Former Sri Lanka’s Foreign Secretary and former Head of UN Treaty Section, Dr. Palitha Kohona told the Sunday Observer, “First and foremost, the co-sponsorship of HRC Resolution 30/1 in 2015 was ill considered, divisive domestically and was inimical to the national interest.”
Sri Lanka voluntarily slung a mill stone around its own neck and has been engaged in a process of self flagellation since it was not only the government of the day that voluntarily agreed to carry this heavy cross but it also bound future governments and the State through it voluntary capitulation. He said Resolution 30/1 was co-sponsored by a deluded foreign minister. In any other country he would have had to face the courts for an act of treason.
The former Head Treaty section said the government will need to convince the European and US sponsors of Res 30/1 that it cannot give effect to the commitments whimsically undertaken in 2015 due to the reasons explained by the Foreign Minister in Parliament and hope that they will lend a sympathetic ear.
“The signs, however, are not propitious as these governments have consistently pressured Sri Lanka to implement the obligations that it undertook voluntary,” he said, adding the UN Rights High Commissioner, in her most recent report, has not minced her words in urging, Sri Lanka to give effect to its commitments and her office appears to cling to the notion that this would herald an era of peace, reconciliation and tranquility to the country. Dr. Kohona observed that the process of talking to interested Western decision makers, including the EU, and the High Commissioner should have started much earlier.
“While the government has quite rightly expressed its desire to continue to work with the High Commissioner’s office on human rights issues, which in any case are dear to right thinking people, its sincerity and credibility will face serious challenges due to the pressures exerted by an angry Tamil expatriate community and sceptical NGOs.” “Even Sri Lanka’s traditional NAM support base may make a major effort to re-mobilise following the disenchantment that was visible from 2015.” “While the government decision to step back from Res 30/1 may sound joyful to elements of the domestic electorate (many of whom are beginning to be distracted and jaded by other pressing issues, including economic), a gulf exists in the area of conveying the government message to the world. Much work needs to be done to bridge this chasm in perceptions,” he said.