Discussion paper – LLRC Report and Situation in Tamil Eelam (Sri Lanka)

Lesson Learnt and Reconciliation Commission Report and

Worldwide Reactions

Structural Genocide Occurring in

North East Sri Lanka (Tamil Eelam)

Should International Community Act Now?

Analysis Submitted to Mr Nick Champion MP

Chair, Foreign Affairs Sub-committee
Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade

South Australian Chapter

Australian Tamil Congress
P O Box 6136, Linden Tamil Park, SA 5065

19 January 2012

1
Discussion paper – LLRC Report and Situation in Tamil Eelam (Sri Lanka)

1. Introduction
The focus is to analyse and examine the content of two reports publicly released; the first one by the
United Nation Secretary General on 31 March 2011 and the second one by the President of Sri Lanka
on 16 December 2011; both reports examined the military conflict which took place between the
armed forces of Government of Sri Lanka (GSL) and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE),
which ended on 18 May 2009. In addition the publications and relevant materials of other
International organizations, with respect to the conflict in Sri Lanka are also considered to emphasize
the necessity to find the truth about alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity; this possibly will
lead to a peaceful resolution of this prolonging conflict in Sri Lanka of over six decades with the
support of the International community. Beside what happened up to the end of conflict, current
situations are discussed as reported by elected representatives of Tamil Eelam in Sri Lanka and
Human rights organizations, which puts the onus on the International Community to act urgently to
prevent the structural genocide of Tamil Eelam occurring in Sri Lanka.

President of Sri Lanka and United Nation Secretary General (UNSG) at the conclusion of UNSG’s
visit to Sri Lanka on 23 March 2009 issued a Joint Statement which "underlined the importance of
an accountability process" and the Government of Sri Lanka agreed that it “will take measures to
address those grievances". Following that declaration, two bodies were set up to report back as to
what happened during the last stages of the military conflict to promote reconciliation between the
two communities.

President of Sri Lanka Mahinda Rajapaksa after procrastinating for about a year and due to mounting
pressure from world leaders for an independent investigation, Lesson Learnt and Reconciliation
Commission (LLRC) was set-up on May 2010 with eight members; most of them are former senior
government representatives contrary to expectation from International community to have more
independent civil society members in the commission.

1.1 Terms of Reference of LLRC

"To inquire and report on the following matters that may have taken place during the period
between 21st February, 2002 and 19th May, 2009, namely:
• The facts and circumstances which led to the failure of the ceasefire agreement
operationalized on 21st February, 2002 and the sequence of events that followed thereafter up
to the 19th of May, 2009.
• Whether any person, group or institution directly or indirectly bear responsibility in this
regard;
• The lessons we would learn from those events and their attendant concern, in order to ensure
that there will be no recurrence;
• The methodology whereby restitution to any person affected by those events or their
dependants or their heirs, can be affected;
• The institutional administrative and legislative measures which need to be taken in order or
prevent any recurrence of such concerns in the future, and to promote further national unity
and the reconciliation among all communities, and to make any such other recommendations
with reference to any of the matters that have been inquired into under the terms of the
Warrant."

The LLRC’s tenure was extended twice each time by six months; during this time LLRC handed
over an Interim Recommendation for implementation on 13 September 2010, which has neither
been released nor implemented. The final LLRC report1 was released after nearly Thirty
Months since the end of the conflict and eighteen months after the setting up of LLRC.

1
http://groundviews.org/2011/12/16/the-official-report-of-the-llrc/

2
Discussion paper – LLRC Report and Situation in Tamil Eelam (Sri Lanka)

1.2 Terms of Reference of UNSG’s Panel of Experts (PoE)

United Nation Secretary General (UNSG) Mr Ban Ki Moon appointed UNSG’s Panel of Experts
on 22 June 2010. The Panel was Mr Marzuki Darusman (Indonesia) as Chair; Mr Steven Ratner
(United States) and Ms Yasmin Sooka (South Africa), as members. The Panel formally
commenced its work on 16 September 2010 and was assisted throughout by a secretariat. The
Panel's mandate is to advise the Secretary- General regarding the modalities, applicable
international standards and comparative experience relevant to an accountability process, having
regard to the nature and scope of alleged violations of international humanitarian and human rights
law during the final stages of the armed conflict in Sri Lanka.

PoE was not granted permission by GSL to visit Sri Lanka and gather information, against many odds
the report was completed and handed over to UNSG on 31 March 2011. UNSG immediately sent a
copy of the report to GSL requesting GSL’s views and made the report public.

