Comments on: Sri Lanka: The Case Against An International Monitoring Mission

By: Dayan Jayatilleka

Dayan Jayatilleka — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 22:13:50 +0000

there was very strong representation from the tamil Diaspora at the meeting. that included fr bernard, mr kirpaharan and mr arjunan ethiriweerasingham. human rights watch and amnesty international were also present, as were many sri lankan based NGO leaders such as ms sunila abeysekara.

By: V Siva

V Siva — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 00:03:57 +0000

Independent Human Rights Offices, War Crimes Investigators and Journalists must be in Tamil areas to witness, collect info and report details of crimes committed and that will help to take action against the criminals.

There is no transparency by the Sinhala government and detailed information are reported in the Human Rights Watch report on “Disapperences”.

Tamils are losing faith in the Global bodies including the UN Human Rights Organization and India as no action has been taken against criminals.

Ten times of people have been raped, butchered in Eelam than in Kosovo and Western nations have failed to act to date. Britain has amoral duty to put an end to war crimes and occupation of Sinhala forces as they handed over the power to the Sinhala regime when they left Sri lanka. Please help stop “Crimes Against Humanity”.

By: V Siva

V Siva — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 23:51:34 +0000

Is UN Human Rights a political organization to help state terrorism and not investigating War Criminals?

Despite Ccrimes committed against humanity by the GOSL, why should the UN body wait and seek permission to visit and conduct investigation?

Human Rights body should work independently and there should not be any political pressure or interference in its work by anyone. Else, the credibility of UN Human Rights organization is at stake and it will become a joke!

UN Staff, please read the report on “Disappearences” released by Human Rights Watch on 06 March 2008.

By: Sam Thambipillai

Sam Thambipillai — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:46:03 +0000

At the panel discussion held in Geneva, Dayan Jayatilleka stressed on the policy of the Sri Lankan state that Sri Lanka will not permit any UN or other international monitoring mission in the country for the foreseeable future. Engagement, yes; permanent monitoring mission or external presence on the ground, no he emphasized.

This is the display of arrogance of a state that is criminal and is determined to be more criminal.

Sri Lankan state will not permit a UN monitoring mission because the criminal Sinhala soldiers will then have to be brought to justice and punished. It is defintely a taboo inthe island now!

Addressing the participants Mahinda Samarasinghe the Minister of Disaster Management and Human Rights and the head of the Sri Lanka delegation to the Seventh Session of the Human Rights Council, appreciated the solidarity and the support expressed by the delegate of China in Sri Lankas war against terrorism while protecting human rights.

Is China knowing to protect the human rights of its own citizens? It is still learning. Therefore, it expressed surprise at the calls by some countries for the establishment of a monitoring mission in Sri Lanka.

Further, the Minister added that Sri Lanka had, over the past year, received and facilitated visits by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour, Special Representative of the Secretary General on Internally Displaced Persons Mr. Walter KÃ¤lin, the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture Manfred Nowak, the Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator Sir John Holmes and the Assistant Secretary-General for Political Affairs of the United Nations Angela Kane.

True, but did all the visits of powerful people from the UN change anything in Sri Lanka to reduce human rights violations or bring justice to the victims? No

Only a monitoring mission from outside could be impartially expected to bring the truth, which is a precursor to justice.

By: nathan

nathan — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 15:24:07 +0000

This shows that the UH Human Rights Council is a ‘passive’ forum which merely listens to representatives of nations engaged actively in human rights violations and does nothing thereafter.
It is a lie that Louise Arbour was allowed to meet with relatives of victims of ‘disappearances’.
How can LTTE use UN personnels’ visit to the Wanni use it for “propaganda” purposes ?
The lame excuse of “security” is used to prevent any outside visiters from access to the public.
The BBC Channel 4 Team was thus prevented, but succeeded in giving a factual report which accuses the GoSL of “abductions, disappearances and murder”
So far none of the international or UN visiters have been allowd to speak in private with the public or civil society organisations – lest the truth will come out.
A crowd which waited for hours to meet Arbour for was dispersed by the army.
What action was taken on reports by Arbour, Holmes, Novak and Kane was not said.
The IIGEP has said in no uncertin terms that the Commission of Inquiry which they were supposed to monitor is an “eyewash’.
China representative’s comments were foreseeable – from a nation which wants political support and which itself is accused of HRViolations.
Many nations of UNO are active HRViolaters and are not interested in the deliberations of the HRCouncil.
SL government is terrified of a permanent UN HR monitoring commission.

