Sri Lanka needs the solidary support and cooperation of the IC to rebuilt - Cuba

On27th May 2009 at the Palais des Nations in Geneva, SwitzerlandCuba succeeded in blocking resolution by EU countries (e.g. France, Britain, Germany) backed by High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay which called for an investigation into possible war crimes during last stage of war in Sri Lanka. As the Sri Lankan government declared an end to the 25-year civil war against the Tamil Tiger rebels, the military closed off a conflict zone, rescuing three hundred thousands of Tamil civilians from LTTE human shield.


JUAN ANTONIO FERNANDEZ PALACIOS (Cuba):
0:00 "Thank you very much chairman. Chairman, it is regrettable that we had to get this point. The delegation of Germany has presented a package of nine amendments to L.1/Rev.2 draft. Now according to what I have just heard and looking at the texts in front of me, these nine amendments over all. So it's clearly, the intention is clearly to completely redraft and amend the intent of L.1/Rev.2. So there is no other option left to me but to invoke rule article 117 of the 'Rules of Procedure' and move for a motion to close the discussion on the package of the amendment submitted. The motion that I am submitting is founded on the following three elements: "

1:04 "the first, draft resolution L.1/Rev.2 as presented by Sri Lanka is the outcome of comprehensive cross-regional efforts and it reflects a new vision of how the Human Rights Council ought to operate in order to ensure the cooperation, approach that we all decided to share become fully operational"

1:32 secondly, in its current draft, L.1/Rev.2 takes into consideration the vast majority of proposals made by other delegations during very wide-ranging consultations that were undertaken. So, L1 as originally presented only included 17 paragraphs, where as, if you look at the current version which Sri Lanka has just submitted we have got 29 paragraphs. These are figures which speak volumes about the flexibility and openness of Sri Lanka and co-sponsors to be as accommodating as possible including the proposals by other delegations"

2:22 "third point, the decision to put forward a package of amendments reflect the same arrogance and negligence of those who don't accept that the world is not simply accepting what is happened, the changes have come since the defunct Commission. We have think about the basic principles of the UN charter. Notably principles of non-intervention. For all of the reasons I have listed, Cuba moves that we close the debate on the package of amendments submitted by delegation of Germany and others. If there is an opposition to that proposal, we would urge to all council members (countries), in particular members of non-aligned movement (countries of third world and their allies), to vote in favour of our motion of non-action, we should not consider these amendments which distort nature and dramaticaly alter draft resolution L.1/Rev.2. As I have said before this is a draft which reflects cross-regional support. It includes, it is been contributed to by people from all over the world. It meets the consensus of the country concerned. Thank you sir."

The Council approved by 22 a votes in favour, 17 against and 7 abstentions to a no-action motion requested by Cuba against to oral proposed amendments to the draft resolution made by Germany on behalf of EU allied countries. The results of the vote were as follows:

In favour (22): Angola, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Madagascar, Malaysia, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, and South Africa.

Against (17): Argentina, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Canada, Chile, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Mauritius, Mexico, Netherlands, Republic of Korea, Slovakia, Slovenia, Switzerland, United Kingdom, and Uruguay.

Abstentions (7): Azerbaijan, Brazil, Gabon, Nigeria, Senegal, Ukraine, and Zambia.

Statement by Ambassador Juan Antonio, permanent representative of Cuba at UNHRC

(May 29, Geneva, Sri Lanka Guardian) At the outset allow me to extend my appreciation for the statement of the Minister of Disaster Management and Human Rights of Sri Lanka, Mr. Mahinda Samarasinghe, whose presence in this special session evidences the constant will of Sri Lanka of exchanging with the international community, the importance Sri Lanka attaches to the Human Rights Council, of which it was a founding member, as well as the commitment of the country in this regard.

Let me also pay tribute to Ambassador Dayan Jayatilleka, who I consider to be a tireless champion in defense of justice and principles in the framework of this Council. A prominent intellectual and patriot, for whom dialogue with others and honesty constitute basic premises when approaching any situation regarding human rights, no matter its complexity.

Cuba did not support the call for this special session.

We did not do it because we saw it as an attempt by some former colonial metropolises to single out and stigmatize a small developing country, victim of an internal conflict that has lasted for years and devastated the nation, reduced its possibilities for development and caused the death of thousands of people. A conflict that was not exempt from terrorist acts, that Cuba, a country that has been a victim of terrorism for more than 50 years, are condemnable from all points of view.

In addition to this, the process that led to the call for this special session brought about the reset of the tarnished methods and practices of the defenestrated Commission, which are incompatible with the new working culture that should be promoted by the Council on Human Rights.

The fact of not holding talks with everyone since the beginning about the call for a special session, double standards, pressures in Capitals to get a signature, the secrecy and lack of transparency, are some of the vices that we hope will not be repeated in the future when tackling complex situations that require sensitivity and constructive atmosphere.

Ensuring an approach based on good faith dialogue and cooperation, and not resorting to the old practices of imposition, selectivity and politicization, is vital for the success of the Human Rights Council. In fact, and I should say it clearly, the proponents of this special session imposed an approach of confrontation that has divided the Council, closing the door to other initiatives and proposals few days before the inauguration of the 11th regular session of the Council.

By the way, it has not escaped our attention the statement delivered by the Independent Expert on extreme poverty, who speaking apparently on behalf of all special procedures made a number of allegations. I wonder how such kind statements are drafted agreed, and if they are compatible with the Code of Conduct.

Cuba is a co-sponsor of draft resolution L.1, entitled “Assistance to Sri Lanka in the promotion and protection of human rights”, submitted by Sri Lanka in an additional expression of openness, cooperation and commitment with the Human Rights Council.

L.1 document gets off the hackneyed path of cold, condemnatory and imposition-like languages, and goes through the path of good faith cooperation and full involvement of the concerned State, while not neglecting the main concerns on the situation in the country, which have been recognized by the Government itself.

L.1 document tackles, among other elements, the situation of the internally displaced persons and the need to provide assistance to the people affected by the conflict, including the access to basic rights such as food, sanitation, health care and safe drinking water. It also includes the rehabilitation of former child soldiers into society, the cooperation with the mechanisms of the United Nations and other international organizations, and the issue of a political solution of national reconciliation.

After more than 25 years of internal conflict, Sri Lanka needs the solidary support and cooperation of the international community (IC) to rebuilt its country and fight against poverty and underdevelopment. L.1 emphasizes on this aspect.

The difference between L.1 and L.2 is very simple. The first one is based on cooperation and constructive dialogue. It captures a comprehensive and cross-regional new vision on how this Council should operate. The second one is the same inquisitorial look of those that do not accept the new realities of the world in which we live. The decision is therefore very simple: either we go back to the past, or we better build all together a new vision of future.

Cuba invites all members of the Council, in particular developing and non-aligned countries, to unequivocally support L.1.

In order to conclude, let me reaffirm our conviction that the encouragement and development of a genuine international cooperation, based on the respect for the sovereign equality of all States and on the principles of universality, objectivity and non-selectivity, constitute the only possible way to effectively for progressing in the promotion and protection of all human rights for all.

sources:
1. NoEelamInSL Sri Lanka Conquered EU Dictatorship at UNHRC - Cuba - HE MR. JUAN ANTONIO
2. Sri Lanka Guardian:Sri Lanka needs the solidary support and cooperation of the IC to rebuilt


Related posts:
1. Strange bedfellows on the UN Human Rights Council
2. Cuba blocks thorough review of Sri Lanka
3. Cuba thwarts human rights debate on Sri Lanka

Friends of Sri Lanka

The following are the manner in which the United Nations Human Rights Council member states voted at the 11th special sessions in Geneva today (May 27).


[Adopted by a recorded vote of 29 to 12, with 6 abstentions.

The voting was as follows:

In favour: Angola, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Madagascar, Malaysia, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, South Africa, Uruguay, Zambia

Against: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Canada,Chile, France, Germany,Italy, Mexico, Netherlands,Slovakia, Slovenia, Switzerland United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland;

Abstaining: Argentina,Gabon, Japan, Mauritius,Republic of Korea,Ukraine].

Sri Lanka won at UNHRC

Wednesday, May 27, 2009
By Malinda Seneviratne


(May 27, Geneva, Sri Lanka Guardian) Sri Lanka's expanded resolution to the United Nation's Human Rights Council was adopted despite furious canvassing by countries led by Switzerland that had sought to obtain a decision from the Council detrimental to the Sri Lanka’s sovereignty.

The Sri Lankan resolution, expanded from 17 to 29 paragraphs and titled “Assistance to Sri Lanka in the promotion and protection of human rights” had the support of 29 countries. Twelve members voted against the resolution while six abstained.

Sri Lanka's Permanent Representative at the UN in Geneva, Dr. Dayan Jayatillake responding to the outcome said it was “the best synthesis of the sentiments of the Human Rights Council”.

Sri Lanka, which had earlier drawn a 17-point resolution presented an amended resolution at 7.15pm Geneva time incorporating some of the elements of the Swiss Resolution.

When the Council re-convened, Germany had, on behalf of the European Union, recommended a further 9 amendments. However, this move was shot down by Cuba on the basis of technical and procedural irregularities. The Council had then decided to vote on the expanded resolution submitted by Sri Lanka.

Minister of Foreign Affairs, Rohitha Bogollagama, said that the efforts in Geneva constituted a major achievement in terms of Sri Lanka’s international relations in the immediate aftermath of successfully countering LTTE terrorism.

“The final result, 29 countries voting for us and only 12 opposing, shows that Sri Lanka stands on top in terms of wide support from a states across the globe. This is again a reflection of President Mahinda Rajapaksa's astute leadership and the wide engagement of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in seeking the support of the international community,” he said.

Meanwhile, UNHCR President Martin Ihoeghian Uhomoibhi (Nigeria) commended the Sri Lankan delegation for facing and discussing human rights allegations and stated that he hopes to stay engaged with Sri Lanka.

The resolution adopted praised the government of Sri Lanka for its commitment to human rights, while condemning the LTTE. The resolution also allows the government to let aid agencies' have access to camps for the internally displaced "as may be appropriate." This is a significant achievement given that the Swiss-led move sought to obtain free and unhindered access of unnamed 'humanitarian agencies'.

They also wanted an investigation into alleged human rights violations during the fighting.

UNITED NATIONS Press Release -2 UNHRC 27 MAR 2009

HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL CONTINUES SPECIAL SESSION ON SITUATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN SRI LANKA


Human Rights Council
MORNING

27 May 2009


Divisions Remain on Approach to Take in Dealing with the Issue


The Human Rights Council this morning continued its eleventh Special Session on the situation of human rights in Sri Lanka, with speakers again expressing divergent views on the approach which should be taken towards Sri Lanka in the aftermath of the bloody conflict in the north of the country, which left tens of thousands dead and wounded, hundreds of thousands displaced and engendered a humanitarian emergency.

In the debate, many speakers supported the holding of the Special Session as a priority, given the seriousness of the situation, including the alleged violations of humanitarian and human rights law, which merited a strong response by the Council. An independent investigation of the recent events would be an important prerequisite to achieve lasting peace and reconciliation. It was noted that severe human rights violations had taken place in the so-called "no fire zone", with both parties to the conflict ignoring international humanitarian law. Several speakers spoke of the situation of the media, human rights defenders and the judiciary, who were now under pressure, they said, and the democratic space was narrowing. Enforced disappearances and torture remained a problem. The Sri Lankan Government was urged to accept the establishment of an Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, which would contribute to the improvement of the human rights situation and to the reconciliation process. The culture of impunity also had to be ended if the peace was to be won. While the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam's violent and terrorist methods, in particular its use of human shields and its forced recruitment of civilians, including children, were roundly condemned, the Government was also held to bear responsibility for violations, including the use of excessive force in densely populated areas.

An equal number of speakers felt the convening of a Special Session had been unwarranted. It would have been better to have simply helped Sri Lanka in its reconstruction and rehabilitation efforts, they said. While it was regrettable that so many lives had been lost during the conflict, these speakers declared their support for the legitimate right of the Sri Lankan Government to fight against terrorism, as well as its endeavours to establish public order in the country, following the end of military operations. Extending security to all areas of society was a very arduous task that was often impeded by outside conspiracies, a speaker noted, adding that, unfortunately, the situation on the ground often called for the taking of action that appeared harsh. It was felt that the liberation of the Tamil population from the traps of separatist terrorism aimed at protecting their honour and dignity and opened an unhindered path to lasting peace, stability, inclusive development and prosperity of the country within the democratic political structure. These countries also welcomed the expression of Sri Lanka's will for reconciliation with the Tamil population, and expressed satisfaction at marks of the Government's cooperation with the international community, including during the recent visit of the United Nations Secretary-General and the joint statement issued. It was also felt that a recovery process led by indigenous actors and ingenuity would move faster and be more sustainable. These speakers concentrated on the provision of assistance to the Government in dealing with the humanitarian catastrophe left in the wake of the conflict.