2. UNSG’s Panel of Experts Report (PoER)2

The Panel report was prepared based on data and information gathered from victims who escaped
from the conflict zone, provided by International organizations which independently collated data
during the conflict and the panel using its own resources. Channel 4 “Sri Lanka’s Killing Fields” 3
which was shown worldwide after the Expert panel report was released, which further reinforced the
conclusions drawn by PoE. Most of the countries welcomed the report and called upon GSL to
respond and endorsed there is a greater need for Independent International Inquiry to find the truth.
President Rajapaksa anointed LLRC, as the body that will answer to the alleged war crimes and
crimes against humanity. GSL refused to consider or investigate the content of the PoE report and
refused to accept the report as that of UN, but referred to it as “Darusman” report (named after
UNSG’s Expert panel chairman). GSL and the Sri Lanka media conducted a hostile propaganda in
the local media against the report led by the Defence Secretary and closely followed by Foreign
Minister of Sri Lanka; at the same time branded Channel 4 presentation as a ”total fabrication”.

The PoE determination reveals a very different version of the final stages of the war than what was
maintained to be and portrayed by GSL to this day. In stark contrast, the PoE found credible
allegations, which if proven indicate that a wide range of serious violations of international
humanitarian law and international human rights law were committed both by GSL and LTTE, some
of which would amount to war crimes and crimes against humanity. Indeed the conduct of the war
represented a grave assault on the entire regime of international law designed to protect individual
dignity during both war and peace. The report claimed up to 40,000 people have been killed in the last
stages of the war which ended on 18 May 2009. The executive summary of the report has four main
recommendations and each recommendation having a few parts, a summary is as follows:

2.1 Investigations
A. GSL comply with International obligations, initiate accountability process and commence
genuine investigation.
B. UNSG should establish independent international mechanism: to monitor GSL’s domestic
accountability process, Investigate independently into alleged violations, collect and
safeguard all information for future use.

2.2 Other immediate measures to advance accountability

A. Implement following short term measures: end violence and by other groups, recovery and
return of remains, issue death certificates without compromising future investigations,
psychosocial support for all survivors, return all displaced persons to former homes and
provide regular relief.

2
UNSG’s Expert Panel Report: http://www.un.org/News/dh/infocus/Sri_Lanka/POE_Report_Full.pdf
3
Channel 4 “Sri Lanka’s Killing Fields” http://srilanka.channel4.com/index.shtml

3
Discussion paper – LLRC Report and Situation in Tamil Eelam (Sri Lanka)

B. GSL should account for displaced people, and allow Working Group on Enforced and
Involuntary Disappearances to visit Sri Lanka.
C. In light of political situation, GSL repeal Emergency Regulations and modify all those
provisions of the Prevention of Terrorism Act that are inconsistent with international
obligations, publish names of all detainees, regular access to family of detainees, grant legal
rights to challenge the detention and
D. GoSL should end state of violence by the state and other practices which prevent freedom of
movement, assembly and expression.

2.3 Longer term accountability measures

While the current climate is not conducive to an honest examination of the past, in the longer term,
as political spaces are allowed to open, the following measures are needed to move towards full
accountability for actions taken during the war:
A. Sri Lanka should initiate a process, with strong civil society participation, to examine in a
critical manner: the root causes of the conflict, including ethno-nationalist extremism on both
sides; the conduct of the war and patterns of violations: and the corresponding institutional
responsibilities.
B. GSL should issue a public, formal acknowledgment of its role in and responsibility for
extensive civilian casualties in the final stages of the war.
C. The Government of Sri Lanka should institute a reparations programme, in accordance with
international standards for all victims of serious violations committed during the final stages of
the war, with special attention to women, children and particularly vulnerable groups.

2.4 United Nation:

A. The Human Rights Council should be invited to reconsider its May 2009 Special Session
Resolution (AlHRC/S-IIIL.IlRev. 2) regarding Sri Lanka in light of this report.
B. UN Secretary-General should conduct a comprehensive review of actions by United Nations
system during the war in Sri Lanka and the aftermath regarding the implementation of its
humanitarian and protection mandates.

3. LLRC Report vis-à-vis Accountability Process in Sri Lanka

The release of LLRC report by GSL was welcomed by World leaders, but the past records of
successive GSL do not augur favourably for implementation of LLRC report and follow up action to
address accountability, as agreed between President of Sri Lanka and UN Secretary General. A review
of number of Commissions of Inquiry (CoI) set-up in Sri Lanka over the past three decades, starting
with Sansoni Commission in 1977 to Udalagama commission in 2007, established to respond to
repeated pogroms against Tamils, allegations of gross human rights violations in the form of enforced
disappearances and extra-judicial, arbitrary or summary executions, have illustrated the failure of all
three branches of the state – the executive, legislature, and judiciary in guaranteeing remedies and
reparations for victims of human rights violations, as reported in International Commission of
Jurists publication4. In almost every case neither legal remedy nor financial compensation was given
to the victims of crimes.

