The Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) on Monday said that former Sri Lankan president Mahinda Rajapaksa and his supporters might use, to “their benefit,” the issue of participation of foreign jurists in the proposed judicial mechanism to probe alleged rights violations during the civil war.
“This is why we, in the JVP, are opposed to the involvement of foreigners in any probe on accountability,” General Secretary Tilvin Silva told The Hindu .
He added that the party was not against investigation per se, but this had to be “purely domestic.”
When pointed out that leaders of the Tamil community were against a domestic mechanism on the ground that it was not credible, the JVP leader said this argument was made keeping in mind how the previous Rajapaksa regime “handled” the judiciary.
Now, with the new government “making changes to the judicial system in the country”, it is possible to have a “credible domestic mechanism”.
Questioning the claim made in some quarters that the UN Human Rights Council’s adoption of a consensus resolution was a “diplomatic victory” for Sri Lanka, Mr. Rajapaksa said there were “objectionable operative paragraphs” in the text of the resolution. Sri Lanka has gained “nothing” by joining the US as a co-sponsor of this resolution “except to commit the government to a course of action which runs contrary to the interests of this country and is therefore politically unfeasible”.
Giving instances of such paragraphs, he referred to the provision for the participation of foreign jurists in the judicial mechanism and the clause that leaves “no scope for retention in or recruitment into the security forces of anyone credibly implicated through a fair administrative process in serious crimes”.
Pointing out that the “first duty” of the Sri Lankan government was to make sure the interests of the country’s “war heroes” were looked after, the former president argued that the paragraphs “run directly contrary to that sacred duty”.