Speaking in the general debate were the Netherlands, Bangladesh, Mauritius, Angola, Republic of Korea, Bolivia, Nigeria, Azerbaijan, Zambia, Uruguay, Algeria, Norway, Singapore, Syria, Bhutan, Nepal, Israel, Cambodia, Sweden, Austria, Australia, New Zealand, Thailand, Ireland, Denmark, Maldives, Turkey, Liechtenstein, Venezuela, Costa Rica, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Iran, Sudan, United States and Viet Nam. The United Nations Refugee Agency and the Sovereign Military Order of Malta also took the floor.

Representatives of the following non-governmental organizations also spoke: Franciscans International, in a joint statement; Asian Legal Resource Centre; Women's International League for Peace and Freedom; Fédération Internationale des Ligues des Droits des l'Homme, in a joint statement; Liberation; Lawyers' Rights Watch Canada; International Educational Development; Pasumai Thayagam Foundation; Interfaith International; Cercle de Recherche sur les Droits et les Devoirs de la Personne Humaine; North South XXI; International Movement Against All Forces of Discrimination and Racism; and United Nations Watch.


When the Council reconvenes at 3 p.m. this afternoon it will hear remaining non-governmental organization speakers and will then take action on draft resolutions before it and conclude its eleventh Special Session on the situation of human rights in Sri Lanka.


General Debate

BOUDEWIJN J. VAN EENENNAAM (Netherlands) said that the Netherlands gave its full support to the call of the United Nations Secretary-General for unrestricted and unhindered access of all humanitarian organizations to the conflict zone. Very little humanitarian assistance had been provided to the civilians trapped in the conflict zone. Aside from a lack of access to water and medical care, the Netherlands was also deeply concerned about the human rights situation in Sri Lanka. They deemed the situation urgent. In accordance to the Vienna Declaration on Human Rights, and given the urgency of the situation, the Netherlands felt fully justified in calling for this Special Session, although they realized others did not think it was necessary.

The Netherlands said child soldiers should be rehabilitated and reintegrated. The Government of Sri Lanka should also start a policy of rehabilitation and reintegration of the Tamil population. The Czech delegation, speaking on behalf of the European Union, had already explained what that should look like. Finally, the Netherlands hoped that the High Commissioner would be able to brief the Council at its twelfth session on progress made.

MUSTAFIZUR RAHMAN (Bangladesh) congratulated the Government of Sri Lanka for concluding the longstanding hostilities in the country. The victory allowed focusing now on critical areas of relief, rehabilitation, resettlement and reconciliation. The challenges were many. As a next door neighbour and a good friend of Sri Lanka, Bangladesh trusted that the Government of Sri Lanka would be successful in overcoming those challenges. The immediate priority was to provide humanitarian relief to the affected and displaced. There was a need to bring normalcy back in the affected areas. The process of resettlement of the displaced persons should start as early as possible. Bangladesh had taken note of the Government's plan to dismantle the displacement camps and to return the displaced Tamils to their original homes before the end of the year.

On the process of reconciliation, the Government of Sri Lanka should begin a broader dialogue with all parties concerned. This dialogue had to be inclusive. Further, the recent visits of the United Nations Secretary-General and the United Nations Emergency Relief Coordinator were a few examples of Sri Lanka's willingness to work with the United Nations and the wider global community. The convening of a Special Session had been unwarranted.

SHREE BABOO CHEKITAN SERVANSING (Mauritius) commended the holding of the Special Session on the situation of human rights in Sri Lanka. This was an opportunity for the international community to devote time and attention to a long-standing conflict. It was the belief of Mauritius that the Council was the most appropriate international forum to assess situations of human rights in all conflict areas and to formulate recommendations accordingly, while paying due regard to the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of the countries concerned.

Mauritius welcomed the cessation of hostilities in Sri Lanka and the conciliatory position adopted by the Government of Sri Lanka to bring lasting peace to the country. The Government of Sri Lanka was fully aware of its ultimate responsibility to provide, as part of reconstruction efforts, protection and basic human rights to all civilians indiscriminately, including all ethnic minorities. The conflict and the aftermath of the conflict had created a humanitarian crisis in Sri Lanka which was cause for deep concern to the international community, not only in terms of the number of civilian and non-combatants who lost their lives or had been displaced, but also in terms of the lack of reliable information on the full extent of the crisis.

ARCANJO MARIA DO NASCIMENTO (Angola) expressed solidarity with the people and Government of Sri Lanka for their efforts to protect sovereignty and to bring about peace and security for the country. It also welcomed the way in which Sri Lanka had engaged with the Human Rights Council. Angola was appalled by the suffering that Sri Lankan civilians had gone through following 25 years of civil strife. Millions of lives were shattered and the future of an entire nation had been hijacked. In those circumstances, human rights and fundamental freedoms had not always been respected, and, among others, children had been used in military operations. The Government had first and foremost to protect the unity of the nation and to protect them against any major threats, be they national or international. In so doing they would be discharging their responsibility to protect. Wars always gave rise to human rights violations. Collateral damage was associated with all wars everywhere. Hence, the focus of international efforts should be on the prevention of wars, rather than on dealing with their consequences.

Sri Lanka had always shown its openness to finding a solution to its internal situation. Peace would have been achieved long ago if not for one of the parties which had failed to keep the ceasefire and achieve a political solution. Today, after defeating terrorism, Sri Lanka had the best opportunity in years to be a united, peaceful and stable nation. The Government should seize this time to reconcile and unite the nation. There had to be reconciliation and rehabilitation of the former combatants. Angola was encouraged by the Government's pledge to resettle most of the displaced within 180 days within internationally accepted norms and in accordance with UNHCR guidelines. Also welcome was the initiative to begin a dialogue with all parties to foster national reconciliation.

LEE SUNG-JOO (Republic of Korea) welcomed the end of the 26-year-long hostilities in the north of Sri Lanka. The Tamil Tigers had undermined their own legitimacy through acts of terrorism and their use of civilians as human shields. During the last phase of the conflict, the Republic of Korea's major concern had been the tremendous loss of lives and the hardship that was endured by civilians trapped in the combat zone. While the loss of lives had now appeared to have ended, there remained some outstanding issues related to internally displaced persons, reconciliation and the accountability process to address violations of humanitarian and human rights law. The Republic of Korea hoped that this Special Session would help to explore constructive avenues to deal with these challenges.

The Republic of Korea also hoped that the Government would continue to provide adequate access to humanitarian agencies and take immediate steps to improve conditions in internally displaced persons camps.

ANGELICA NAVARRO LLANOS (Bolivia) supported the statement made by Cuba on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement. Bolivia did not co-sponsor the request for this Special Session because of the way the country concerned was being dealt with. It did recognize the sincere concern of some of the countries who supported the Special Session and their reasons for wanting to hold the session, but it could not support the neo-colonist attitudes of some other States. Bolivia was a pacifist State, which aimed to help its people live in peace. It was regrettable that so many lives had been lost during the conflict in Sri Lanka, but Bolivia also recognized the enormous efforts taken by the Government of Sri Lanka as a sovereign State to protect its territories while fulfilling its obligations as a State. The Government of Sri Lanka should ensure the eradication all forms of discrimination and work in an inclusive fashion in its reconstruction, rehabilitation and reconciliation process.

Bolivia would have preferred the dialogue taking place in the Special Session to have been carried out in the eleventh regular session of the Human Rights Council, which was scheduled to start next week, and that the costs incurred for this Special Session would have been better used to feed the hungry in Sri Lanka. The international community should have responded to the request by its Member States by assisting and supporting the coordination of aid to Sri Lanka in its time of need.

IFEANYI NWOSU (Nigeria) said Nigeria supported the statements by Egypt on behalf of the African Group, by Cuba on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement and by Pakistan on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference. Nigeria was deeply happy that the 25 years of brutal and protracted conflict that had caused grave human and material losses in Sri Lanka had come to an end. Nigeria would like to support a post conflict reconciliation, rehabilitation and reconstruction process in Sri Lanka to ensure safety and security and to promote and protect all human rights for its people.

With the cessation of the hostilities, Nigeria called on the Government of Sri Lanka to deal with the enormous, complex and emerging challenges facing its people and to urgently address the perilous state of the internally displaced persons and their reintegration. Great care should be taken on the major concerns on child soldiers. The rights of children, women and other vulnerable people had to be protected and their access to food, medicines and other basic essentials of life guaranteed. It was obvious that the Government could not cope with those responsibilities alone. Nigeria therefore called on the international community to support the efforts of the Sri Lankan Government in providing basic infrastructure and ensuring socio-economic and political development as well as mine clearing to enable an early return to normalcy in Sri Lanka.

HABIB MIKAYILLI (Azerbaijan) expressed satisfaction with the end of the military operations in Sri Lanka. The population had suffered too much in the course of the last three decades from the evils of terrorism and aggressive separatism. Azerbaijan itself suffered from these deplorable phenomena and therefore always supported the efforts of all concerned countries to fight terrorism, separatism and to preserve their territorial integrity. Terrorism as a tactic in struggle should be condemned wherever it occurred and by whomever it was committed.

Effective reconciliation steps would allow the Government to complement the gains achieved on the battlefield. The cessation of hostilities provided a good opportunity for the Tamil political forces to be actively engaged in the process. The recent decision of the Government to hold local elections in the newly liberated areas was welcomed. Cooperation with the international community and United Nations agencies was of paramount importance. Azerbaijan gave its full support to the post-conflict efforts of the Government that were aimed at effectively protecting all human rights.

ENCYLA T. SINJELA (Zambia) said the recent fighting in Sri Lanka had left thousands of people displaced and in need of shelter with many more among them requiring medical attention. Zambia was concerned about this situation and therefore called upon the Government of Sri Lanka to ensure that humanitarian agencies were given access to all areas in order to reach the affected population as soon as possible in order to attend to their needs. The people of Sri Lanka, especially the displaced, should be given all the assistance required to restart their lives and enjoy the peace. Zambia also called upon the Government of Sri Lanka to come up with a quick strategic plan on how to bring life back to normal for all the displaced and see international assistance. The international community would not fail to do its part in this regard.

Now the Government of Sri Lanka was in control of the whole country, it must ensure that all the human rights and fundamental freedoms of the Sri Lankan people were promoted and protected. It was also their hope that the Sri Lankan Government would now focus on rebuilding and developing the country. The commitment made by the President of Sri Lanka to find a political solution to the situation in the country, and the pronouncement by the Tamil Tigers that they would now fight for their rights through political means, was welcomed.

GABRIEL WINTER KABRAN (Uruguay) said that Uruguay had closely followed with great concern the aggravation of the armed conflict between the Government of Sri Lanka and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). It was essential that they clearly separated two aspects: the Tamil people and the armed Tamil Tigers group. Uruguay deplored this long war, with its human rights and international humanitarian law abuses, and it particularly and clearly condemned the methods of the LTTE, which had clearly been terrorist, as they included indiscriminate attacks against the civilian population. Uruguay had agreed to the convening of a Special Session because it was the Council's right to discuss and adopt action, or not adopt action, on any human rights issues and this was a human rights issue.

Now that the weapons had fallen silent and the LTTE had been defeated, it was time for the Government to put its efforts into reconstruction and reconciliation with the Tamil people. The Sri Lanka Government should allow, on equal footing and without discrimination, for all of its minorities that formed part of the nation to participate. Also, in the peace process, the Government should provide the necessary rehabilitation and reintegration of child soldiers, material reconstruction of wide areas, and facilitate the return of vast numbers of displaced people, as well as cooperate with the United Nations and the High Commissioner for Human Rights.

IDRISS JAZAIRY (Algeria) said Algeria hoped that the Human Rights Council would be similarly moved by conflicts that affected the civilian population in other regions of Asia and Middle East. Algeria referred to regions where, according to the United States Army, drones were hitting their targets with a 2 per cent success rate and a 98 per cent rate of collateral damage in terms of civilian loss, or also in the regions where white phosphorous bombs were being heavily used against civilian populations. It was regrettable that the work of the Council was still distorted by double standards.

Algeria welcomed the fact that the Sri Lankan Government had successfully defeated a terrorist movement, which had invented suicide attacks, and of which Al Qaida had only been a pale imitation. Algeria invited the international community to provide urgent aid to Sri Lanka for reconstruction and to increase funding, especially aid for development.

BEATE STIRO (Norway) welcomed the decision to convene this Special Session on the human rights situation in Sri Lanka. Ever since the direct peace talks between the Government of Sri Lanka and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) ended in 2006, Norway had urged both parties to return to the negotiation table. However, it became evident that both the LTTE and the Government decided that their chosen path would be war. To strengthen the reconciliation process, the protection of human rights was a vital element. Norway was deeply concerned about the current human rights situation in Sri Lanka.

More than 270,000 people had fled their homes and were entirely dependent on emergency aid and medical treatment. Norway called upon the Sri Lankan Government to ensure the United Nations, International Committee of the Red Cross and other humanitarian organizations had full and unhindered humanitarian access to the affected population. The International Committee of the Red Cross and the United Nations must also be granted full access to the screening and registration processes of the internally displaced persons. Norway welcomed the Sri Lankan Government's assurances that the internally displaced civilians would be resettled within 180 days. Furthermore, the Government of Sri Lanka was urged to take measures to improve the situation for media freedom in Sri Lanka.