It is pertinent to look at working of CoI set-up by President Rajapaksa after he came to power in
November 2005 with a slimmest of a majority in a Presidential election with tacit support of LTTE,
because alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity happened under his regime, as commander –
in- chief of armed forces. Following the election, serious violations of human rights took place in the
year 2006; amidst mounting local and international pressure, an eight member CoI headed by Justice
Udalagama was appointed in November 2007 to investigate 16 most serious violations of human
rights. The CoI was subjected to the scrutiny of ‘International Independent Group of Eminent
Persons’ (IIGEP) selected from democratic countries to observe the proceedings of the public inquiry

4
ICJ - Post War Justice in Sri Lanka – Rule of Law, the criminal system and commissions of Inquiry:
http://www.icj.org/IMG/Sri_Lanka_COI_18.01.09-2.pdf

4
Discussion paper – LLRC Report and Situation in Tamil Eelam (Sri Lanka)

because International community did not have much faith in the accountability process in Sri Lanka.
After attending for a period, IIGEP was dissatisfied with CoI on number of key issues: including
witness and victims’ protection, involvement of Attorney General’s office (conflict of interest –
current Chairman of LLRC), lack of transparency and timeliness of proceedings and withdrew as a
monitoring body. The CoI appointed by President Mahinda Rajapaksa expired on June 14, 2009 as its
term of office was not extended; CoI completed investigations into seven cases and reports were
finalized on five cases and the Commission recommended compensation to be paid by the state to the
next of kin of the victims of human rights violations5. All the recommendations by Justice Udalagama
remain unfulfilled; fate of this CoI is not different to what happened to all other CoI in Sri Lanka, in
the past. GSL due to pressure from other governments and human right organizations introduced a
Witness Protection Bill to the Sri Lanka Parliament, after the Second Reading had taken place but for
some mysterious reason that Witness Protection Bill was abandoned. LLRC has to conduct the
investigation being handicapped by the absence of this protection for witnesses, which would have put
off many with different understanding

3.1 Investigative Process of LLRC

LLRC conducted open and public hearing and considered both written and oral presentations. It is
said more than 950 testified in person before the commission, while nearly 5,000 submitted
written statements. Unfortunately, the failure of the GSL to put the Witness Protection Bill6 in
the statute made it difficult to get more balanced input of evidence which led to conclusions by
LLRC about LTTE and GSL Armed Forces, which were contradictory to that made by PoE.
LLRC conducted its work with primary source of information from the general public of Sri
Lanka, organizations, civil society groups who came forward to give evidence and other materials
selectively. As far as military operations are concerned, LLRC mostly made their conclusions
solely based on armed forces evidence, which is a major participant in this conflict. Some
journalists called Sri Lanka’s final battle with the Tigers a “war without witnesses” because UN
and other NGO were asked to withdraw from the conflict zone months before the government
defeated the Tigers. Only handpicked reporters, mostly from state media, were allowed to embed
with troops and most of the videos available about the conflict did not form neither part of the
evaluation process nor in the final conclusions made by LLRC.

Reaction of GSL to PoER and the stand taken by President Rajapaksa at the CHOGM held at
Perth in October 2011, made the International community to expect that the LLRC report will
respond to the conclusions drawn by PoE, as given above in sections 2.1 to 2.4. International
Human rights organizations were unanimous in rejecting the LLRC report and LLRC findings as
failing to meet the international standards; media was forthright in pointing out the shortcomings
as a response to PoER. Considering that this is the first time that the GoSL has released a
document publicly, some of the governments welcomed the publication of the report and called for
implementation of recommendations of LLRC, also stressed the importance of establishing an
internationally acceptable accountability process which was the main thrust of the PoER.

3.2 Conclusions and Recommendations of LLRC

Unfortunately, the LLRC failed to follow and address areas identified in the PoE Report which
would have been welcomed and countered alleged charges of war crimes and crimes against
humanity, but considering the terms of references of both UNSG Panel of Experts and LLRC are
different such outcome was not expected. Some of the key points relevant to the final stages of
the conflict are given below directly quoting, as given in the LLRC report.

