The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, stated on the 13th March:
“Certain actions being undertaken by the Sri Lankan military and by the LTTE may constitute violations of international human rights and humanitarian law.” Pillay said. “We need to know more about what is going on, but we know enough to be sure that the situation is absolutely desperate. The world today is ever sensitive about such acts that could amount to war crimes and crimes against humanity.”
The president of Sri Lanka and several other spokesmen have commented on this statement and have entirely endorsed the accusations against the LTTE. On the other hand the LTTE have not denied the allegations. The government even went further in stating that the LTTE violations are greater than stated. Therefore, for the time being there is no controversy regarding the accuracy of the accusations of the High Commissioner against the LTTE.
While the Sri Lankan government is happy to endorse the accusations against the LTTE it vehemently denies the accusations made against the regime. Its denial is based on two allegations, one of which is that the figures given by the High Commissioner, ¡§More than 2,800 civilian deaths may have been killed and more than 7,000 injured since the 20th January, many of them inside the no-fire zones¡¨ are inaccurate. The government also says that whether those killed are LTTE cadres or civilians cannot be ascertained. This may indicate that the government¡¦s position is that even if the figures regarding the dead and injured were correct the High Commissioner allegations may not be well founded as many of those who have been killed may not be civilians.
The problem therefore is all about the accuracy of the facts. When it comes to the proof of the accuracy of the facts, rhetoric and propaganda are of little use despite of whether the propaganda is in support of the High Commissioner allegations or against them. The only way to test the accuracy of the facts is to probe the matter independently and impartially. That, of course, is the principle of common sense as well as science. There are many fields of science used to probe the accuracy of any fact, whether the facts are related to accounts held or forensic matters. The only judgements that can be relied on in these matters are the result of independent and impartial inquiries.
An example can be learned of how to deal with such matters from an extremely serious incident in Bangladesh which took place on the 26th and 27th of February, 2009. In the Bangladesh Rifles (BDR) 55 officers, seven civilians including two officer¡¦s wives, were killed allegedly by lower ranking officers. Five other senior officers are still missing. Those who were killed include the Major General of the BDR, two Brigadier Generals, over a dozen colonels, several lieutenant colonels, captains, majors and two soldiers. The newly elected government, which has 263 seats out of 300, was seriously undermined due to this massacre of senior army officers of the Bangladesh Rifles.
In the days that followed the massacre the government of Bangladesh and the Bangladesh Awami League lead by Sheik Hasina, came under heavy criticism from many quarters including the armed forces. There was also public criticism about the accuracy and level of military intelligence in the country that was unable to prevent such a deadly occurrence.
However, to the credit of Sheik Hasina, the cabinet decided to call upon the FBI, Scotland Yard and experts from other international agencies to come and investigate the matter and submit a report for the purpose of taking appropriate action. All the critics have supported the move by Sheik Hasina¡¦s government in making such a probe possible. The conduct of the probe by the international experts has created the impression that it will be an independent and impartial one conducted by competent investigators.
In the international forums during recent years the Sri Lankan government has consistently claimed that it does not have adequate human resources for conducting inquiries into serious crimes and human rights abuses. It has even asked for assistance in that aspect. However, the accuracy of this assertion about the absence of competence to investigate is subject to controversy. Human rights organisations have pointed out that, while admitting the need to improve the competence of investigators, the country, in fact, already has the capacity in this area. The real problem, it has been pointed out, is the politicisation of the system which deliberately prevents investigations that may be to the disadvantage of the regime in power. Whatever that may be, even if the government¡¦s claim for the absence of competence is taken at face value then there is a further argument to follow the Bangladesh example in conducting a probe through international experts.
However, there is an assumption built over a long period of time that all international probes will be partially in favour of the LTTE. This is despite of the fact that, all the countries from which such competent expertise could be obtained have declared the LTTE to be a terrorist organisation and has banned it. Therefore other than being a self-serving propaganda ploy the suspicion of partiality towards the LTTE cannot be the real reason to object to an inquiry by competent criminal investigators from agencies that enjoy international reputations regarding their abilities.
From the point of view of post conflict justice the matter raised by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights will have to be recognised within the framework of international law. The question of when and how an inquiry will be conducted is merely a matter of the possibility of such an inquiry. Global experience shows that inquiries may come up even quite late, sometimes as late as 30-40 years. Interested parties may prevent investigations in the short run, however, if the facts are documented such inquiries can happen at one time or another.
The stability of a country requires investigations into all crimes and of course investigations into those most heinous crimes of which crimes against humanity and war crimes are the foremost. From now on it should be in the agenda of law enforcement locally as well as internationally to probe the allegations made by the highest officer in the United Nations in the human rights field regarding Sri Lanka.
Propaganda, however smart, either in favour of the High Commissioner¡¦s allegations or against them does not solve the problem of allegations regarding crimes against humanity and war crimes. Of course the propaganda can either expedite or delay such inquiries depending on the political climate. Propaganda is basically an exercise that takes place within a no-fact zone. Neither the loudness of propaganda nor the smartness of lying and bullying can raise propaganda to an area outside the no-fact zone.
The population in Sri Lanka and outside will only know the truth when an independent and impartial inquiry is conducted by competent experts. Until then they will all be denied the truth about what has allegedly taken place in the recent weeks. The sooner Sri Lanka follows the example of Bangladesh in this regard the better for all the citizens and the international community concerned with the human rights and humanitarian problems existing in the country at present.