TAN YORK CHOR (Singapore) observed that, now that the war was over, national reconciliation was the only way to ensure lasting long-term peace in Sri Lanka. In that regard, Singapore welcomed President Mahinda Rajapaksa's address to the Sri Lankan Parliament on 19 May, in which he had noted that a solution to the conflict should be acceptable to all communities and he had guaranteed the protection of all Tamil-speaking people and that all people of Sri Lanka should live with equal rights. That was truly the fundamental basis for any national reconciliation effort.

The task ahead was daunting, and the scale of the humanitarian crisis would require the full support of the international community. In recognition of the urgent humanitarian situation, Singapore had decided to co-sponsor draft resolution L.1/Rev.1, and to add Singapore's support to its call for action by the United Nations and the international community.

FAYSAL KHABBAZ HAMOUI (Syria) congratulated Sri Lanka on the end of hostilities. The country could now go back to peace and stability. They were however surprised that this Special Session was being held now; there was no justification for that as it was clearly an interference in the internal affairs of a country. It was also strange that this Special Session had been requested by the very same who normally turned a blind eye to the violations committed by the forces of Israeli occupation in the Occupied Arab Territories. Syria further highlighted the appeal made by the Secretary-General to donors in order to offer assistance to this developing country.

YESHEY DORJI (Bhutan) said the work of the Human Rights Council was supposed to be based on cooperation and dialogue, translating into a spirit of consultation and constructive engagement. Unfortunately, the very question of convening the eleventh Special Session of the Council on Sri Lanka had, since the beginning, been shrouded in ambiguity. The delegation of Bhutan was not convinced of the appropriateness of holding this Special Session when Members were only days away from the Council's eleventh regular session.

Sri Lanka had been faced with a ruthless terrorist insurgency for the past three decades, exacting a heavy toll on life and property, and instilling a sense of fear and uncertainty in the daily lives of all Sri Lankan people. With the end of the conflict, the challenges faced by Sri Lanka were of relief, rehabilitation, resettlement and reconciliation. Bhutan welcomed the statement issued by the Sri Lankan Government yesterday at the opening of the Special Session, which reaffirmed their firm commitment to an inclusive national solution and to the promotion and protection of all human rights to all. The Government also outlined a 180 day plan to resettle internally displaced persons, and in this regard, was cooperating with the Government of India, which was welcomed.

DINESH BHATTARAI (Nepal) welcomed the defeat of the terrorism of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. That was a victory of pluralism, unity and integrity of Sri Lanka. Also welcomed was the statement of the President of Sri Lanka before the national Parliament on 19 May, which amply demonstrated the commitment of Sri Lanka to a political solution and national reconciliation. The liberation of the Tamil population from the traps of separatist terrorism aimed at protecting their honour and dignity and opened an unhindered path to lasting peace, stability, inclusive development and prosperity of the country within the democratic political structure.

Nepal further welcomed the just-concluded visit of the United Nations Secretary-General to the country at the invitation of the Government immediately after the cessation of hostilities. The joint statement issued following the visit signalled Sri Lanka's commitment to work together in the post conflict situation. Sri Lanka's constructive engagement with a series of other visits, including the visits of the Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and the Special Rapporteur on internally displaced persons, had to be appreciated. Here, it was noted that the post conflict situation was a sensitive period with multiple challenges. A recovery process led by indigenous actors and ingenuity moved faster and became sustainable. It was also noted that Sri Lanka had maintained its steadfast commitment to stick to the democratic path and to honour human rights and fundamental freedoms of its people despite several challenges. Nepal wished the Government and people of Sri Lanka all success in building a peaceful, stable, prosperous and united Sri Lanka on its democratic foundations.

AHARON LESHNO-YAAR (Israel) noted Israel's close cooperation and longstanding relations with the Government of Sri Lanka. Both countries had worked closely together on a variety of issues. The conflict in the country had been long-lasting. There had been tens of thousands of civilian casualties. They were here today, not to condemn the Government of Sri Lanka, but rather, in the spirit of transparency and international dialogue, to constructively and effectively address a human rights situation of serious concern. The Security Council itself had strongly condemned the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam for its acts of terrorism and use of human shields. But they also had to express deep concern at the alleged violations of international humanitarian law and human rights. In this regard, Israel trusted that the Sri Lankan Government would conduct a fair and independent investigation into alleged violations committed by both parties during the conflict.

Israel had also closely followed the sincere efforts of the European Union and other democratic partners in convening this Special Session. It had been a difficult process, sometimes seemingly hopeless. Those genuine attempts had been encountered by destructive ones of those who sought to manipulate and politicize the Council's agenda.

SUN SUON (Cambodia) said that as a country that had its own experiences of conflicts, Cambodia fully understood the situation and shared the concern and regrets expressed by the international community at the proportion of civilian casualties and human sufferings over the decades of the conflict in Sri Lanka. The end of the conflict was welcomed and the Government of Sri Lanka was congratulated for its efforts to achieve peace after decades of conflict. The country's priority now was to address the necessary assistance as a result of this humanitarian crisis, in order to ensure relief and rehabilitation of people affected by the conflict. Therefore, the Sri Lankan Government was commended for the efforts and steps taken thus far to address the urgent needs and challenges related to relief, rehabilitation, resettlement, applying the rule of law, and especially the reintegration of internally displaced persons.

The Sri Lankan Government was praised for the strong commitment shown toward the promotion and protection of human rights in keeping with its international obligations, including its cooperation with the Human Rights Council through the update and briefing of the situation. Cambodia called on the international community to cooperate with Sri Lanka by providing all relevant assistance for the reconstruction of its economic and social infrastructure in this post conflict period.

HANS DAHLGREN (Sweden) noted that, with the end of fighting came the opportunity for reconciliation and recovery. But winning the peace would take significant efforts. Real measures to address the human rights and humanitarian situation had to be taken now. Winning the peace would involve urgently proceeding towards an inclusive political solution, based on respect for human rights, equality and the rule of law. Urgent measures had to be taken to ensure the survival and well-being of civilians still left in the former conflict areas. Unhindered and safe access had to be ensured for humanitarian actors to internally displaced persons, who had been held in closed camps, at screening points or who remained in the former conflict zone. Full respect of humanitarian principles and international humanitarian law had to be ensured, including in the management of the camps for internally displaced people. Furthermore, freedom of movement, family reunification and the early and safe returns of the displaced had to be guaranteed.

Winning the peace would also require ending the culture of impunity. The conflict had caused, and its aftermath was still causing, enormous human suffering. Thousands of innocent lives had been lost, and many more had been wounded. The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam's violent and terrorist methods, in particular its use of human shields and its forced recruitment of civilians, including children, had to be condemned in the strongest terms. But the Government of Sri Lanka also bore responsibility. That was the basis of the European Union's position in calling for this Special Session: the seriousness of the situation, including the alleged violations of humanitarian and human rights law, should merit a strong response by the Council. Investigating such allegations was a key principle of international law. Finally, Sweden urged the Government to ensure human rights defenders and journalists who had tried to expose abuses were not harassed or intimidated.

CHRISTIAN STROHAL (Austria) said that during the last days they had witnessed the end of fighting in Sri Lanka's vicious war, which had ravaged the country for decades. Austria welcomed the fact that the Government of Sri Lanka had regained control over its territory and the end of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) as a military force. Many challenges regarding the humanitarian and human rights situation as well as the future political developments in Sri Lanka persisted. Currently there were hundreds of thousands of internally displaced persons in the country; international aid and humanitarian assistance was urgently needed.

Austria was particularly concerned about reports of violations of international humanitarian law and human rights law by the LTTE as well as by government forces in the course of the fighting. Atrocities like the use of civilians as human shields, the recruitment of children, and the indiscriminate use of force in an area densely populated with civilians and designated as a "no fire zone" had shocked them. An independent investigation of the recent events would be an important prerequisite to achieve lasting peace and reconciliation. Austria also welcomed the commitment expressed by the President of Sri Lanka to find lasting political solution that addressed the rights of all minorities in the country. The Human Rights Council had the responsibility to follow the development in the country and to support the efforts of the Government to address the current human rights challenges.

CAROLINE MILLAR (Australia) welcomed this Special Session of the Human Rights Council on the situation in Sri Lanka. Australia was relieved that the fighting was over. The civilian toll of the conflict had been and remained a matter of serious concern. Australia echoed the hope of the President of the Council that this Special Session may contribute towards the cause of lasting peace in Sri Lanka. The Sri Lankan Government needed to start the process of political reform. For Sri Lanka to achieve a lasting settlement and an enduring peace, political reform and rapprochement between all parties and communities was clearly required. For peace to flourish, reconciliation must also begin. Allegations of human rights abuses – including those arising from recent fighting – needed to be dealt with.

Australia had consistently stated that the protection of civilians should be the absolute priority, and as such the safety and welfare of at least 300,000 displaced persons remained of deep concern. The Sri Lankan Government was called upon to ensure that internally displaced persons camps were administered in line with international standards, and to ensure that international observers, particularly the International Committee of the Red Cross and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and the United Nations Children's Fund personnel, had ready access to the internally displaced persons camps. Further, of concern were the reports of intimidation of media workers in Sri Lanka, extending to violent attacks and murder in some cases.

WENDY HINTON (New Zealand) expressed New Zealand's appreciation to the co-sponsors of the Special Session which had given the international community an opportunity to discuss the situation in Sri Lanka. The long-running conflict had cost the lives of many Sri Lankans, had divided the nation, and had led to a humanitarian crisis, particularly for those who had been trapped in the conflict zone.

While the fighting now appeared to be over, the New Zealand Government remained concerned about the plight of internally displaced persons who had fled the conflict. New Zealand also recognized the loss of life and suffering endured by civilians in northern Sri Lanka in recent months and joined other countries in urging the Government of Sri Lanka to allow humanitarian access to the area. It called on the Government to cooperate with international humanitarian agencies and non-governmental organizations to ensure that all those affected by the conflict received the assistance they urgently needed.

SIHASAK PHUANGKETKEOW (Thailand) said that, as all were aware, the convening of this Special Session had generated considerable debate. Serious reservations had been expressed by a number of delegations and the delegation of Thailand shared many of the concerns. In spite of their different views, one thing they had in common was that they could not afford to allow this session to end up in a way that created more divisiveness. All had to endeavour to make it constructive. In order for this session to be relevant, they had to address the way forward. They had to encourage all stakeholders to step up their efforts to meet the immediate and long-term needs of relief, resettlement and reconciliation. No one should doubt the legitimate right of the Government of Sri Lanka to fight against terrorism within its national borders. At the same time the Government had to demonstrate that combating terrorism and promoting and protecting human rights went hand-in-hand and were mutually reinforcing.

Thailand had rendered emergency financial assistance to Sri Lanka to help it alleviate the plight of its people. They also reaffirmed their continued commitment to provide technical assistance to Sri Lanka in its reconstruction and rehabilitation phases. With true spirit of cooperation and constructive engagement among all parties, the process of national recovery, renewal and reconciliation would gain momentum and create a conducive environment for the full and effective enjoyment of human rights in the country.

DAITHI O CEALLAIGH (Ireland) welcomed the holding of this Special Session on Sri Lanka to address the serious human rights situation there. Ireland fully condemned the attacks that the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam launched on the civilian population and its practice of using civilians as human shields. Ireland was deeply troubled by reports of serious breaches of international human rights and humanitarian law by both sides in the course of the conflict. Ireland along with European Union partners was firmly of the view that these must now be subject to an independent inquiry. Now that the fighting was over, the immediate priority of the international community must be to ensure the safety and welfare of all displaced civilians, especially those who had been injured and traumatised during the later stages of the conflict.

The Government of Sri Lanka was now expected to fulfil its obligations under international human rights law and international humanitarian law to protect all people under its jurisdiction. Camps in which displaced people were being assisted should be transferred from army to civilian control, entry to and departure from them should be strictly voluntary, and the camps must be temporary. It was essential that humanitarian agencies and independent observers were given full access to these areas and to the people in them. Strict compliance with the rule of law and international human rights and humanitarian law must be ensured, and there must be full accountability for any violations thereto. It was important for the international community to be involved in the peace process. International experience, expertise and support would be invaluable in terms of guiding the process, keeping it on track and serving as an independent facilitator.

ARNOLD SKIBSTED (Denmark) said Denmark fully endorsed the statement by the Czech Republic on behalf of the European Union. Denmark welcomed the convening of this Special Session on the urgent and serious human rights and humanitarian situation in Sri Lanka. It was crucial for the legitimacy of the Council to be able to respond to urgent human rights violations around the world. Therefore, organizing this session had been a priority for Denmark. The Danish Government was deeply concerned about the plight of the thousands of civilians who had fallen victims to the long-standing armed conflict in the country. As an expression of that deep concern he had personally visited Sri Lanka earlier this month to make a firsthand assessment of the human rights situation – a visit that had confirmed that the last half year's escalation of the armed conflict had further deteriorated the already critical human rights situation.