3.2.1 Cease Fire Agreement (CFA) (February 2002 to January 2008)

5
Permanent Commission recommended for serious rights violations in SL
http://southasiaspeaks.wordpress.com/2009/06/23/permanent-commission-recommended-for-serious-rights-
violations-in-sl/
6
Without Witness and Victim Protection, No Hope for Justice in Sri Lanka
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rebecca-buckwalterpoza/without-witness-and-victi_b_811446.html

5
Discussion paper – LLRC Report and Situation in Tamil Eelam (Sri Lanka)

“CFA brought about a short lived respite to a country and people who had suffered decades of
terrorism and counter violence. However unstable and eventually unproductive, the CFA gave an
opportunity, albeit without necessarily providing a sound political or security framework, for all
parties concerned to make an effort to lay a foundation for a process leading to a negotiated
solution. However, as the events unfolded it was clear that none of this materialized”

3.2.2 Overview of Security Forces Operations

“The material contained in this chapter is based on comprehensive briefings received by the
Commission from Senior Defence Officials and Senior Military Officials, in addition to the
representations received during Public Hearings from Defence and Senior Military Officials as
well as from Senior Public Officials who had served in the conflict affected areas and members of
the Public. Dates are approximate”

3.2.3 Security Forces Casualties and LTTE Casualties

According to the material placed before the Commission, from July 2006 to May 2009, “the
Security Forces had lost 5,556 personnel in action, 28,414 were wounded and 169 were missing in
action. The LTTE had lost 22,247 cadres of which 11,812 had been identified by name”.

3.2.4 International Humanitarian Law (IHL)

LLRC devoted more than quarter of the report to look into the IHL and concurred with PoER
views on LTTE, but dismissed any conclusions drawn about GSL armed forces. LLRC said: “In
evaluating the Sri Lanka experience in the context of allegations of violations of IHL, the
Commission is satisfied that the military strategy that was adopted to secure the operation LTTE
held areas was one that was carefully conceived, in which the protection of the civilian population
was given the highest priority”. This is in complete contrast to PoE Report that 40,000 civilians
may have been killed.

3.2.5 Comments on the Channel 4 Sri Lanka’s Killing Fields

LLRC recommends that the “Government initiate an independent investigation into this matter to
establish the truth or otherwise of the allegations arising from the video footage. The Commission
considers this course of action as necessary and urgent for two reasons” commission said “the
footage reflects evidence of real incident of summary execution of persons in captivity and of
possible rape victims, it would be necessary to investigate and prosecute offenders as these are
clearly illegal acts; if on the other hand footage is artificially constructed or the incidents are
staged as contended by several experts, the issue becomes even more serious and the need to
establish facts of this case, equally compelling.”

3.2.6 Abduction, Disappearances and Arbitrary Detention

During the public sittings and its field visits, including to the conflict-affected areas, the
Commission was alarmed by a large number of representations made alleging abductions,
enforced or involuntary disappearances, and arbitrary detention. In many instances, it was
revealed that formal complaints have been made to police stations, the Human Rights
Commission of Sri Lanka and the ICRC. In some cases, submissions had also been made to the
previous Commissions of investigation. Yet, the next of kin continue to complain that the
whereabouts of many of those missing persons are still unknown. The Government therefore is
duty bound to direct the law enforcement authorities to take immediate steps to ensure that these
allegations are properly investigated into and perpetrators brought to justice.

3.2.7 Key Statement by Commissioners

“The Commission hopes that its observations and recommendations would provide pointers to
areas where such decisions are needed, sooner rather than later. These areas include governance,
devolution, human rights, international humanitarian law, socio economic development,
livelihood issues, issues affecting hearts and minds, leadership issues and many more.”

6
Discussion paper – LLRC Report and Situation in Tamil Eelam (Sri Lanka)

3.3 White flag incident and Independence of Judiciary

What has come to be known as the ‘white flag incident’, in which all unarmed civilian leaders of
LTTE were gunned down in what observers say would be tantamount to a war crime. Sri Lankan
opposition presidential candidate and victorious chief of the Sri Lankan Army against the LTTE,
Sarath Fonseka was charged in the Supreme Court; claiming in an interview that “there was a
direct order from Defence secretary, Gotabhaya Rajapaksa, to shoot dead the entire leadership of
the Tamil Tigers”. In a split decision of three member court, Sarath Fonseka was sentenced to
three years rigorous imprisonment against independent evidence provided by others. This casts
doubts about the Independence of the judicial process in Sri Lanka, which was raised earlier too.

3.3.1 Pawns of Peace: Evaluation of Norwegian peace efforts in Sri Lanka, 1997-20097
Recently released a report [page 68] gives an insight into what happened in ‘white flag incident’
which took place in the penultimate days of the conflict in Sri Lanka, “In the night between 17
and 18 May, Nadesan (head of the LTTE Political Wing) and Pulidevan (head of the LTTE Peace
Secretariat) contacted the Norwegians as well as the UK and US embassy, the ICRC, and Chandra
Nehru (a Tamil politician in Colombo) indicating their last-minute willingness to surrender.
Following hasty negotiations with presidential advisor and his brother Basil Rajapaksa, they are
told to walk across the frontline with a white flag. The last phone conversation is held shortly
before their departure. Hours later they are reported shot.”

