Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers – United Nations. Universal Declaration of Human Rights
The UN Human Rights Council is the world’s foremost body for the promotion and protection of human rights around the world. It is made up of 47 member states. They come together to deliberate and take decisions at the three sessions of the HRC that are generally held each year. In the month of March 2019, it was the HRC’s 40th Session so the meeting is referred as “HRC 40”.
The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights is the most senior official within the United Nations system with responsibility for human rights. The wider office which they preside over is known as OHCHR, the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. Their job is to help coordinate the UN’s work with respect to human rights, and to champion human rights globally. The current UN High Commissioner for Human Rights is Michele Bachelet, where he took over from Zeid Ra’ad al Hussein in September 2018. In October 2015, shortly after Sri Lanka’s former President Rajapaksa was ousted from power, the HRC adopted resolution 30/1, which was also on “promoting reconciliation, accountability and human rights in Sri Lanka. It followed the release of a ground-breaking UN report, known as the ÓISL report’ which claims to find credible evidence of alleged atrocities being committed during the final stage of Sri Lanka’s civil war in 2009.
That particular resolution was significant in that it was adopted with the unanimous support of HRC member states, and co-sponsored (i.e. formally supported) by Sri Lanka’s then recently elected national unity government, headed by President Sirisena and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe. It was then Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera, who came forward with the decision. Such a co-sponsorship did lend credibility to then government’s bona fides. The resolution marked a welcome change from earlier attempts by the HRC to engage with Sri Lankan in the aftermath of the civil war – efforts which had previously been rejected by Rajapaksa government and which left HRC members divided.
When it was adopted in October 2015, Resolution 30/1 was envisaged as a kind of blueprint for action by the government of Sri Lanka. It contained a range of specific commitments designed to help improve the human rights situation and to address alleged war crimes, alleged mostly to be conducted by the government forces, and in which both sides are alleged to have committed grave human rights violations.There are about 25 specific pledges in total, covering things like returning military held lands to civilian owners, setting up a mechanism to trace disappeared persons and, crucially, establishing a justice mechanism with international involvement to investigate alleged war crimes. The full range of measures are often referred to under the umbrella label of ‘transitional justice’.
Under these developments, a Fundamental Rights Application was filed in the Supreme Court on 10th of October seeking a directive to the Government to take measures to withdraw from the UNHRC Resolution 30/1. The Petitioner, Truth Seekers Movement (Sathya Gaveshakayo) Convener Attorney-At-Law Premanath C, Dolawatta stated that his Fundamental Rights protected by Article 12(1), 12(2), 13(1) of the Constitution are continuously being violated or caused to be violated by the Government co-sponsoring this Resolution.
The Respondents are Minister of Finance (former Minister of Foreign Affairs) Mangala Samaraweera, Secretary to Minister of Foreign Affairs Ravinath Ariyasinghe and the Attorney General. The Petitioner, further states that by cosponsoring the said resolution, the 1st and/or 2nd Respondents and other delegates who were representing the Government of Sri Lanka at the UNHRC have given an undertaking and/or forwarded proposals to engage in several activities that are inconsistent with the Constitution.
The most serious among these undertakings relates to the establishment of a judicial mechanism with powers to investigate human rights violations and abuses, violation of international humanitarian law. The Petitioner states adding that as long as this remains in force to the Petitioner and every citizen of Sri Lanka would be subject to the jurisdiction of foreign judicial mechanism.