Serious differences of opinion between the Government of Sri Lanka and the European Union over the implementation of three UN Human Rights conventions threaten the suspension of GSP plus or a preferential system of tariffs for garments and a variety of other export items.
Despite last minute attempts by the Government, through diplomatic channels, to make a final plea, an SOS of sorts, the thorny issue, diplomatic sources told the Sunday Times is now a major obstacle. They fear the EU is veering towards a six month suspension of the GSP plus scheme giving time for Sri Lanka to implement the conventions at issue during that period. That is for the resumption of the GSP plus.
This means the GSP plus facility will not be available after June 2009. A consequence of the move will be an annual loss of US $ 1500 million. It would also lead to unemployment and closure of garment factories unless the Government is ready to pump money to offset the losses.
 |
| The loss of GSP plus would lead to unemployment and closure of garment factories |
The European Parliament on Thursday set the stage for such an EU move. A resolution, adopted unanimously with three abstentions, called for EU to impose sanctions against Sri Lanka. It was over reported denial of access to 250,000 IDPs “displaced by the civil war” and held “in camps in Sri Lanka.”
The EU Parliament said “the Sri Lankan Government must cease its repression of the media in the name of its anti-terrorist legislation, which must be overhauled, and press freedom must be stressed.”
The Government has taken up the official position that it has effectively implemented these conventions. However, a European Union report dated October 18 says “on the basis of facts and information available, including relevant material and information provided by the GOSL (Government of Sri Lanka), the Commission has concluded” that neither of the three main conventions “incorporating the obligations” under them have been “effectively implemented in Sri Lanka during the period covered by the investigation.”
The three UN conventions are the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), Convention Against Torture (CAT) and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and the Convention on Rights of the Child (CRC).
The latest EU report is based on the findings “of the investigation with respect to the implementation of certain human rights conventions in Sri Lanka.” It was commissioned by the EU from a panel of experts who brought out a 121 page report. The team comprised Professor Francoise Hampson, Judge Leif Sevon and Professor Roman Wieruszewski. They were asked to provide “independent legal advice on the matters at stake in the investigation, and in particular on whether Sri Lanka is effectively implementing its obligations” under the three conventions.
The Government has decided to respond to the latest EU report before the deadline of November 6. Sri Lanka’s Ambassador to Brussels, Ravinatha Ariyasinha, who was summoned for this purpose, arrived in Colombo yesterday. He will assist the four member Ministerial team tasked to lobby for the resumption of GSP plus in the formulation of the response.
The report by the three-member panel was submitted to the Government on August 11. August 28 was the deadline set by the EU for submission of comments but the Government did not respond though the deadline was extended to September 16. Thereafter, the Commission reminded the Government that “in the absence of information provided by Sri Lanka, findings may be based on the basis of facts available.”
 |
| The index page of the EU report |
A commentary on this report by Kishali Pinto Jayawardena, whose writings have been referred to, appeared in the Sunday Times of September 20 2009.
The EU said the Government “elected not to make any submission in the specific context of the investigation, despite repeated invitations by the Commission to co-operate in the exercise and present its view on the matters at issue.” Accordingly, the EU Commission, their latest report said, “has reached its findings, as presented in the report, on the basis of facts available. In doing so, the Commission has studied the documents submitted in response to the Notice of initiation of the investigation, as well as other documents available from public sources, including reports from UN Special Rapporteurs and other documents submitted by Sri Lanka to the UN treaty bodies.”
It was in 2005 that Sri Lanka applied to the European Union and obtained GSP plus benefits. The latest EU report notes that “Sri Lanka stated that it had ratified and effectively implemented all 16 human and labour rights conventions,” including the ICCPR, the CAT and the CRC. The GOSL gave an undertaking to maintain the enforcement of the conventions. It was stated that legislation of Sri Lanka guaranteed the promotion and protection of human rights but some of the rights might be restricted by law only for specific purposes such as the interest of national security, racial and religious harmony and the national economy.”