3.3.2 War without witnesses Report8

According to the above report Sri Lanka President Mahinda Rajapaksa, in May 2009, told Vijay
Nambiar, Chief of Staff of UNSG and surrendering Tamil Tigers that they would be safe to cross
no-man land if they hoisted a white flag. “Just walk across to the troops, slowly! With a white flag
and comply with instructions carefully. The soldiers are nervous about suicide bombers,” said a
text from foreign secretary Palitha Kohona (former DFAT official) sent via the Red Cross.

None of the satellite photographic evidence of damages to hospitals in “No Fire Zones” defined by
GSL, artillery firing positions and directions of firing given in given in PoE Report (pages 187 -196),
resulting death of civilians and damages to infrastructures have been examined by LLRC. It is
surprising that deaths among Armed forces and LTTE personnel have been accounted for, but not of
any civilians by the LLRC. Death of civilian runs into tens of thousands as reported by others.

Taking note that the LLRC Chairman played an adverse role, as attorney general, in the Udalagama
commission inquiry casts more doubts about the Independence of the process pursued by LLRC to
meet international standards as pointed by others. The available video evidence confirmed that LLTE
civilian leaders were killed, similarly many unarmed civilians too were mercilessly gunned down and
the judgement in the ‘white flag incident’ court case expose the inadequacy of Sri Lanka judiciary.

Above conclusions show that important events which occurred during the conflict have been omitted
by LLRC and failed to meet the expectation of the International community contrary to a number of
promises made by the GSL and President Rajapaksa. The failure could be attributed to terms of
reference given to LLRC, but LLRC failed to investigate very critical conclusions pointed out in PoE
Report and by other International Human rights Organizations. The incomplete outcomes of LLRC
give an impression that the exercise has been conducted to white wash alleged war crimes and crimes
against humanity.

4. LLRC Report Falls Short on Justice to Victims

7
Pawns of Peace: Evaluation of Norwegian peace efforts in Sri Lanka, 1997-2009
http://www.norad.no/en/tools-and publications/publications/evaluations/publication?key=386346
8
Vijay Nambiar facing calls for ICC investigation, War Without Witnesses in Sri Lanka
http://warwithoutwitness.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=313:nambiar-facing-calls-for-
icc-investigation&catid=1:latest-news

7
Discussion paper – LLRC Report and Situation in Tamil Eelam (Sri Lanka)

After LLRC was established, invitations were sent to Amnesty International (AI), Human Rights
watch (HRW) and International Crisis Group (ICG) to appear before the commission; on 14 October
2010 they wrote a joint letter in which they said that they would welcome an opportunity to appear
before a genuine, credible effort to pursue political reconciliation and accountability in Sri Lanka, but
that the Commission does not meet minimum international standards for commissions of inquiry9.

4.1 Human Rights Organizations

They pointed out that LLRC lacks credibility in four main areas: Inadequate mandate, Lack of
independence, Lack of witness protection and past commissions’ failures. Joint letter says
“Nothing in the LLRC’s mandate requires it to investigate the many credible allegations that both
the government security forces and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) committed
serious violations of international humanitarian and human rights law during the civil war,
especially in the final months, including summary executions, torture, attacks on civilians and
civilian objects, and other war crimes. The need to investigate them thoroughly and impartially is
especially urgent given the government’s efforts to promote its methods of warfare abroad as
being protective of the civilian population, when the facts demonstrate otherwise”. Also, serious
allegations have been made against the members of the LLRC in the letter by Amnesty
International (AI), Human Rights Watch (HRW) and International Crisis Group (ICG); it is hard
to believe that the expectation of the International community can be met by the anticipated LLRC
report. The following quotations from the letter are further prove that GoSL will not undertake any
serious investigation regarding the allegation given in the UNSG’s Expert panel report or into the
Sri Lanka’s Killing Fields.

The letter pointed out “both the chairman C.R. de Silva and a member H.M.G.S. Palihakkara were
senior government representatives during the final year of the war. They publicly defended the
conduct of the government and military against allegations of war crimes. Indeed during two
widely reported incidents – the shelling of the first “no-fire zone” declared by the government in
late January and the shelling of Puthukkudiyiruppu (PTK) hospital in February – H.M.G.S.
Palihakkara, then Sri Lanka’s representative to the UN, told CNN that government forces had
confirmed that even though the LTTE was firing out from the “no-fire zone”, the government was
not returning fire; and that the military had confirmed they knew the coordinates of PTK hospital
and they had not fired on it.” PoE report satellite photographic evidence tells a different story.

