In what could be a major embarrassment to the United Nations Human Rights Council and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (HCHR), Sri lanka has accused the two bodies of committing a fraud by tampering with the wordings in the resolutions adopted against the island nation.
The UNHRC resolution had given the mandate to the office of the HCHR to probe the excesses during the last phase of the Eelam War. But it has been revealed that there solutions passed by the UNHRC since 2009 has nothing to do with the Eelam War, the last phase of the war or even about the victims.
“Someone somewhere wants to take revenge on Sri lanka for eliminating the dreaded liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam and its leader Velupillai Prabhakaran. The UNHRC head has cunningly included into the terms of reference for the investigation a period that was not included in the mandate,” said a senior political commentator in Colombo.
The commentator who did not want her name to be quoted pointed out that the Resolution was to cover the period under lessons learnt and Reconciliation Commission investigation. This period was 2002 to 2009. “Why has the UNHRC Resolution put self-appointed itself to investigate from 2002 to 2011IJ” she said.
According to the UNHRC website, the resolution was to undertake “a comprehensive investigation into alleged serious violations and abuses of human rights and related crimes by both parties in Sri lanka (the Government forces and the lTTE) during the period covered by the lessons learnt and Reconciliation Commission (llRC), and to establish the facts and circumstances of such alleged violations and of the crimes perpetrated with a view to avoiding impunity and ensuring accountability, with assistance from relevant experts and special procedures mandate holders.”
According to the llRC website, its mandate was to enquire and report on matters that may have taken place during the period between 21st February, 2002 and 19th May, 2009.
The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights has recently altered the resolution and it now reads: “The period under investigation is that covered by the llRC, that is, from 21 February 2002 until 15 November 2011, when it presented its report to the President of Sri lanka” .
Shenali Waduge, a senior political commentator based in Colombo , who courted controversy with her recent article “How Meaningful are Jayalalithaa’s love letters to Narendra Modi ( referring to the series of letters on the arrest of Tamil Nadu fishermen by Sri lankan Navy and the retrieval of Katchachatheevu islet ) is of the view that Navi Pillay, the HCHR and her investigating team do not have anything to hold against the Sri lankan Government on the last phase of the war.