In the aftermath of the last phase of the war that ended in the military defeat of the LTTE, government leaders considered the “Sri Lankan Model” of overcoming terrorism to be one that the world could emulate. An international conference was held in Colombo that was attended by military strategists from around the world. The prestigious Wall Street Journal published in the United States went to the extent of arguing that there was a two-word response to those who claimed that terrorism could not be militarily vanquished. Those two words were “Sri Lanka.” But in a gradual shift over the past three years since the end phase of the war, Sri Lanka is looking to become an international example of internationally determined limits of civilian casualties in fighting internal wars in particular.
(New York) – The Sri Lankan army’s announcement that it had appointed a five-member court of inquiry to investigate allegations that its forces committed serious violations of the laws of war appears to be another government delaying tactic in the face of mounting international pressure, Human Rights Watch said today.
The United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva is expected to discuss at its next session a resolution on the lack of accountability for violations of international human rights and humanitarian law by government forces and the secessionist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam during the final months of their armed conflict, which ended in May 2009. The session begins February 27, 2012.
Reporters Without Borders firmly condemns the threats that President Mahinda Rajapaksa made in a phone call to the chairman of The Sunday Leader, Lal Wickrematunge, on 19 July because of an article reporting that China had given the president and his son, parliamentarian Namal Rajapaksa, money to be used “at their discretion.”
“We are extremely shocked that the president personally phones journalists in order to threaten them.” Reporters Without Borders said. “It is unacceptable that The Sunday Leader, Sri Lanka’s only independent English-language newspaper, should be subjected to such pressure. If the president disagrees with an article, he can respond to it and explain himself in the media. That is how issues are discussed in a democracy.