Throughout the country, the media, human rights defenders and the judiciary were now under pressure and the democratic space was narrowing. Enforced disappearances and torture remained a problem. A humanitarian catastrophe, including severe human rights violations had taken place in the so-called "no fire zone", which had turned into the worst possible combat zone, where both parties to the conflict were ignoring international humanitarian law. The civilian casualties and the uncertainty of their fate was the main reason for having this session today. Among others, Denmark urged the Government of Sri Lanka to accept the establishment of an Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, which would contribute to the improvement of the human rights situation and to the reconciliation process.

MARIE-THERESE PICTET-ALTHANN, of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, said that prior to the recent visit of the United Nations Secretary-General to Sri Lanka, the Sovereign Military Order of Malta's worldwide relief agency "Malteser International" had joined other aid agencies in addressing an appeal to the Sri Lankan Government to secure access to the camps so as to enable them to proved urgently needed services to thousands of internally displaced persons. Malteser International had been providing assistance in Sri Lanka since 2005. In addition to its rehabilitation and reconstruction work they had also assisted displaced persons in camps and had supported the construction of temporary houses in their home areas. For the international humanitarian community to succeed in its mission to save lives and restore the human dignity of those who had lost family members, it needed unrestricted and full access to those who were almost totally reliant on aid.

SHAZRA ABDUL SATTAR (Maldives) said the Government of Maldives had always been concerned about terrorism in Sri Lanka and the suffering this had imposed on all its communities for the past 25 years. While the matter was largely an internal matter for the Government of Sri Lanka, terrorism in Sri Lanka had affected the Maldives directly and indirectly as well. Therefore, the Maldives was happy that the Government of Sri Lanka had achieved a significant victory in combating terrorism in Sri Lanka and liberating all communities in the country from the scourge of terrorism.

It was hoped that the victory for the Government of Sri Lanka over terrorism would usher a new era of peace, progress and ethnic harmony. The Maldives strongly supported the efforts taken to build a revitalized country premised on the full enjoyment of human rights for all Sri Lankan people. Noteworthy was the Government of Sri Lanka's commitment to returning displaced persons to their homes as soon as possible, and to pursue the process of national reconciliation, rehabilitation and reconstruction according to international best practice. It was hoped that international stakeholders would contribute to these endeavours.

ASLIGUL UGDUL (Turkey) condemned the acts of the terrorist organization the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam that had caused the death of so many Sri Lankan citizens. Turkey reiterated its support for the legitimate right of the Sri Lankan Government to fight against terrorism, as well as its endeavours to establish public order in the country, following the end of military operations.

Turkey also shared the concerns regarding the suffering of civilians. The Sri Lankan Government and the international community should swiftly address the urgent needs of the civilians who had suffered from the conflict. To that end, the Common Humanitarian Action Plan initiated jointly by the Sri Lankan Government and the United Nations would serve the needs of thousands who sought their help. Following the successful conclusion of the military operation, it was now time to heal the wounds and to ensure a better future for the entire people of Sri Lanka. Turkey was confident that the Sri Lankan Government would create the necessary political atmosphere within the parameters of democracy, rule of law, tolerance and respect for human rights.

NORBERT FRICK (Liechtenstein) said that Liechtenstein welcomed the convening of this Special Session as the current situation fell squarely within the mandate of the Council. They were also grateful for the leadership, during the hostilities, by senior United Nations officials, in particular the Emergency Relief Coordinator and the High Commissioner for Human Rights. Liechtenstein also shared the hope that the defeat of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam who had victimized persons belonging to all ethnic communities for long years would indeed lead to a long-term peaceful political solution. Liechtenstein had followed the developments in the northern parts of the country with great concern, especially reports on serious violations of human rights and humanitarian law, including the recruitment of child soldiers, the indiscriminate use of force in densely populated areas and the disrespect for international humanitarian law. It was essential that the Government undertook all necessary judicial effort to hold perpetrators of serious violations accountable.

While the fighting had come to an end, the humanitarian situation continued to be alarming and measures to improve the situation were needed immediately. Humanitarian agencies had to be given immediate and full access to camps of internally displaced persons and the wounded that remained in the conflict area. This Special Session should result in a clear statement that focused on the humanitarian dimension, the situation and rights of internally displaced persons and of child soldiers and that also addressed the need for accountability.

GERMAN MUNDARAIN HERNANDEZ (Venezuela) fully supported the statement made by Cuba on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement. The armed conflict which for so long had deprived and caused suffering for the Sri Lankan people had come to an end. Venezuela supported draft resolution of L1 as proposed by Sri Lanka in this Special Session. Now it was important to begin the process of reconciliation, to come up with a political solution, reconstruction of the country, the safeguarding of reintegration within its territories and transition into peace.

With such a historic event Sri Lanka had closed the doors to armed conflict and opened the doors to peace and restoration. Venezuela shared the pain of the victims as a result of this war, and was sure that they were hard workers and would be able to overcome this stage in their history. Sri Lanka's constructive cooperation during the Universal Periodic Review further illustrated the Government's commitment to reconstruction, rehabilitation, national reconciliation and lasting peace in the country. The international community needed to provide assistance to guarantee the social and economic rights of the people of Sri Lanka. Venezuela urged all Member States to support draft resolution L1 as proposed by Sri Lanka.

LAURA THOMPSON CHACON (Costa Rica) said that, in view of the grave situation Sri Lanka had experienced in the past few months and deeply concerned by the serious humanitarian impact of those events on the civilian population, Costa Rica, as a non-permanent member of the Security Council, had issued an urgent call to all parties to the conflict to respect international humanitarian law and to collaborate with the United Nations in the delivery of humanitarian assistance. For that reason, Costa Rica welcomed the commitment of the Sri Lankan authorities to fulfil their international human rights obligations as expressed during the recent visit by the United Nations Secretary-General.

The protection of civilians was essential and had to be respected by all parties. Costa Rica therefore welcomed the ceasefire so that there could be immediate and unconditional access for humanitarian assistance, including access to internally displaced persons' camps. The humanitarian necessities of internally displaced persons required urgent measures to guarantee their human rights and to ensure their speedy and safe return, as well as to prepare the way for a process of stable and durable return and family reunification.

CHOE MYONG NAM (Democratic People's Republic of Korea) said that following the conclusion of a longstanding internal conflict, Sri Lanka had entered a new phase of relief, rehabilitation, resettlement and reconciliation throughout the country. The Democratic People's Republic of Korea welcomed a series of measures and efforts that were made by the Government of Sri Lanka to address the humanitarian situation including by urgently responding to the needs of internally displaced persons in close cooperation with the international community. All challenges facing the country had to be resolved in the best interest of its people and Sri Lanka's sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence.

Any attempts to interfere with the internal affairs and the imposing of solutions should be rejected and the international community should cooperate with the Government of Sri Lanka. Further, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea was gravely concerned over the politicization, selectivity and double standards that were practiced by some by singling out Sri Lanka for purposes other than genuine human rights, while ignoring gross human rights violations including civilian killings as a result of bloody wars that were carried out by powerful countries elsewhere in the world.

HAMID BAEIDI NEJAD (Iran) fully associated itself with the statements made by Pakistan on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference and Cuba on behalf of Non-Aligned Movement. Iran welcomed the Minister of Disaster Management and Human Rights of Sri Lanka for his presence which was a sign of constructive engagement with the Council. Iran did not support the holding of the Special Session for obvious reasons. Resorting to the old habits of the past and politicizing the work of the Council would not serve the purpose and principles on which the Human Rights Council was based upon.

Iran, while reiterating the humanitarian nature of this particular situation, as well as the sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence of Sri Lanka, was of the view that the international community, at this crucial juncture, should be focused on sensitizing and mobilizing the provision of necessary assistance to ensure relief and rehabilitation of the persons affected by the conflict, including internally displaced persons, as well as the reconstruction of the country's economy and infrastructure. Sri Lanka faced many challenges in terms of relief, rehabilitation, resettlement and reconciliation, the country was in dire need for help and support by the international community and the United Nations. Iran welcomed the assurances made by the President of Sri Lanka that a national solution acceptable to all sections of people would be evolved in the post conflict situation aimed at bringing about lasting peace and development in Sri Lanka.

RAHMA SALIH ELOBIED (Sudan) said Sudan supported the statements made by Egypt on behalf of the African Group, by Pakistan on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, and by Cuba on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement. Extending security to all areas of society was a very arduous task that was often impeded by outside conspiracies. Unfortunately, the situation on the ground often called for the taking of action that appeared harsh. However, the Government of Sri Lanka had spared no effort to seek reconciliation and peace. It was also a sovereign country that had spared no effort to ensure its unity and the safety of its citizens. Combating terrorism was an indivisible objective. The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam had been recognized as a terrorist organization by many States, as borne out by their indiscriminate attacks on civilians. Sudan welcomed the declaration by the President of Sri Lanka that he would now seek to ensure recovery and reconciliation for all Sri Lankans.

Sudan was not convinced that they should have held this Special Session. It would have been better to have simply helped Sri Lanka in its reconstruction and rehabilitation efforts. Moreover, parties that had endorsed the convening of this session had turned a blind eye to the human rights violations going on in other parts of the world. That was impeding the functioning of the Council with politicization and double standards.

MARK C. STORELLA (United States), said that the United States welcomed the end of fighting in the north of Sri Lanka. This was an important moment for the Sri Lankan nation. The United States hoped that the Council would be able to provide the Government of Sri Lanka with some useful ideas to build lasting peace based on national reconciliation and full respect of human rights. While they had heard many differing views during this session, they believed that the basis existed for consensus on a group of human rights and humanitarian priorities, many of which had already been embraced by the Sri Lankan Government and which could be carried forward with the assistance of the international community.

The United States strongly urged the Government of Sri Lanka to ensure immediate, full, safe and unhindered access for humanitarian assistance to all persons in need and to work hand in hand with the United Nations, the International Committee of the Red Cross, and non-governmental organizations. They also appreciated the strong commitment made by Sri Lanka to the promotion and protection of human rights in keeping with international human rights standards and the country's international obligations. To secure peace, they also encouraged the Government to make all possible efforts to combat discrimination against persons belonging to ethnic minorities.

VU DUNG (Viet Nam) associated itself with the statement made by Cuba on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement. Viet Nam supported the efforts made by the Government of Sri Lanka in restoring territorial integrity, national stability and in combating terrorism. Proceeding from the principles of respect of national sovereignty and non-interference into internal affairs of the sovereign State, it held the opinion that post-conflict issues should be decided by the people of Sri Lanka with the solidarity and assistance of the international community. Viet Nam noted with interest the close cooperation initiated by the Government of Sri Lanka with the international community in its long-term struggle against terrorism and the protection of its territorial integrity as well as the provision of the humanitarian assistance to the affected people.

Viet Nam called upon the international community to cooperate with and assist Sri Lanka in its reconstruction efforts. Viet Nam welcomed the recent visit to Sri Lanka of the United Nations Secretary-General at the invitation of the President of Sri Lanka, as well as visits by the United Nations Humanitarian Coordinator and the Representative of the United Nations Secretary-General on the human rights of internally displaced persons. The Government of Viet Nam had contributed a modest urgent contribution to Sri Lanka to assist the internally displaced persons. As a multi-ethnic and multi-religious country and already experienced from long wars, Viet Nam was ready to share its good practices and experience in national reconciliation and reconstruction with Sri Lanka.

KAROLINA LINDHOLM BILLING, of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), said that, between January and May 2009, UNHCR had assisted the Government of Sri Lanka in its efforts to receive some 300,000 internally displaced persons and accommodate them in 41 emergency sites in Vavuniya, Jaffna, Trincomalee and Mannar. The majority of the internally displaced persons had arrived in Vavuniya in the weeks immediately before the cessation of the military conflict and the defeat of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) on 18 May. UNHCR took note of the Government efforts to ensure appropriate shelter allocation, access to food and other assistance for those internally displaced persons, but was concerned about the impact of the overcrowding in the sites for the displaced on those basic services, particularly for persons with specific needs. UNHCR therefore supported government efforts to decongest the sites by reducing the population accommodated at each site to internationally recommended levels.

UNHCR urged the Government to take immediate steps to facilitate unimpeded humanitarian access to the internally displaced persons by the United Nations, international organizations and non-governmental organizations, and called upon it to maintain the civilian nature of the sites. UNHCR further called on the Government to develop a transparent and time-bound screening and separation policy for former combatants to ensure that they were separated from the rest of the internally displaced population and placed in separate facilities for rehabilitation. UNHCR welcomed the Government's decision to facilitate the return of a high percentage of the displaced before the end of 2009, and stood ready to assist. It was convinced that the early return of the displaced to their homes and swift reconstruction and recovery efforts would contribute to the effective reconciliation and speedy rebuilding of the lives of those who had suffered from the conflict.