The first CoI appointed by President Rajapaksa under Justice Udalagama and the role played by
C.R. de Silva as Attorney general was well known, the joint letter points to “evidence that as
Attorney general, C.R. de Silva actively undermined the independence of the Udalagama
Presidential Commission of Inquiry (that was tasked with investigating allegations of serious
human rights violations by the security forces. Mr. de Silva’s conflicts of interest were repeatedly
criticized by the International Independent Group of Eminent Persons (IIGEP), which had been
invited by the President to scrutinize the Commission’s work. The members of the IIGEP resigned
in April 2008 and cited Mr. de Silva’s conflicts of interest as a major reason for doing so. Most
other members of the LLRC have some history of working for the Sri Lankan government. None is
known for taking independent political positions, and many have publicly declared their allegiance
to the President and government.

Having observed the functioning of the commission over two years AI released a report10 saying
GSL’s inquiry into the country's civil war is fundamentally flawed and provides no accountability
for atrocities committed during the conflict. The report, When will they get justice? Expose the

9
Joint letter to LLRC outlining the decision not to testify before the flawed commission by
Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and International Crisis Group
http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2010/10/13/joint-letter-llrc
10
Amnesty International – Sri Lanka: Inquiry into armed conflict fundamentally flawed
http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/report/sri-lanka-inquiry-armed-conflict-fundamentally-flawed-
2011-09-07

8
Discussion paper – LLRC Report and Situation in Tamil Eelam (Sri Lanka)

shortcomings of the inquiry conducted by LLRC. These include its failure to properly pursue
allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity levelled against both government forces
and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). GSL for almost two years used the LLRC as its
trump card in lobbying against an independent international investigation. Officials described it as
a credible accountability mechanism, able to deliver justice and promote reconciliation. In reality
it's flawed at every level: in mandate, composition and practice," said Amnesty International's
Asia Pacific Director, Sam Zarifi.

4.2 UNSG’s Panel of Experts Comment

It made an observation in their report published on 31 March 2011: “In sum, the LLRC is deeply
flawed, does not meet international standards for an effective accountability mechanism and,
therefore, does not and cannot satisfy the joint commitment of the President of Sri Lanka and the
Secretary General to an accountability process”.

4.3 AI, HRW and ICG Comments after LLRC Report was Released
There are many International organizations who expressed their views, as the three premiere
organizations which were invited by the LLRC to appear before them to give a submission
because they have continuously presented reports during the conflict as well as after the conflict;
their views about the LLRC report are given here.

4.3.1 Amnesty International - Sri Lanka Falls Short11

“A preliminary review of the report suggests that it acknowledges the very serious human rights
problems in Sri Lanka. But where it appears to really falter is in ignoring the serious evidence of
war crimes, crimes against humanity and other violations of the laws of war by government
forces, even though the report highlights the serious and systematic violations committed by the
LTTE,” said Sam Zarifi, Amnesty International’s Asia-Pacific director.

“There is a clear sign of the bias we had feared and already detected in the LLRC’s composition
and conduct. It does however offer some interesting recommendations about how to improve the
overall human rights situation in Sri Lanka that the government needs to take seriously,” said Sam
Zarifi, “The Sri Lankan government must now address the findings included in this report. It
should report to the UN Human Rights Council at its next session in March 2012 on its measures
to implement the report’s recommendations, including the need for further investigation of
alleged violations of the laws of war, taking account of the findings and recommendations of the
report of the UN Secretary-General’s Panel of Experts on Accountability in Sri Lanka.”

4.3.2 HRW – Sri Lanka’s Report Fails to Advance Accountability12

HRW commenting on the LLRC report says that LLRC “disregards the worst abuses by
government forces, rehashes longstanding recommendations, and fails to advance accountability
for victims of Sri Lanka’s civil armed conflict, Human Rights Watch said today. The serious
shortcomings of the 388-page report, which was posted on a government website on December
16, 2011, highlight the need for an international investigative mechanism into the conflict as
recommended by the United Nations Secretary-General’s Panel of Experts in April”.

“Governments and UN bodies have held back for the past 18 months to allow the Sri Lankan
commission to make progress on accountability,” said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human
Rights Watch. “The commission’s failure to provide a road map for investigating and prosecuting
wartime perpetrators shows the dire need for an independent, international commission.”