Here are the conclusions listed in the 41-page EU report that was given to the Government last week:
“In this investigation, the Commission has reviewed a number of distinct aspects of effective implementation of the ICCPR, CAT and CRC. The Commission has conducted this review with a particular focus on those obligations which are amongst the most important and fundamental human rights obligations established in the three Conventions, and where in light of the information available to the Commission, most of the problems in effective implementation were concentrated.
“The following conclusions of the investigation are based on the Commission's analysis of these aspects.
“The legal and institutional framework giving effect to the ICCPR, CAT and CRC is not sufficient to ensure effective implementation of all relevant obligations provided for by the three instruments. Some of the provisions of the Conventions have not been transposed in full, while provisions in the domestic legislation are in some cases more restrictive than the corresponding provisions in the Conventions. Domestic legislation also contains provisions which are not entirely in compliance with the Conventions. In particular, the emergency legislation overrides other current legislative provisions and imposes restrictions on human rights, which are incompatible with the Conventions.
“The police are unwilling or unable to investigate human rights violations. The criminal investigation system and the courts system have proven inadequate at investigating human rights abuses. The NHRC is weakened, incapable of performing its role and has lost international recognition. Emergency legislation shields officials against prosecution. So far as effective implementation in practice of the conventions is concerned, the evidence shows that unlawful killings, perpetrated by police, soldiers and paramilitary groups, are a major problem. While Sri Lanka has a strong record of adopting legislation to criminalize torture, in practice torture both by the police and the armed forces remains widespread.
“The powers of detention conferred by emergency legislation have enabled arbitrary detention without effective possibility of review of the lawfulness of detention.
 |
| The EU Parliament |
There have been a significant number of disappearances, which are attributable to state agents or paramilitary factions complicit with the government; hence Sri Lanka has failed to implement its obligation to prevent disappearances by State agents and other forces for which it is responsible. For instance, issues connected to the freedom of association (regulated by ICCPR Article 22 whichmakes reference to the ILO Convention of 1948 concerning Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize) have not been addressed in this report. This does not mean that the Commission excludes that questions related to freedom of association may exist.
“Serious restrictions have been placed on freedom of movement, notably concerning the thousands of persons interned in IDP camps. Strong verbal condemnations by government representatives of journalists combined with a failure to take effective action to protect journalists against physical violence have undermined the right to freedom of expression. Child recruitment was a serious problem in the period 2005 to 2008. The government has taken important steps to address child recruitment and implement its zero tolerance policy. At present it is impossible to assess if these steps will be adequate. However, it is clear that during the period covered by the investigation child recruitment was taking place in government-controlled territory by the Karuna group/TMVP with at least the occasional involvement of government forces.
“The Government of Sri Lanka has taken the position that Sri Lanka has effectively implemented the three Conventions. However, on the basis of the facts and information available, including relevant material and information provided by the GOSL (although outside the formal context of the investigation), the Commission has concluded that neither the ICCPR, the CAT, nor the CRC, nor the legislation incorporating the obligations under these Conventions have been effectively implemented in Sri Lanka during the period covered by the investigation.”
Last minute bids to have the EU continue with the GSP plus scheme has been carried out by a four member Ministerial team appointed by President Rajapaksa. They are Ministers G.L. Peiris, Milinda Moragoda, Mahinda Samarasinghe and Rohita Bogollagama. Meanwhile various ministers and state institutions have been making their own forecast. Some claimed the GSP plus would not be withdrawn. The Central Bank said in a statement this week that the withdrawal of the GSP plus facility would not be harmful since rising foreign reserves would help.
The remarks reminded one about the IMF standby loan facility where speculation continued for months. Some ministers said Sri Lanka could manage even without this facility. When the first tranche was awarded to the Government, however, it was a different story. This instance is being cited to bolster their argument again that EU too would follow suit.
The Government has been given time until November 4 to respond to the EU’s 41 page report. A final decision by the EU Ministers will come in December this year.
Extracts of the EU report are also carried in the FT on Sunday .