JULIE DE RIVERO, of Human Rights Watch, said that the end of the devastating war in Sri Lanka had come at a terrible cost in civilian lives and suffering. There were many credible reports of violations of the laws of war by both the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) and the Sri Lankan Government during the recent fighting. This included the use of civilians as human shields and child soldiers and Sri Lankan forces' indiscriminate shelling of densely populated areas, including hospitals. Impunity for rights abuses remained a widespread problem in Sri Lanka. The Council should call for the creation of an impartial international commission of inquiry to investigate and make recommendations for accountability of all sides for violations of human rights. Some 300,000 civilians who had been displaced by the fighting remained intensely vulnerable. The Government had also taken into custody an unknown number of displaced people with alleged LTTE ties. The Council had to call on the Government to put an end to all forms of harassment, intimidation and threats against human rights defenders and journalists exposing past or present abuses

SUNANDA DESHAPRIYA, of Franciscans International, in a joint statement with Pax Romana and Dominicans for Justice and Peace, said the fighting between the Sri Lankan armed forces and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam had led to the death of more than 6,400 civilians, and had left 13,000 wounded and more than 230,000 displaced since January 2009. These were only estimates, as no independent monitor – including humanitarian organizations, journalists and human rights defenders – had been allowed into the conflict affected areas. Internally displaced persons affected by the conflict continued to suffer; the infringement of their right to food, water, health and freedom of movement would continue to be a major problem due to the dire conditions inside Government camps. In addition, the condition of those working for human rights inside and outside the conflict zone served as a good example of why this Council must act strongly today.

MICHAEL ANTHONY, of the Asian Legal Resource Centre, strongly condemned the grave crimes committed by the brutal Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam terrorist organization, including terror attacks on civilians, using civilians as human shields, the killing of large numbers of persons after capture and the forced recruitment and use of child soldiers. They were, however, gravely concerned that the Council would make an historic blunder by producing an outcome that failed to even acknowledge, let alone condemn, the gross violations of international humanitarian law and human rights allegedly committed by the Government of Sri Lanka. Would the Council deny the validity of the Geneva Conventions and international human rights instruments by failing to produce a proportionate and relevant outcome of this session? The Government continued to show disdain and unwillingness to meaningfully address violations, evidenced by the lack of credible investigations and prosecutions concerning the many cases of torture, disappearances and other grave abuses, giving rise to obvious concerns about continuing impunity. The Council had to ensure that independent, credible and effective monitoring, investigations and prosecutions took place.

ILSE WERMINLE, of Women's International League for Peace and Freedom, welcomed this Special Session. With the end of the upsurge of the armed conflict, the immediate task of providing humanitarian assistance for the victims of the war was immense. The end of the armed conflict opened the road to constructing peace in the country. Experience had taught them that there had to be an understanding and recognition of the root causes of the conflict. The Sri Lankan Government should install truth and reconciliations commissions to this end. It was also needed to ensure that all citizens had fair and equal rights to participate in the democratic process.

CARLOS GARCIA, of International Federation of Human Rights Leagues (FIDH), in a joint statement with World Organization against Torture, called upon the Human Rights Council to urge the Sri Lankan authorities to guarantee in all circumstances the physical and psychological integrity of all Sri Lankan human rights defenders; order an immediate, thorough, effective and impartial investigation into all acts of reprisals against human rights defenders, in order to identify all those responsible, bring them before a civil competent and impartial tribunal and apply to them the penal sanctions provided for by law; remove restrictions on access to war areas to human rights defenders and aid workers, as a matter of extreme urgency; put an end to all acts of harassment against all human rights defenders in Sri Lanka; and to revoke the Prevention of Terrorism Act and Emergency Regulations, among others.

ARJUNAN ETHIRVEERASINGAM, of Liberation, said that this Special Session had arrived too late for the victims. How could one explain the silence of the Council in the light of the atrocities committed in Sri Lanka? Credible sources had reported that there had been more than 13,000 deaths these past months and the final days of the battle had been described as a "bloodbath". More than 300,000 displaced persons, of which approximately 80,000 were children, were in dire need of urgent humanitarian assistance and protection from the ongoing abuses being committed in camps controlled by the Government of Sri Lanka. The Special Session had arrived too late, but it could still be useful, on a single condition: that it allowed the Human Rights Council to set up an International Commission of Inquiry with a mandate to investigate allegations of violations of international human rights and international humanitarian law and to make recommendations on ways and means to address the continuing impunity in Sri Lanka.

SATHIYASANGARY ANANDASANGAREE, of Lawyers' Rights Watch Canada, noted that the struggle for equality for Tamils in Sri Lanka had not started in 1983, nor ended in 2009, but rather it was one that had commenced well before independence and, sadly, was unlikely to be resolved any time soon. Over a span of three decades, the struggle for equality for Tamils in Sri Lanka had claimed well over 100,000 lives, and displaced approximately 1 million people within Sri Lanka and over 1 million around the world. In the past several weeks alone, it was estimated that tens of thousands had died, 30,000 had been maimed, and that over 300,000 had been internally displaced. Having won the war, however, Sri Lanka was far from winning the peace. Sri Lanka had embarked on a dangerous path towards the destruction of its democratic tenets, namely the freedom of the press, free movement, free speech, due process and, most importantly, rule of law – all in the name of the war against terror. Anyone criticizing the Government was a terrorist, and anyone courageous enough to challenge State authority was labelled a traitor. That was definitely not the foundation upon which a State could achieve peace.

SOOSAIPILLAI DAVID, of International Educational Development, said that the Tamil civilians were currently facing conditions of life that appeared to be designed to bring about their destruction, at least in part. This was after killing nearly 100,000 of them. It was also after having driven more than a third of them out of the country. Justice had failed. Tamils were persecuted in concentration camps. Young men and women were disappearing daily from these torture chambers. Urgent steps should be taken to save the dying Tamils.

V. SANTHAKUMAR, of Pasumal Thaayagam Foundation, said they were deeply concerned about the conditions and treatment of Tamils in Sri Lanka. Verification of war crimes was hindered as human rights defenders had been denied access to the areas affected. In the internally displaced persons camps people had been reportedly disappearing. Indiscriminate shelling of hospitals and hindered access to health care were violations of the Fourth Geneva Convention. The Human Rights Council was urged to take note of the extremely precarious situation and to intervene in a direct and forceful way. It was also recommended that Tamils be directly involved in the process of rehabilitation.

VISUVALINGAM KIRUPAHARAN, of Interfaith International, observed that this Special Session had been called after the cold-blooded massacre of more than 20,000 civilians in several days. Today, where were those who had survived? They were in concentration camps, far away from their habitual residence, surrounded by razor barbed wire and without food, medicine or freedom of movement. It was now more than a week since those killings had taken place and international agencies and observers were still not permitted to enter that area. In fact, Sri Lanka was in the process of clearing away the evidence in the same way it had done before in various parts of the north and east, including when 600 Tamils had "disappeared" and had been killed by the Sri Lankan security forces in the area called Chemmani in Jaffa. The laws of right conduct in war had been flagrantly and consistently breached by Sri Lanka – the 1949 Geneva Conventions and its 1977 protocols, as well as the Hague Conventions. Sri Lanka's war crimes and genocide against the Tamil people had been well documented for a very long time.

BELL HILAIRE, of Cercle de recherche sur les droits et les devoirs de la personne humaine (CRED), said that they had been closely following the situation and had welcomed the ceasefire in Sri Lanka. The demonstrations in front of the Palais des Nations had not let them become indifferent to the plight of the civil population. All the parties in Sri Lanka should unite their efforts in order for the country to return to peace, stability and sustainable development.

LILY AUROVILLIAN, of North South XXI, expressed regret that once again a Special Session had been called on the initiative of States that were not from the region. It was hoped that Special Sessions would be initiated by, and enjoy the support of, States from the region with which they were intended to deal with. If these conditions were not fulfilled, the Special Sessions ran a risk of appearing to not treat all States equal. This was contrary to the Charter of the United Nations. It was also hoped that the draft resolution proposed by the Government of Sri Lanka as well as others from the region would be adopted, but also that it would include a very clear statement of imperative need to ensure respect for international human rights and humanitarian law and to combat impunity for violations of international law. Dialogue between the Government of Sri Lanka and ethnic minority groups, especially the Tamils, was encouraged in an attempt to bring about a lasting political solution.

HELENE SACKSTEIN, of International Movement against all Forms of Discrimination and Racism (IMADR), said the present situation called for urgent and immediate responses to the humanitarian needs of over 300,000 people displaced in Sri Lanka and for the protection of their human rights. The present celebrations had further worsened fears among all minorities, as a "Sinhala War Hero" culture was promoted through State sponsorship. That could easily lead to denying a long-lasting political solution to the Tamil national question and fundamental freedoms related to other faiths, beliefs and cultural identities. The continuing intimidation of human rights defenders, media persons and critics of a military resolution of the conflict who were being labelled as "anti-national" was a deliberate attempt to stifle expression of concerns regarding the humanitarian crisis in the north.

MARISSA CRAMER, of United Nations Watch, said that United Nations Watch was alarmed by the human rights situation in Sri Lanka and aligned itself with those who had condemned the use of child soldiers and terrorist attacks by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. But the Government should also be held accountable for shelling no fire zones and for denying access to humanitarian organizations to camps. The situation in Sri Lanka was an emergency, a human rights catastrophe. Would the Council fulfil its mandate to protect human rights in the field? Giving what they had heard in this session, they feared it would fail to do so. Was protecting civilians from massive human rights violations a waste of time and money?

____________

For use of the information media; not an official record

UNITED NATIONS Press Release -1 UNHRC 26 MAR 2009

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

xxxxxxxxxx HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL OPENS ELEVENTH
SPECIAL SESSION ON SITUATION OF
HUMAN RIGHTS IN SRI LANKA

xxxxxxxxxx
Human Rights Council
AFTERNOON


26 May 2009


The Human Rights Council this afternoon opened its eleventh Special Session on the situation of human rights in Sri Lanka. High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay said that there were strong reasons to believe that both the Government and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam had grossly disregarded the fundamental principle of the inviolability of civilians.

In a video message, the High Commissioner said an independent and credible international investigation into recent events should be dispatched to ascertain the occurrence, nature and scale of violations of international human rights and international humanitarian law, as well as specific responsibilities. Victims and the survivors had a right to justice and remedies. Ms. Pillay said she remained convinced that an Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights with a promotion and protection mandate in Sri Lanka could play an important role in supporting the Government and in building the confidence of all stakeholders in Sri Lanka's recovery. She urged the Human Rights Council to support the call for the international community's help at such a critical juncture for Sri Lanka.

Sri Lanka's Minister of Disaster Management and Human Rights, Mahinda Samarasinghe, speaking as the concerned country, said that over 250,000 persons who had been held hostages by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam had been freed by the Sri Lankan forces and were now being looked after by the Sri Lankan Government. Sri Lanka was also giving access to some 50 international organizations and non-governmental organizations. Sri Lanka was committed to continue to ensure access to their international partners. Their objective was to resettle all citizens in their homes but they had to ensure that an environment was created so that an informed choice could be taken by the people themselves. The Government cared for all Sri Lankan citizens and would ensure that demining was carried out, that basic services were provided in the region and this information would be given to the people in order for them to make an informed decision on whether or not to return to their homes.

The President of the Council, Ambassador Martin Ihoeghian Uhomoihi of Nigeria, hoped that in the next days and months, the important tasks of reconciliation, rehabilitation and reconstruction would begin and pave the way for sustainable peace and development in Sri Lanka. The Human Rights Council, convening this Special Session today, joined in sending a message of readiness and willingness to work with the Government and people of Sri Lanka to address the most urgent humanitarian and human rights challenges facing them.

A joint statement by the Special Procedures mandate-holders of the United Nations Human Rights Council said they reiterated their deep concern at the continuing humanitarian crisis and at the serious human rights situation in Sri Lanka, and were also concerned about the lack of transparency and accountability that accompanied this crisis. A huge number of civilians had been displaced and many had been killed. The devastating situation of civilians in Sri Lanka trapped in the midst of fighting between the Sri Lankan army and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam had resulted in over some 300,000 displaced persons interned in Government-run camps. Their situation must be immediately addressed.

The Special Procedures said it was clear that the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam acted in flagrant violation of the applicable norms of international law by using civilians as human shields or in preventing them from leaving the conflict areas. As to the Government of Sri Lanka, citing security concerns, after three months it continued to detain in temporary camps the more than 300,000 men, women and children who escaped the fighting. This gave rise to concerns of arbitrary detention. Today, a critical humanitarian situation existed with regard to essential needs such as food, water and sanitation, shelter, education and healthcare. The Special Procedures called upon the authorities to swiftly extend invitations to those mandate-holders who wished to conduct country visits to Sri Lanka.

Speakers in the general debate were divided on the approach which should be taken by the Council towards Sri Lanka in the aftermath of the conflict. A number of speakers questioned the convening of the Special Session, saying it was not clear what the Special Session aimed to achieve. Now that the armed conflict in Sri Lanka had been concluded, they affirmed the need to mobilize and intensify all efforts to assist civilians affected by the conflict for many decades. They felt that at this juncture, the international community should be focused more on helping Sri Lanka to address its humanitarian challenges. With the regular session of the Council only a few days away, the undue haste for calling this Special Session was not only inexplicable but a waste of time, effort and money.