4.3.3 ICG - Statement on Sri Lanka’s LLRC Report13

11
Sri Lanka’s Report Falls Short http://www.amnesty.org.au/news/comments/27467/
12
http://www.hrw.org/news/2011/12/16/sri-lanka-report-fails-advance-accountability
13
http://www.crisisgroup.org/en/publication-type/media-releases/2011/asia/statement-on-the-report-of-sri-
lanka-s-lessons-learnt-and-reconciliation-commission.aspx

9
Discussion paper – LLRC Report and Situation in Tamil Eelam (Sri Lanka)

The report acknowledges important events and grievances that have contributed to decades of
political violence and civil war in Sri Lanka and makes sensible recommendations on governance,
land issues and the need for a political solution. But it fails in a crucial task – providing the
thorough and independent investigation of alleged violations of international humanitarian and
human rights law that the UN and other partners of Sri Lanka have been asking for. It is now
incumbent on the international community, through the UN Human Rights Council, to establish
an independent international investigation in 2012. Without such an investigation, accountability
for the crimes committed at the end of the civil war is highly unlikely; without accountability, and
a full understanding of the nature of the violations which took place on all sides, the seeds of
future conflict will grow.

4.4 Report Submitted to US Congress14

This is the result of Congress directing the Secretary of State to submit a report “detailing
incidents during the recent conflict in Sri Lanka that may constitute violations of international
humanitarian law or crimes against humanity, and, to the extent practicable, identifying the parties
responsible”, which occurred during the final stages of the conflict between GSL armed forces
and LTTE. The major topics covered are: children in armed conflict, harm to civilians and civilian
objects, killing of captives or combatants seeking to surrender, disappearances and humanitarian
conditions.

GSL repeatedly denied shelling of civilians and hospitals, the report alleges that the majority of
shelling of No Fire Zone (NFZ) was by the GSL forces; also armed forces shelled the NFZ before the
end of 48 hours cease fire and LTTE prevented the IDPs escaping. The comparison of allegations in
this report with that in the PoER and others from International Humanitarian Organizations show
everyone except LLRC reached the same conclusions, as to the topics identified in this report.

5. Situation in North East Sri Lanka (Tamil Eelam)

One of the terms of reference given to LLRC is to report on possible “methodology whereby
restitution to any person affected by those events or their dependants or their heirs, can be affected”;
to carry out this successfully, knowing the prevailing conditions under which most victims of the
conflict are living in North East Sri Lanka is critical. The military victory over LTTE resulted in
incarceration of about 282,380 in camps as updated by UN and death of about 40,000 people as given
in the UNSG’s Expert Panel report. Most of the people have moved out of these camps, but have not
resumed their normal livelihood which existed prior to the conflict which ended on 18 May 2009.
Bishop of Mannar in his submission to LLRC15 raised the question 146,679 people missing, which
is the discrepancy between the number of people who came to government controlled areas between
October 2008 – May 2009 and the population reported to be in Vanni in early October 2008. Having
these facts in mind, it is important to look at the current situation in the conflict zone and how the
people are living, two and a half years since the end of conflict.

5.1 International Crisis Group (ICG)

ICG under the title “Sri Lanka: Post-War Progress Report”16 updated on 13 September 2011
gives a detailed analysis and put it as “claim” what is said by GoSL and ICG assessment as
“reality”. Most of what GoSL “claim” is position already known to everyone and ICG
observations are given in more detail and are summarized under different subtitles as follows:

5.1.1 State of Emergency and Anti Terrorism Laws

14
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/131025.pdf - Report to Congress on Incidents During the
Recent Conflict in Sri Lanka 2009
15
LLRC: Submission by the Catholic Diocese of Mannar, Rt. Rev. Dr. Rayappu Joseph, Rev. Fr. Victor Sosai, Rev. Fr.
Xavier Croos http://www.srilankaguardian.org/2011/01/llrc-submission-by-catholic-diocese-of.html
16
Sri Lanka: Post-War Progress Report - International Crisis Group
http://www.crisisgroup.org/en/key-issues/sri-lanka-post-war-progress-report.aspx

10
Discussion paper – LLRC Report and Situation in Tamil Eelam (Sri Lanka)

Claim: Emergency regulations (ER) promulgated under Public Security Ordinance No.25 of 1947
(as amended) lapsed on 31 August 2011.
Reality: Instead of reverting to ordinary law all the repressive clauses in ER are being
incorporated into Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) no. 48 of 1970, which includes retention of
high security zones, indefinite detention without charges or legal counsel, etc.

5.1.2 Militarization and Insecurity

Claim: a “comprehensive program of socio economic development in the former theatre of
conflict”. Reality: “The actual security situation for the minority is much more precarious. There
is deep distrust of the police and army”.

