to this report titled ‘Rights Up Front’ termed it
as a systemic failure. As remedial action, Rights Up Front (RUF) report
recommended internal restructuring within UN. But it has not addressed
the remedial action to be followed for justice to the victims.
The RUF cited the lack of co-operation among member states for this failure and said that the UN reports must be held to the highest standard for the sake of the victims and for the Secretary-General to carry out the responsibilites of the Article 99 of UN Charter to accurately pass information to the Security Council.
But, now again, UN is on the verge of succumbing to the course dictated by member states, and not ready to adopt the guidelines laid down by RUF. If OHCHR does not resort to Article 99 mandate and refer the case to ICC, we will be witnessing another report, after 4 years, from the UN, terming this fiasco as another systemic failure.
External Links:
The RUF cited the lack of co-operation among member states for this failure and said that the UN reports must be held to the highest standard for the sake of the victims and for the Secretary-General to carry out the responsibilites of the Article 99 of UN Charter to accurately pass information to the Security Council.
But, now again, UN is on the verge of succumbing to the course dictated by member states, and not ready to adopt the guidelines laid down by RUF. If OHCHR does not resort to Article 99 mandate and refer the case to ICC, we will be witnessing another report, after 4 years, from the UN, terming this fiasco as another systemic failure.
External Links:
| UN: | Rights Up Front |
கருத்துகள் இல்லை:
கருத்துரையிடுக