Others said they were seriously concerned that the human rights situation in Sri Lanka had been backsliding in areas not directly related to the conflict. Media freedoms had deteriorated significantly in 2008 and 2009 with several attacks on journalists and media premises. There had been little progress on bringing to justice the perpetrators of enforced disappearances in Sri Lanka. Further, the country's human rights protection mechanisms were inadequate, lacking both capacity but also independence. During the conflict, the use of force was often indiscriminate and often civilians were used as human shields. It was the primary responsibility for the Government of Sri Lanka to investigate violations of international human rights and international humanitarian law, as well as to oppose impunity. It was now necessary for the Government to establish criminal liability for those who had violated international humanitarian law and international human rights law.

Speaking in the general debate were the Czech Republic on behalf of the European Union, Cuba on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, Egypt on behalf of the African Group, Pakistan on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, Germany, Canada, Qatar, China, India, Russian Federation, Egypt, Jordan, Switzerland, Chile, Cuba, Brazil, Malaysia, the United Kingdom, the Philippines, Argentina, Indonesia, Slovenia, Japan, France, Mexico, Ghana, Italy, Nicaragua, Saudi Arabia and South Africa.

The Council will resume its eleventh Special Session on the situation of human rights in Sri Lanka at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, 27 May.


Opening Statements

MARTIN IHOEGHIAN UHOMOIBHI, President of the Human Rights Council, in his opening statement, said that the eleventh Special Session of the Human Rights Council was supported by the following 17 Member States of the Council: Argentina, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Canada, Chile, France, Germany, Italy, Mauritius, Mexico, the Netherlands, the Republic of Korea, Slovakia, Slovenia, Switzerland, Ukraine, the United Kingdom and Uruguay.

As Member States met here today in a Special Session on the human rights situation in Sri Lanka, once again the Human Rights Council signalled its readiness to contribute to promoting and protecting human rights in all parts of the world, underscored Mr. Uhomoibhi. This was right and appropriate and was consistent with the mandate of the Council.

However, he believed no one in this hall was unaware of the long history of the needless conflict that had ravaged the nation of Sri Lanka for the past two and a half decades and more. In the course of this atrocious conflict, thousands of innocent lives had been wasted and millions of people had suffered untold hardships, stressed Mr. Uhomoibhi. Member States commiserated with the civilian population, particularly the most vulnerable segments of the population, who had borne the brunt of the war. Mercifully, so to speak, today as Member States met, the guns had gone silent in Sri Lanka, hopefully forever. The dawn of peace which appeared to be beginning was most welcome. It was hoped that, in the next days and months, the important tasks of reconciliation, rehabilitation and reconstruction would begin and would pave the way for sustainable peace and development in the country. He said he could not agree more with the United Nations Secretary-General who, in his recent visit to Sri Lanka, stated that it was imperative now to find a lasting political solution to the situation in the country, while addressing the aspirations and grievances of all concerned.

The Human Rights Council, convening this session today, joined in sending a message of readiness and willingness to work with the Government and people of Sri Lanka to address the most urgent humanitarian and human rights challenges facing them. As the Human Rights Council, this should be our focus and objective, signalled Mr. Uhomoibhi. He wished, therefore, to call on all delegations present at this meeting to work together in an open and constructive manner in the conduct of the debate, discussions and negotiations. As he had underscored on previous occasions, no useful purpose could be served if they did not invest their efforts and energies in addressing the needs of the victims. And the way by which this was best achieved was through dialogue, conducted in an atmosphere of respect and dignity for all sides and opinions.

NAVI PILLAY, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, in a video message to the Human Rights Council, said that she regretted that she was not able to attend in person this Special Session on the human rights situation in Sri Lanka. It was appropriate that the Human Rights Council, as the premier body for the protection of human rights, addressed the tragic human rights and humanitarian consequences of the conflict in that country. "The images of terrified and emaciated women, men and children fleeing the battle zone ought to be etched in our collective memory. They must spur us into action." she said.

Since December, during the latest phase of intense fighting, tens of thousands of civilians had been killed, injured or displaced. They had seen their property and livelihoods shattered. Independent human rights monitors and the media should be given unfettered access to verify reports of serious violations of international human rights and international humanitarian law which had consequently surfaced in the course of the fighting, said Ms. Pillay. Furthermore, the fate of thousands of civilians believed to have been in the conflict area, or in transit to displacement camps, was still unknown. The plight of those who had already reached the camps had to be addressed with urgency. These people were in desperate need of food, water, medical help and other forms of basic assistance. Severe overcrowding was creating serious problems. Malnourishment was a pressing concern. There had already been outbreaks of contagious diseases, noted Ms. Pillay.

Unrestricted humanitarian aid would make the difference between life, illness or even death to many, and yet access for the United Nations and non-governmental organizations to the internally displaced persons camps continued to be hampered, said Ms. Pillay. She called on the Government to ensure that unimpeded assistance promptly reached the survivors. She also urged the Government to expedite and correct flaws in the screening process implemented to separate Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) combatants from the civilian population. Full access to independent monitors was crucial to ensure due process and humane treatment for detainees. Freedom of movement for the very large majority of displaced people who did not pose security threats should also be granted as soon as possible.

The Government had claimed military victory over the LTTE and announced the death of senior LTTE commanders, said Ms. Pillay. For many years, the LTTE's campaign of violence had been terrorizing Sri Lankan people of all ethnic communities and had ruthlessly eliminated independent-minded Tamils who dared to dissent. She fully recognized the Government's responsibility to protect its people against acts of this kind, but as in any comparable situation, the rules of international human rights and international humanitarian law had to be upheld at all times. In no circumstances could the end justify the means employed to achieve it.

"There are strong reasons to believe that both sides have grossly disregarded the fundamental principle of the inviolability of civilians" said Ms. Pillay. An independent and credible international investigation into recent events should be dispatched to ascertain the occurrence, nature and scale of violations of international human rights and international humanitarian law, as well as specific responsibilities.

Victims and the survivors had a right to justice and remedies. The Government had already indicated that it might grant amnesty to lower and mid-level LTTE cadres and only prosecute senior LTTE leaders. Ms. Pillay underscored that amnesties preventing accountability of individuals who might be responsible for war crimes, genocide, crimes against humanity or gross violations of human rights were impermissible.

At the time she recorded her message, on May 25, the Secretary-General had visited Sri Lanka. She joined him in his appeal to the Government of Sri Lanka to address the root causes, the longstanding human rights conditions, to ensure a comprehensive process of accountability for human rights violations by all concerned. A new future for the country, the prospect of meaningful reconciliation and lasting peace, where respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms could become a reality for all, hinged upon such in-depth and comprehensive approaches.

Ms. Pillay remained convinced that an Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights with a promotion and protection mandate in Sri Lanka could play an important role in supporting the Government and in building the confidence of all stakeholders in Sri Lanka's recovery. She urged the Human Rights Council to support the call for the international community's help at such a critical juncture for Sri Lanka.

MAGDALENA SEPULVEDA CARMONA, Independent Expert on the question of human rights and extreme poverty, said that she was delivering her statement on behalf of the Special Procedures mandate-holders of the United Nations Human Rights Council. The Special Procedures mandate-holders reiterated their deep concern at the continuing humanitarian crisis and at the serious human rights situation in Sri Lanka, and were also concerned about the lack of transparency and accountability that had accompanied this crisis. A huge number of civilians had been displaced and many had been killed. The devastating situation of civilians in Sri Lanka trapped in the midst of fighting between the Sri Lankan army and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam had resulted in the internment of some 300,000 displaced persons in Government-run camps. Their situation must be immediately addressed.

As they had stated on previous occasions with regard to other situations, the obligation under international law to distinguish between combatants and civilians, to direct attacks only against combatants and military targets, and to ensure protection of civilians must be respected by all parties to the conflict. In this regard, it was clear that the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam had acted in flagrant violation of the applicable norms of international law by using civilians as human shields or in preventing them from leaving the conflict areas. As to the Government of Sri Lanka, citing security concerns, after three months it continued to detain in temporary camps the more than 300,000 men, women and children who had escaped the fighting. This gave rise to concerns of arbitrary detention, Ms. Sepúlveda noted. With combat operations in the conflict zone coming to an end, it was necessary to speed up the screening process in the camps. Releases must take place without further delay and should prioritize the most vulnerable. The reintegration of these persons into society with due attention to their mental and physical integrity was critical.

Today, a critical humanitarian situation existed with regard to essential needs such as food, water and sanitation, shelter, education and healthcare. It was regrettable that United Nations personnel were until very recently denied access to the conflict zone and initial screening points for persons exiting the conflict zone, including Kilinochchi, which made it very difficult to determine the veracity of the allegations of serious human rights violations, including enforced disappearances and arbitrary executions and detentions. Indeed, it was very worrisome to learn from recent reports received that some of those who risked their lives to help the sick and wounded in the conflict zone were now being detained incommunicado. The Special Procedures called upon the authorities to swiftly extend invitations to those mandate-holders who wished to conduct country visits to Sri Lanka. In addition to concerns about the severe abuses in areas of conflict, emphasis should be put on the wider and endemic problems and failures to protect human rights throughout the country. Weak institutional structures permitted impunity to go unabated. Disturbing reports of torture, extra-judicial killings and enforced disappearances continued to be received. Those defending human rights, journalists, doctors and lawyers, did not have the space they needed to do their important work without fear of reprisals. Ms. Sepúlveda stressed that room needed to be provided for constructive dialogue which also included the possibility to express dissent in a democratic society.

Statement by the Concerned Country

MAHINDA SAMARASINGHE, Minister of Disaster Management and Human Rights of Sri Lanka, speaking as the concerned country, said that the Council was focusing on Sri Lanka at a time when a 30 years old conflict was coming to an end. The issue of giving access to conflict zones when a conflict had ended was not a topic to be discussed; Sri Lanka was giving access to all its partners.

At a time when the biggest hostile situation in present time had been successfully resolved, at a time when new challenges arose for peace, they were meeting in this room to discuss Sri Lanka. He had however not heard the High Commissioner refer to the fact that one of the most ruthless terrorist organizations had been defeated; the fact that a 30-year old conflict had ended; and that the biggest hostage crisis that the world had ever known had been resolved, said Mr. Samarsinghe.

Over 250,000 persons who had been held hostages by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) had been freed by the Sri Lankan forces and were now being looked after by the Sri Lankan Government, said Mr. Samarsinghe. Sri Lanka was also giving access to some 50 international organizations and non-governmental organizations. Sri Lanka was committed to continue to ensure access to their international partners. Their objective was to resettle all citizens in their homes but they had to ensure that an environment was created so that an informed choice could be taken by the people themselves. Nearly 9,000 persons who had surrendered and other identified recruits of the LTTE would be put in a rehabilitation programme.

Mr. Samarsinghe said that the Government cared for all Sri Lankan citizens and they would ensure that demining was carried out, and that basic services were provided in the region. This information would be given to the people in order for them to make an informed decision on whether to return to their homes or not.

The draft resolution before the Human Rights Council was an implementable resolution, said Mr. Samarsinghe, and they hoped that the resolution would be supported by everyone. Sri Lanka was a State that was coming out of a 30-year old conflict. They were in the process of putting into place the voluntary pledges they had made at the Universal Periodic Review for the better protection of all of their citizens in each and every part of their country. Sri Lanka needed to be supported by the whole international community. Sri Lanka had always cooperated with all the core treaty bodies and Special Procedures. They had also put in place a mechanism to protect children in armed conflicts, among many other initiatives. Sri Lanka was a multicultural, multi lingual, multi ethnic and multi religious society; this was its strength. And it was only through the nurturing of this diversity that they would be able to be successful in their reconstruction efforts.

General Debate

TOMAS HUSAK (Czech Republic), speaking on behalf of the European Union, welcomed this opportunity to address the serious human rights situation in Sri Lanka. Over the years, the European Union has followed with deep concern the protracted conflict in the north of Sri Lanka. The recent climax had seen thousands of civilians trapped in the conflict zone or shelled in the previously assigned `safe zones', defenceless and with very little humanitarian assistance. This had been appalling. The European Union had condemned the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam's violent and terrorist means and its use of civilians as human shields, and had repeatedly called on the organization to renounce terrorism and violence. At the same time, the European Union had pleaded throughout the conflict with the Sri Lankan Government to take all necessary steps to prevent, in accordance with international humanitarian law, the loss of lives of civilians and protect the human rights of all, and in particular the lives of internally displaced persons.

The recent announcement about the end of the fighting was welcomed. The European Union called on the Government of Sri Lanka to start a comprehensive and fully inclusive political peace process, that would, at the outset, also address issues regarding the full protection of the internally displaced persons and their return, protection of children affected by armed conflict, including rehabilitation and reintegration of child soldiers, the upholding of human rights compliance with international human rights and international humanitarian law and full accountability of those responsible for those violations. The European Union understood the importance of discussion and was searching for a consensus on the best way for the Council to assist Sri Lanka in the coming months and years.

