By Jehan Perera –

Jehan Perera

The United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) sessions in Geneva have regularly been a focal point of controversy for Sri Lanka. Since 2009, the year the thirty year internal war ended, the country has been the subject of multiple resolutions aimed at addressing human rights violations and war crimes committed during and after the war. These resolutions have been met with strong resistance from successive Sri Lankan governments, which have accused the UNHRC of double standards and external interference in the country’s internal affairs. Nationalist political factions have often used the UNHRC’s actions as a rallying point to stir anger against the international community and ethnic minorities within Sri Lanka, further deepening divisions within the country.

However, the ongoing UNHRC sessions have seen a notable shift in Sri Lanka’s approach. Unlike in previous years, where government delegations clashed openly with UNHRC representatives, the government representatives delivered speeches that emphasised Sri Lanka’s commitment to international human rights norms. Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath reaffirmed Sri Lanka’s commitment to independent and credible domestic mechanisms within the constitutional framework to address post-war issues of national reconciliation. He emphasized that institutions such as the Office on Missing Persons (OMP), Office for Reparations (OR), and Office for National Unity and Reconciliation (ONUR) will be strengthened.

Foreign Minister Herath also said, “The Government led by President Anura Kumara Disanayake is firmly and sincerely committed to working towards a unified Sri Lanka that respects and celebrates the diversity of its people with no division or discrimination based on race, religion, class and caste. We will not leave room for a resurgence of divisive racism or religious extremism in our country. The fundamental and longstanding principles of democracy and freedom enshrined in our Constitution will be fully respected and safeguarded while protecting the human rights of all citizens. Every citizen should feel free to practice their religion, speak their language, and live according to their cultural values without fear or discrimination. No one should feel that their beliefs, culture, or political affiliations will make them targets of undue pressure or prejudice.”

Nawaz Commission 

However, while the speech did Sri Lanka proud, it largely revolved around broad commitments to human rights rather than addressing specific allegations of war crimes, enforced disappearances, and militarization in the North and East of the country. For instance, UNHRC Resolution 25/1, adopted in 2014, mandated the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) to conduct an independent investigation into allegations of human rights violations during the final phases of the war. More recently, in 2021, a resolution was passed that granted the UN human rights office a mandate to collect and preserve evidence of war crimes for potential future prosecutions. Successive Sri Lankan governments have rejected these resolutions, viewing them as politically motivated and unfairly targeted at the country’s military and political leadership.

Despite these criticisms, the international community has continued to push for accountability. The extension of the OHCHR’s Sri Lanka Accountability Project in October 2024 highlighted the international perception that Sri Lanka has not done enough to ascertain  the truth of what happened in the past and to take action  against those who perpetrated war crimes and gross human rights violations during the war period. Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath’s response to this was to say in Geneva that “The contours of a truth and reconciliation framework, will be further discussed with the broadest possible cross section of stakeholders, before operationalization to ensure a process that has the trust of all Sri Lankans.”

The solution of a truth and reconciliation commission is a concept that has taken root and evolved from within the country. The recommendations of the Presidential Commission to Investigate Findings of Previous Commissions of Inquiry on Human Rights chaired by Supreme Court Justice A.H.M.D. Nawaz makes this clear. This Commission was entrusted with the huge task of evaluating the findings of previous Presidential Commissions of Inquiry and assessing their implementation. The Commission’s interim reports, published in 2022 and 2023, and its final report, submitted in January 2024, provide a comprehensive analysis of Sri Lanka’s human rights landscape. The report provides a clear answer—Sri Lanka must establish a Truth and Reconciliation Commission to formally address past injustices, provide justice for victims, and prevent future conflict.

Overcoming Mistrust 

The pivotal recommendation from the Nawaz Commission is the formation of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission. As articulated in paragraph 1043 of the report: “Undoubtedly, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission can provide a historical record of serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law, and influence institutional reforms in law and practice to promote and protect human rights. Critically, they assist in ensuring accountability for serious violations, which is fundamental in order to prevent potential violations, promote compliance with the law, and provide avenues of justice and redress for victims.” By establishing an authoritative historical record, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission can dispel misinformation, acknowledge the suffering of victims, and pave the way for meaningful reforms.

Sri Lanka’s history is replete with numerous commissions of inquiry, each established with the intent to investigate specific incidents or periods of unrest. The Nawaz report goes painstakingly into them. Notable among these are the Three Presidential Commissions of 1994, which investigated violations from 1987 to 1990 but were prematurely halted; the All-Island Presidential Commission of 1998, which built on the earlier inquiries and issued a report in 2002, calling for judicial action; The 2001 Presidential Truth Commission on Ethnic Violence (1981-84), which investigated the 1983 riots. While some victims received compensation in 2004, there was no accountability for perpetrators; The 2006 Udalagama Commission, which investigated cases like the Trincomalee five students and the 17 ACF humanitarian workers but lacked follow-through; The 2010 Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC), which reviewed events from 2002 to 2009 and made many recommendations that were not implemented; The 2013 Paranagama Commission, which examined missing persons and civilian casualties during the final years of the war and led to the setting up of the Office on Missing Persons (OMP) in 2016.

The recurring theme across these commissions is a pervasive sense of disillusionment among victims and the broader populace. As the Nawaz Commission which went through them in detail poignantly observes, “Our island nation has had a surfeit of commissions. Many witnesses who testified before this commission narrated their disappointment of going before previous commissions and achieving nothing in return.”  This sentiment highlights the critical need for a Truth and Reconciliation Commission that not only investigates but also ensures the implementation of its recommendations, thereby restoring public trust in transitional justice mechanisms. The Nawaz commission being an internal one, entirely funded and supported by the Sri Lankan government, documented and analysed material that was also gathered by other national commissions. This would dispel any notion of an international conspiracy behind it.

Immediate Actions

The government’s recent approach at the UNHRC suggests a willingness to engage diplomatically. However, for its credibility to grow and for trust to develop, this engagement must be backed by concrete action and be more inclusive in its scope to include key stakeholder groups. The government also needs to move beyond general statements and take tangible steps to address the concerns raised by the international community. Key steps could include Returning Land to Displaced Communities. Many communities in the Northern and Eastern provinces remain displaced due to land occupied by the military. The government should expedite the process of returning these lands to their rightful owners to restore livelihoods and promote reconciliation.

This needs to be buttressed by Releasing Long-Term Detainees. A significant number of individuals remain in detention under the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA), some without formal charges. Ensuring due process and releasing those against whom there is no credible evidence would demonstrate a genuine commitment to justice and human rights. Finally, the government also needs to set about Reducing Military Presence in the North and East. The continued military presence in civilian areas fuels tensions and undermines reconciliation efforts. Demilitarization, along with empowering local governance structures, would be a crucial step toward normalizing life in these regions.

The government needs to back up its diplomatic engagement with the UNHRC and other international and national stakeholders with real, measurable actions. Addressing core issues such as land restitution, the release of detainees, and demilitarization would not only help rebuild trust with the international community but also contribute internally to national unity and reconciliation. This needs to be followed by the establishment of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission that is established in consultation with all stakeholders and is genuinely implemented.

Usually, stakeholders are limited to victims and survivor groups and some government institutions. Ideally stakeholders should also include, the media and journalists, judiciary and legal institutions, CSOs, NGOs and religious and community leaders, who recognize the need for a Truth and Reconciliation process. The Nawaz Commission Report has laid the groundwork for this vital initiative, and it is up to all of them to ensure its success. Sri Lanka has the potential to be the voice of conscience in a world that is increasingly troubled by the breakdown of international norms. Sri Lanka can do its part to contribute to healing processes in the world.