Mangala’s warning letter to President Rajapaksa in 2006
Three years ago Mr. Mangala Samaraweera who was then Foreign Minister, warned that the European Union may impose sanctions including withdrawal of the GSP + trade concessions due to a deteriorating human rights situation.
 |
Mangala
Samaraweera |
The warning was contained in a letter dated December 13, 2006 he wrote to President Mahinda Rajapaksa in his official capacity as Foreign Minister.
He said, “European countries which have already banned the LTTE are now trying to pass resolutions against the Sri Lanka Government in order to balance the situation by bringing in strictures on human rights issues. We have been able to put pressure on the EU to defer these resolutions so far but if such allegations continue, they will bring back another resolution at the next session of the Human Rights Council early next year. Such adverse resolutions will give a propaganda advantage to the LTTE.”
Here are edited excerpts from his letter:
H.E. President Mahinda Rajapaksa
Your Excellency,
I am writing this letter to flag some grave concerns. These issues are seriously undermining our credibility as a Government in the eyes of the international community. As I have pointed out in several discussions recently, due to various ‘omissions and commissions’ on our part as the Government, our image internationally is deteriorating rapidly which may lead to serious repercussions.
Since your State visit to India in December last year, Indo-Sri Lanka relations were further strengthened and even in the area of military procurement, India provided us with all our requested requirements. Subsequent to one such request, I conveyed to the Indian Prime Minister and the Defence Minister, a special team was sent to Colombo within 48 hours to assess our needs. In fact, the former Indian High Commissioner Nirupama Rao informed me that India has not provided so much military help to Sri Lanka since IPKF days.
HUMAN RIGHTS :
There have been persistent reports about alleged abductions and extra-judicial killings attributed to Government forces as well as the Karuna faction and the LTTE. These alleged abductions and killings have been reported both from cleared areas and uncleared areas. Whether or not these were committed by terrorist groups or Government agencies, it is the responsibility of the Government to investigate and prosecute the perpetrators in keeping with Sri Lanka’s treaty commitments.
When such prosecutions do not take place, the Government will be blamed for allowing a culture of impunity. Even when investigations are being carried out, the process of perpetrators being brought to justice is extremely slow. As a result, there is a perception that authorities are turning a blind eye to these matters. As such, the impression of a culture of impunity gains further credence.
CHILD SOLDIERS :
The issue of child soldiers is one of the main planks on which the Government has maintained the high moral ground against the LTTE. The Government action against the LTTE’s reprehensible acts of recruiting child soldiers was much appreciated by the international community. One of the main reasons for the EU ban on the LTTE, was this abhorrent practice of forced child recruitment.
DEVOLUTION :
Despite heavy lobbying by the LTTE and its front organizations, the Government was finally able to convince the EU to impose a ban on the LTTE. The Foreign Ministry, under your Excellency’s directives, worked resolutely on getting the LTTE proscribed in the EU and Canada. Even Prabhakaran acknowledged this fact in his speech of November 27. As you would recall, this decision by the EU provided the Government with an opportunity to launch a constitutional reform process. The international community, especially India welcomed this initiative.
We must build on this platform and not demolish it.
Our reaction should not create the impression that the Government is distancing itself from the policy of devolution which your Excellency articulated so well in our Parliament, At the UN General Assembly, Asia Society in New York and to PM Manmohan Singh. Above all, a devolution friendly policy is essential to carry forward your vision of making a distinction between the genuine aspirations of the Tamil people and the LTTE’s polity as a terrorist group. If the Government is seen as an advocate of a devolution package that addresses the grievances of the Tamil people, the LTTE will become far less appealing to the Tamils.
Finally, I would like to express my concern about the manner in which allegations against the Government are handled by the State media. Instead of responding to the allegations made against us in a factual and credible manner, the people who make such allegations become victims of vicious personal attacks bordering on criminal defamation. A strategy of ‘shooting the messenger’ will only alienate the international community further away from us.”
|
E-mail