RESFEL PINO (Cuba), speaking on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, said that the presence of the Sri Lankan Minister for Disaster Management in this Special Session was a testimony of the commitment of Sri Lanka towards this Council. The Non-Aligned Movement congratulated Sri Lanka on putting an end to more than 25 years of internal conflict. Sri Lanka's sovereign right to fight terrorism and separatism within its undisputed borders had to be respected. Sri Lanka had now entered a new post-conflict beginning. In that regard, the Non-Aligned Movement wished the Government and people of Sri Lank success in rapidly overcoming the consequences of the conflict.

The convening of this Special Session had been marked by divisions and lack of understanding among various actors. The Non-Aligned Movement firmly believed that preserving the core principles of avoiding selectivity and double standards, as well as promoting an approach of cooperation for the promotion and protection of human rights, were vital to the success of the Human Rights Council.

HISHAM BADR (Egypt), speaking on behalf of the African Group, said that the African Group had not been in favour of holding a Special Session. The African Group thought that the conflict in Sri Lanka was an internal affair in which a sovereign Government did its best to fulfil its duty towards its citizens and took measures necessary to fight a militia that was universally recognized as a terrorist group. It was not clear what the Special Session was aiming to achieve in this regard. Now that the armed conflict in Sri Lanka had ended, the African Group affirmed the need to mobilize and intensify all efforts to assist civilians affected by the conflict for many decades. Emphasis needed to be placed on ways and means to support the Government of Sri Lanka in its efforts for reconciliation, rehabilitation, reconstruction and the restoration of order and the rule of law all over the country.

The African Group welcomed the clear commitment of the Government of Sri Lanka to political reconciliation in the country. It was noteworthy that all regional neighbours of Sri Lanka indicated their support for the efforts of the Government in this regard. Also welcomed was the particular attention given by the Government of Sri Lanka to address the issue of internally displaced persons. The African Group called upon the international community to increase its assistance to the Government of Sri Lanka in order to increase the accessibility of the internally displaced persons to humanitarian relief efforts.

ZAMIR AKRAM (Pakistan), speaking on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, congratulated the Government and people of Sri Lanka for their victory against one of the most dangerous and vicious terrorist organizations. They wished every success to the Sri Lankan Government in its efforts to overcome the challenges of relief, rehabilitation, resettlement and reconciliation. The Organization of the Islamic Conference also welcomed the commitment of the Sri Lankan Government to work in close cooperation with the United Nations. There was an urgent need for the United Nations and the international community as a whole to address the problems related to the internally displaced persons, mine clearing operations, humanitarian needs, and the release and rehabilitation of child soldiers recruited by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam.

The Organization of the Islamic Conference felt that at this juncture, the international community should be focused more on helping Sri Lanka to address its humanitarian challenges. With the regular session of the Council only a few days away, the undue haste for calling this Special Session was not only inexplicable but a waste of time, effort and money. Sri Lanka was a functioning democracy. Under international law, its Government was fully justified to protect and uphold the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the country by all means at its disposal to defeat the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. Unfortunately, it seemed that for some there were differing standards for judging human rights as well as the criterion for combating terrorism.

KONRAD MAX SCHARINGER (Germany) aligned itself with the statement made by the Czech Republic on behalf of the European Union. A week ago, one of the bloodiest civil wars of recent decades had come to an end in Sri Lanka; the human rights problems, however, remained. Both sides had ignored repeated appeals from the international community – including that of neighbouring India, for example – to agree on a ceasefire and seek a negotiated settlement. Both sides had continued fighting, although hundreds of thousands of civilians, women, children and elderly, had been caught between the front lines and could not flee to safety. Many Tamils, who survived the fighting, continued to suffer, from shock and trauma, from injuries and hunger, from the loss of their homes, villages, towns and from harsh treatment in camps.

What the country needed now was a review process to identify what led up to this tragedy, and an investigation process to examine human rights violations and punish those responsible. The focus must not just be on the northern and eastern regions but on the country as a whole, for in the current climate those who held different views were subject to violence and oppression and those who were responsible for such acts went unpunished. This had to stop immediately, all communities must once again be free to say and write what they wanted without risking intimidation, torture or death.

MARIUS GRINIUS (Canada) said that while recognizing some encouraging signs, the human rights situation in Sri Lanka was troubling in areas both related and unrelated to the escalation of the conflict in recent years. Continuous improvement in the human rights situation was a necessary condition for lasting peace in Sri Lanka. Canada also welcomed the end of hostilities in the country and understood that Sri Lanka had fought a brutal enemy. Canada had listed the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) as a terrorist organization in 2006. Canada also had serious concerns about the Government of Sri Lanka's conduct during the conflict and remained concerned about the humanitarian situation in Sri Lanka. They were encouraged by the Government's commitment to the timely, voluntary and safe return of internally displaced persons.

Canada was at the same time seriously concerned that the human rights situation in Sri Lanka had been backsliding in areas not directly related to the conflict. Media freedoms had deteriorated significantly in 2008 and 2009 with several attacks on journalists and media premises. There had been little progress on bringing to justice the perpetrators of enforced disappearances in Sri Lanka. Further, the country's human rights protection mechanisms were inadequate, lacking both capacity but also independence.

KHALID FAHAD AL-HAJRI (Qatar) said Qatar fully supported the statements by the Arab Group and the Organization of the Islamic Conference. Given the circumstances, it was inappropriate to hold a Special Session, especially as the eleventh regular session was fast approaching. It was important to respect the legal principle for the Government of Sri Lanka to govern its own territory. Qatar believed it was essential to support the efforts of Sri Lanka to safeguard security for all citizens and to ensure lasting peace while promoting development and progress. Qatar called upon the international community to support Sri Lanka's efforts in the promotion and protection of human rights and to assist it in its efforts for rehabilitation through United Nations agencies and international aid.

LI BAODONG (China) congratulated the Sri Lankan Government for their victory in their war against terrorism. With this, Sri Lanka was now at a new departure point in human rights. Convening this Special Session was highly regrettable. Since the start of the civil war, the Government had taken several measures for the protection and security of civilians. The recent meeting with the United Nations Secretary-General was a demonstration of Sri Lanka's cooperation. The international community should respect the independence and territorial integrity of Sri Lanka and give it assistance and cooperation.

The civil war had now come to an end in Sri Lanka but the Government and the people still faced the challenge of resolving the humanitarian crisis. China had given $ 1 million in cash aid in order to resettle displaced civilians in the north of the country.

GOPINATHAN ACHAMKULANGARE (India) said India had serious reservations about the objectives and usefulness of convening a Special Session of the United Nations Human Rights Council on the human rights situation in Sri Lanka at this time. Sri Lanka had just brought to an end a long and tragic conflict waged by an organization wedded to terrorism and separatism. The international community's over-riding goal and priority in Sri Lanka today needed to be focused on promoting a process of reconciliation and healing, overcoming the consequences of this tragic conflict. Instead, by forcing a Special Session on the Council, some Members had, regrettably, politicised the Council's work. This was an unfortunate development. It would have been sufficient if this discussion had taken place during the eleventh regular session of the Council that was barely a week away.

The activities of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam had, in fact, reinforced the need for the Council to focus its attention on human rights violations by non-State actors, especially terrorist groups. The Council must not be reluctant to hold non-State actors accountable for their human rights violations. What Sri Lanka needed now was international assistance for the serious humanitarian situation of civilians who came out of the conflict areas.

VALERY LOSHCHININ (Russian Federation) welcomed the end of the very long and bloody armed conflict in Sri Lanka and the fact that the Government had now taken back the control of all parts of the country. Russia congratulated Sri Lanka for their victory over separatism and terrorism. The Government was now facing new challenges, above all the rehabilitation of the victims. They noted with satisfaction the work that had been done by the authorities so far. Russia considered that the international community and the United Nations had to provide the Government with the necessary assistance, especially in the area of rehabilitating the internally displaced persons and improving the socio-economic situation in the country. The wounds would take time to heal. The problem of the child soldiers recruited by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam also had to be addressed.

Russia further welcomed the assurances given by the President of Sri Lanka to seek a national solution acceptable to all. Russia expressed the hope that the people and the Government would rapidly overcome the effects of the conflict. This was a victory of the international community as a whole. Russia had not been in favour of calling this Special Session and it was important to show support for the country.

HISHAM BADR (Egypt) welcomed the statement made by the Sri Lankan Minister. His presence here illustrated the Sri Lankan Government's commitment to cooperate with the Council and its mechanisms. Egypt did not understand why the Special Session was being convened. Sri Lanka had battled a conflict for many decades and had faced a conflict raised by terrorists. When the Government forces had been on the brink of winning a victory against the rebels, the international community had exercised pressure on the Government. The international community needed to extend its hand to Sri Lanka to ensure national reconciliation, rehabilitation and reconstruction, not to hold a Special Session. The time had come to note that the conflict was over and it was a time for reconstruction. The Government of Sri Lanka had fulfilled its role in this regard, and needed the international community's support.

MUTAZ FALEH S. HYASSAT (Jordan) said that Sri Lanka's openness and cooperation with the United Nations and humanitarian agencies deserved their appreciation. Jordan also commended Sri Lanka for its cooperation with the Human Rights Council. Particular attention should be given to internally displaced persons in order to alleviate their suffering and help them return to their homes in a speedy manner. Jordan was pleased that Sri Lanka had taken steps to that effect. It was also encouraging to note the ongoing cooperation between the Government and the United Nations Children's Fund with respect to child soldiers that had been recruited by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. The international community should lend its support to Sri Lanka in the post conflict efforts with respect to reconciliation, recovery, reconstruction and socio-economic development.

DANTE MARTINELLI (Switzerland) said Switzerland had joined in favour for the request to convene this Special Session. From the beginning, Switzerland had done all it could to ensure that a dialogue between all the delegations could take place so that the Special Session was held in an inclusive and cooperative atmosphere. The aim was to enable the Council to contribute to improving the situation of victims, in cooperation with Sri Lanka. Open consultations had been held and the draft text had been discussed with all Members with a clear wish for dialogue and moderation. Switzerland was relieved that the armed conflict had come to an end and hoped that the Government of Sri Lanka would adopt policies that would lead to a lasting peace in the country.

During the conflict, the use of force was often indiscriminate and often civilians were used as human shields. Switzerland recalled that it was the primary responsibility for the Government of Sri Lanka to investigate violations of international human rights and international humanitarian law, as well as to oppose impunity. It was now necessary for the Government to establish criminal liability for those who violated international humanitarian law and international human rights law. The issue of internally displaced persons was a complex one. The Government of Sri Lanka needed to collaborate closely with the United Nations and the International Committee of the Red Cross and should raise all restrictions imposed on humanitarian aid agencies. The fundamental rights of internally displaced persons must be protected, such as access to water, health care and food. Child soldiers must also be reintegrated and journalists held in detention centres should be released.

CARLOS PORTALES (Chile) said that Chile had to dissociate itself with the statement made by the Non-Aligned Movement. Chile had joined other countries in calling for this Special Session. This was a very important time for Sri Lanka and all its citizens. Assistance should be given to the displaced. The close relationship between human rights law and international humanitarian law was recognized in the International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights. One of the responsibilities of the Human Rights Council was to respond promptly to human rights emergency situations. The serious humanitarian crisis that the internally displaced persons faced in Sri Lanka had led the Secretary-General to say that he had been saddened by what he had seen. This had required a prompt response by the Council.

The end of the civil war in Sri Lanka raised hopes. But any transition after a conflict period was not easy. Access to the displaced for humanitarian agencies needed to be met. Progress had to be made in re-housing, and the work of rehabilitation, particularly of child soldiers was important. National reconciliation with the full incorporation of minorities was a fundamental task. The statement by the Government of Sri Lankan Government was encouraging. The spirit of the Council had to be one of cooperation with Sri Lanka.

JUAN ANTONIO FERNANDEZ PALACIOS (Cuba) said Cuba fully associated itself with the statement made by the Non-Aligned Movement. Cuba thanked the Minister for Human Rights of Sri Lanka for his statement which illustrated the Government of Sri Lanka's commitment to cooperate with the Human Rights Council. Cuba did not agree with the convening of the Special Session. It was an attempt by certain colonial powers to stigmatize a smaller country. It was hoped that in the future, when dealing with a similar problem, the Human Rights Council would not resort to selectivity as was characteristic with the old Commission on Human Rights. It was surprising to hear the statement by the Independent Expert on extreme poverty who made allegations and these would be called into question.

Cuba was a draft cosponsor of resolution L1 as a gesture of cooperation and openness and Cuba's commitment to the work of the Human Rights Council. It addressed inter alia the issue of internally displaced persons, the rehabilitation of child soldiers, and the achievement of national reconciliation, among other things. Cuba called on Members of the Council to give their unreserved support to resolution draft L1.

MARIA NAZARETH FARANI AZEVEDO (Brazil) said that Brazil was concerned about the human rights situation in Sri Lanka. The days of unilateral values were long gone. The Special Session should be used as a constructive instrument to contribute to the improvement of the situation on the ground. For almost three decades, people in Sri Lanka had been living under internal conflicts, ethnic hostilities and acts of terrorism. Militants of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam had been responsible for some of the most brutal assassinations the world had ever witnessed and had recruited child soldiers. Brazil urged Sri Lanka to investigate and persecute perpetrators. The Government had won the war against terror, but they had yet to conquer peace and Brazil understood that peace depended on the full cooperation of the Sri Lankan Government with the United Nations System and its partners. Firm and unequivocal signs that the Tamil and other minorities would be respected and protected by the State would be a welcome gesture which could certainly contribute to the efforts of national reconstruction.