By: Dayan

Dayan — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 14:27:40 +0000

It is very sad story that the human rights violators are within the UN and manipulating the lives of thousnds of innocent children and women.

How are we going to protect the innocent children in the North & East while there is no authority of GOSL in that region?

GOSL does not know the ground situation in the North & East since the region is controlled by Tamil Armed Forces.

The air stikes on the Tamil population is widespread and the GOSL accepted several times that the SLAF carried out such an attacks on selected targets which happened to be civilian targets.

Without the UN presence in the North & East, the world would not listen to the SL propaganda and continued killings of innocent Tamils.

How can we prevent the killings of the defenders of Tamil population, such as parlimentarians of Tamils?

The affected people of North & East require protection from a third party, UN.

By: M C G Devan

M C G Devan — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 12:34:45 +0000

With regard to HR, better solution is to call for UN peace keeping force to be present in Sri lanka inorder tostop the ongoing war and develop the country. Also safe guard civilians to their day to day life.
The SL govt wasting lots of money for the war where as somany people in the world have no food specially in Africa.

By: Sri

Sri — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 11:32:28 +0000

This seems to be a peculiar panel discussion.usually in a panel discussion you have people with different views. The discussion was on �Sri Lanka: The case against an International Monitoring Mission�.

Normally in any panel discussion someone would have represented the opposing view – the case for international monitoring mission Who did it?

Further the discussion was moderated by Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka to the United Nations at Geneva H.E. Ambassador Dr. Dayan Jayatilleka.

Usually the moderator is an independent person. Why the organizers packed the panel with government supporters. The experts from the government were uneasy to face critical comments.
Since the panel was dominated by Ambassadors from Sri Lanka, there was only a competition as to who lies mostly for the government?

By: ilaya seran senguttuvan

ilaya seran senguttuvan — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 09:42:45 +0000

For this powwow to be objective and have some form of integrity
there should have been prominent representatives of Lankans from here and the diaspora – who hold a different view to that of GoSL.
Without this essential ingredient the whole thing is a sham.

By: Nam

Nam — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 09:10:26 +0000

It was like reading a comic book when I read the events and quotes from this.

QUOTE : In his introductory remarks Ambassador Jayatilleka said that the position of the Government of Sri Lanka regarding international monitoring was very clear as it maintains an open door policy and cooperates fully with the mechanisms and procedures of the United Nations system for the protection and promotion of human rights.

RESPONSE: So they invited the International Group of Eminent Persons (IIGEP) to supervise the process, OR SO they think?, then the minister went on and said
Quote : The Minister expressed his regret that the IIGEP has chosen to publicize its departure from Sri Lanka during the current session of the Human Rights Council and noted that this had been its modus operandi-namely to make statements to coincide with the Human Rights Council sessions in Geneva. He still hoped that the IIGEP would change its decision and continue to undertake its work in Sri Lanka.

Response: Funny they invited and not allowed to work and now begging….
What did IIGEP said?

Quote: ‘the IIGEP is of the opinion that there has not been the minimum level of trust necessary for the success of the work of the Commission and the IIGEP’.
So the Sec. to the SCOOP went on further and said: Needless to say, such FINELY TIMED FINGER POINTING was not part of the IIGEP mandate, and doubtless was not the primary purpose of the Eminent Persons themselves, but in THE HUMAN RIGHTS INDUSTRY, TAILS NOWADAYS TEND TO WAG DOGS.
Possibly quoting the HRW’s contribution and influence’

Finally the entire panelists are hardcore SINAHALESE and why was Annandasangaree the defender of Human rights and a recipient of UN award was not included?
A pack were sent to this tea party possibly in the first class airline ticket on tax payer’s money when a loaf of bread is unaffordable by the poor Silva and Siva.
What a government and its cronies.