OTHMAN HASHIM (Malaysia) aligned itself with the statements delivered by Pakistan and Cuba on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference and the Non-Aligned Movement respectively. Malaysia welcomed the end of the long-standing conflict between the Government of Sri Lanka and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, and congratulated the people and Government of Sri Lanka for their perseverance and courage. The Government of Sri Lanka now needed to take the necessary measures to start the healing process by working towards finding a fair and comprehensive political solution which would contribute to lasting peace and stability in the country.

Malaysia viewed the Sri Lankan campaign against terrorism to be an internal, domestic issue and believed that Sri Lanka should be accorded the necessary time and space to deal with its own challenges in the manner which it deemed best. The efforts and resources of the Council should be directed at enhancing and deepening the partnership with Sri Lanka, particularly in the areas of humanitarian relief and assistance. Malaysia had made a modest financial contribution to the humanitarian situation facing the country by dispatching two teams of medial aid workers which were deployed to assist in the internally displaced persons camps in Vavuniya.

PETER GOODERHAM (United Kingdom) said that since January this year, many thousands of civilians had been killed in the intense conflict in northern Sri Lanka. Such loss of life and the ongoing suffering of civilians displaced by the conflict demanded the attention of the Council. The United Kingdom condemned terrorism in all its forms. The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam was a proscribed organisation in the United Kingdom. Its use of human shields had been abhorrent. At the same time, the Sri Lankan Government had a duty under international humanitarian law to prevent civilian casualties and to protect the human rights of all. The United Kingdom welcomed the recent end of fighting but was deeply concerned that the suffering of many civilians continued. It was vital that violations of human rights and international humanitarian law were investigated.

The United Kingdom expressed deep concern about the fate of the large number of civilians that had been displaced by the conflict. Reports of conditions inside the camps were troubling. Adherence to the rule of law and the promotion and protection of a free press were essential foundations for a fair and just society. Progress on police reform, disarmament of militias, prevention of abductions, enforced disappearances and anti-corruption measures were all urgently needed. The United Kingdom further welcomed the commitment of Sri Lanka's President to address the aspirations and grievances of all communities and to work towards a lasting political solution.

ERLINDA F. BASILIO (Philippines) said in recent days, the world had witnessed the conclusion of a long and taxing conflict which had wrought immeasurable damage and suffering on the people and Government of Sri Lanka for decades. At this crucial time of post-conflict reconstruction, rehabilitation and national reconciliation, Sri Lanka needed the support of the international community to reinforce its efforts aimed at addressing the humanitarian needs. In this context, the Philippines shared the doubts of others over the efficacy and timing of this Special Session. Dialogue and cooperation must imbue all the work of the Council, including the convening of the Special Sessions. This was the only way the Council could remain on solid ground.

The Government of Sri Lanka was continuing its efforts and cooperation with the United Nations Children's Fund to rehabilitate and reintegrate former child soldiers. The National Framework for the Integration of Ex-Combatants into Civilian Life, which the Government was formulating with the assistance of the United Nations and other international organizations, would significantly contribute to post-conflict stability and development.

SEBASTIAN ROSALES (Argentina) said that Argentina had co-sponsored the request for this Special Session. Argentina attached great importance to the idea of the main UN human rights body to be capable of responding to urgent human rights situations. Sri Lanka had now entered a new post-conflict era where it had to face challenges. Many persons had very much suffered from the armed conflict. It was important to seek as quickly as possible a political solution. The Human Rights Council had to promote international collaboration. There were currently two draft resolutions and Argentina hoped that both could be merged into a single consensual document.

DIAN TRIANSYAH DJANI (Indonesia) aligned itself with the statements made by Cuba and Pakistan on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement and the Organization of the Islamic Conference respectively. The Special Session on Sri Lanka left many, including Indonesia's delegation, questioning the timing of such a session, noting that the regular session of the Council was starting in a week, and wondering what message it would bring. Nevertheless, one should not lose focus on what was really needed in this Special Session, which was to assist the people of Sri Lanka in time of need. The international community should ensure that the promotion and protection of human rights was well taken care of in the process of strengthening unity and long-lasting peace.

As a sovereign country, Sri Lanka was a multi-party democracy with an elected Government and President discharging their legitimate responsibility to govern the country as mandated by the people. The Sir Lankan Government had proven to the international community that it was committed to resolving the country's internal challenges in a peaceful manner. Sri Lanka was committed to a political solution and had engaged the international community, not only in providing updates on recent developments but also by concretely engaging with United Nations bodies and various humanitarian organizations in providing humanitarian assistance to the affected parties in the internal conflict as shown by its cooperation with the United Nations Under-Secretary for Humanitarian Affairs and of the Representative of the United Nations Secretary-General on the human rights of internally displaced persons, and the recent invitation extended to the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

ANDREJ LOGAR (Slovenia) said that although the decades long war between the Sri Lankan Government and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) was now over, the tremendous result of the conflict and the widespread atrocities against the civilian population of Sri Lanka remained a serious concern. Slovenia, deeply concerned about the grave human rights and humanitarian situation in Sri Lanka, had firmly supported the convening of this Special Session. Slovenia was especially concerned about the situation of the internally displaced persons and individuals the Government might suspect of being members of the LTTE.

Nearly 300,000 civilians, including entire families, were detained in the Government's closed camps in conditions that did not adhere to internationally agreed standards. The monsoon season had arrived and the overcrowding and lack of sufficient sanitation and hygiene facilities could cause serious health problems. For the future of Sri Lanka it was important to assure to the Tamil minority that in the post–conflict Sri Lanka they would enjoy equal rights as other citizens. Further, during the armed conflict, threats against journalists and human rights defenders who had reported critically on the Government's conduct of the war or its treatment of civilians had been a usual practice. The time to stop all forms of harassment, intimidation and threats had come. Slovenia expected the Council to propose the creation of an international commission of inquiry to investigate the violations of international human rights in Sri Lanka and to make recommendations for the improvement of the present situation.

SHINICHI KITAJIMA (Japan) expressed its deepest condolences for the unfortunate loss of many precious lives over the twenty-five years of civil war in Sri Lanka. Japan deplored such loss and sympathized with the great sufferings of the people. In order to realize the national reconciliation essential for post-war rehabilitation, reconstruction and nation building, it was imperative that the Sri Lankan Government took swift and concrete action in keeping with its commitment to the protection of and respect for human rights and to humanitarian principles.

There were many issues that required a quick response to ensure rapid and steady progress in the political process towards national reconciliation, including following proper legal procedures in dealing with the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam personnel who had laid down their arms and surrendered and implementing measures for assistance and resettlement of the large number of internally displaced persons. The assistance and cooperation of the international community would be indispensable to Sri Lanka's rehabilitation and reconstruction process. In the past, Japan had taken part in efforts to benefit the Sri Lankan people, including providing post-tsunami reconstruction assistance and reconstruction assistance to the northern and eastern areas. Japan intended, as a friend of Sri Lanka, to continue to assist with efforts aimed at rapid and steady progress in the political process toward national reconciliation.

JEAN-BAPTISTE MATTEI (France) said that France had supported the calling of this Special Session because thousands of people were in an appalling situation. The end of the conflict had not changed the plight of all the displaced people. The massive population displacement at the end of the conflict had exacerbated the situation. It was vital that the Government gave access to humanitarian organizations. Particular attention needed to be paid to child soldiers and their reintegration into society. France welcomed the will expressed by the Sri Lankan President to fully collaborate with the United Nations Children's Fund on this matter. The defeat of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) was good news. Since the start of the Government's actions, the LTTE had used civilians as human shields. As mentioned by the United Nations anti-terrorist strategy, the fight against terrorism should be conducted in the full respect of human rights and international humanitarian law. This Special Session was particularly important for the civil population and internally displaced persons. It was important that the Government ensured that this military victory became a tangible and lasting political success.

MABEL GOMEZ OLIVER (Mexico) thanked the High Commissioner for her message, the Special Procedures for their statement, and also thanked the Minister of Sri Lanka for his participation. Mexico had joined others in the call for this Special Session because it was convinced of the primary responsibility of the Human Rights Council to act where the human rights of civilian populations were in danger. Mexico welcomed the cessation of hostilities in the northern region of the country, but condemned the serious loss of life, in particular the attacks committed by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam against the civilian population. The Sri Lankan Government's measures taken to strengthen human rights protections in the field were encouraged.

It was recalled that to be effective in fighting terrorism there needed to be a link between the full respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It was hoped that internally displaced persons would be given the necessary guarantees to return to their homes safely and for their reintegration into society, and that respect should be guaranteed for these people in accordance with the United Nations guidelines. Also welcomed were the results of the recent visit by the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Mexico appreciated the positive efforts of openness and cooperation by the Government of Sri Lanka with the Human Rights Council mechanisms. It was hoped that this Special Session would end in consensus to ensure that the promotion and protection of the people of Sri Lanka would be upheld.

MERCY YVONNE AMOAH (Ghana) recalled that the institution-building test of the Council called for a Special Session to be, among others, result-oriented and geared towards achieving practical outcomes. They thus hoped that this session would focus on assistance to the Government and people of that country to rebuild their country and to strengthen their capacity to address their human rights and other challenges with a view to achieving sustainable peace.

Ghana also welcomed the end of the 25-year long war in Sri Lanka. The victory by the Government had to be seen as a victory in combating the use of terrorist acts to achieve one's aims. Ghana also condemned the attacks that had been launched by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam on the civilian population and its practice of using human shields and urged the Government to work to ensure that those on both sides who had perpetrated violations of human rights and international humanitarian law were brought to justice. Ghana applauded the many measures that had already been initiated by the Sri Lankan Government to alleviate the suffering of the internally displaced persons. They also welcomed the Government's commitment to now focus on issues of relief, rehabilitation, resettlements and reconciliation. The international community was called to assist the Government in its post-war reconstruction efforts.

PASQUALE D'AVINO (Italy) aligned itself with the statement delivered by the Czech Republic on behalf of the European Union, and welcomed the convening of this Special Session to deal with the human rights situation in Sri Lanka. Italy expressed its deep concern at the recent escalation of the military conflict in the north of the country, and was particularly struck by the loss of innocent lives among civilians caught in the conflict, including women and children, and strongly condemned the use of civilians as human shields by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. Today, Italy welcomed the end of hostilities; however, the situation on the ground still raised a number of concerns that justified the specific attention devoted to it by the Council.

Italy called on the Government of Sri Lanka to cooperate with the international community, including international and regional organizations, non-governmental organizations and civil society, in order to guarantee and facilitate humanitarian assistance to the victims of the conflict, with particular regard to internally displaced persons. Italy acknowledged the measures taken by the Government of Sri Lanka and the commitment it expressed to this end in the joint statement issued upon the conclusion of the visit of the United Nations Secretary-General to the country. The first step should be to cast light on human rights and humanitarian violations, with special attention to those perpetrated against civilians and vulnerable groups, women and children.

CARLOS ROBELO (Nicaragua) said that Nicaragua endorsed the statement of the Non-Aligned Movement, which represented the majority of the States of the Council. Nicaragua had joined the call for this Special Session but regretted that the process had not been transparent and had been unbalanced. These were unhealthy attitudes for the Council. It seemed that the Council had not learnt the lessons from the past. Today, they wanted to offer all their support to the Government and people of Sri Lanka, so that they could start the reconciliation and rebuilding process. Nicaragua supported draft resolution L.1. The Council should be an instrument of collaboration and dialogue.

ABDULWAHAB ABDULSALAM ATTAR (Saudi Arabia) said the presence of the Minister from Sri Lanka demonstrated the Government's commitment to cooperate with the Council. Saudi Arabia aligned itself with the statements made by Cuba and Pakistan on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement and the Organization of the Islamic Conference respectively. The end of hostilities and the measures towards lasting peace were welcomed. Saudi Arabia commended the visit of the Secretary-General of the United Nations to Sri Lanka and welcomed the joint statement between the United Nations and the Government with respect to internally displaced persons. Saudi Arabia encouraged Sri Lanka to continue its cooperation with the Council and to seek a solution to the issue of internally displaced persons. Sri Lanka was wished every success in its aim to continue to promote and protect human rights in the country towards national reconciliation and a lasting peace.

GLAUDINE J. MTSHALI (South Africa) said that South Africa wished to thank all delegations that had been constructively engaged in brokering a consensus outcome for this Special Session and remained hopeful that consensus might be achieved. South Africa was encouraged by the commitment and efforts of the Government of Sri Lanka to put in place expeditiously its plan aimed at resettling internally displaced persons. South Africa appealed to the international community to assist and support the Sri Lankan Government in its reconstruction efforts.


Further, the Human Rights Council had been envisioned as a rule-based and fair multilateral organization. This vision however was rapidly being eroded by double-standards and inconsistencies that were damaging the integrity of the Council.
_________

For use of the information media; not an official record