5.1.3 Resettlement of Internally Displaced Persons

Claim: At the end of conflict nearly 300,000 Tamil IDPs held in camps, President Rajapaksa told
parliament on 25 August 2011 that “we have now resettled all but 8,000 in their former places of
living”.
Reality: This is not true. As of 31 July over 60,000 of those “resettled” IDPs were still in
temporary settings, living with host communities or in transit situations. Returnees to their home,
many still rely on food assistance from international donors and most are living in makeshift
shelters. GoSL and the military control all humanitarian and development activities in the
formerly LTTE-held areas and continue to restrict the activities of local and international
humanitarian groups.

5.1.4 Rehabilitation and reintegration of ex-combatants

Claim: “For well over a year, the government has been promoting as a “success” its
“rehabilitation” and “reintegration” of the thousands of suspected LTTE cadres detained at the
end of the war in 2009. As of 7 September 2011, it claimed that nearly 8,000 had been released
while another 3,000 were still in “rehabilitation centres”
Reality: “There is plenty of reason to doubt that these efforts have effectively “neutralised”
former combatants, promoted reconciliation or reduced the risk of a new outbreak of violence”.
(a) Individuals detained for rehabilitation without access to counsel or basic rights such as habeas
corpus, and many for longer than allowed under ER. (b) No independent procedure is in place to
determine whether those detained and later “reintegrated” have any history of perpetrating human
rights abuses or are in fact ex-combatants. (c) Released many former detainees are regularly re-
arrested, harassed or forced to act as informants by the military; no system of independent
monitoring of their treatment or protection. (d) Thousands of individuals have been missing since
the war’s end, with many last seen in military custody – as numerous eyewitnesses have testified
to the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC). Additional independent
information can be found on treatment of ex-combatant elsewhere 17

5.1.5 Political settlement on devolution and minority rights

Claim: The president and other senior government officials have frequently expressed their
commitment to finding a political solution to the ethnic conflict through negotiations with Tamil
and other minority political representatives.
Reality: Numerous statements and actions cast doubt on the Sri Lankan government’s
commitment to serious negotiations designed to devolve power to the North East Sri Lanka. (a)
Defence secretary, president’s brother, who has de-facto veto power over any government policies
relating to security issues, announced that “The existing constitution is more than enough for us to
live together…. I mean now the LTTE is gone, I don’t think there is any requirement”. (b) All
Party Representative Conference (APRC) established by President Rajapaksa in 2006 with the
mandate to agree on constitutional reforms for “maximum devolution” within a united Sri Lanka.
Despite nearly three years of negotiations that reportedly produced a draft set of constitutional
reforms that had the broad agreement of government and minority parties, the APRC’s report to

17
Threats, harassments and restrictions on former detainees and their families in Vanni,
http://transcurrents.com/news-views/archives/424

11
Discussion paper – LLRC Report and Situation in Tamil Eelam (Sri Lanka)

the president has never been made public and its valuable work has been shelved. (c) President
proposal to set-up a Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) has not received support from
opposition parties, but president is going ahead. (d) Widespread scepticism within Sri Lanka
about the government’s willingness to devolve power is also based on the highly authoritarian,
centralised and militarised way in which the Rajapaksa regime governs the whole country. Since
the end of the war in May 2009, power has been further centralised in the hands of the president,
his brothers and the military, both through the eighteenth amendment to the constitution in
September 2010 and other administrative changes.

5.2 Submission made at Sri Lanka Parliament

The following highlights are based on the North East Sri Lanka situation report submitted by MA
Sumanthiran MP to Sri Lanka Parliament on 21 October 201118, who visited Australian
Parliament last year. The situation has been summarized under various sub-titles:

5.2.1 Militarization
The high level of militarization in the North is directly linked to problems prevalent in the area:
breakdown in the social fabric, sexual assault, land grabs and occupation, economic
encroachment of livelihoods of the people in the area, intrusion into private and social lives,
illegal intrusion into the role of government including administration and dispute settlement.

5.2.2 State Brutality

People faced threats to their safety by unidentified individuals who have injured and
murdered civilians, and who have commonly come to be known as ‘Grease Yakas’ (Grease
Devils). These attacks resulted in mass paranoia, fear and outrage in the North and East Sri
Lanka. Frequent assault in court premises, violent suppression of dissent by attacks carried out
with impunity in the North by several ‘unidentified’ groups cause serious concern to the people.

5.2.2 Loss of Livelihood

Tamil returnees to their homes and attempting to rebuild their lives after the war now find
themselves being prevented from pursuing their traditional means of livelihood, beside that
unemployment and resource allocation, job creation and income generation have received
minimal attention from GoSL, despite its being central importance to the restoration and
sustainability of family and community life. Restrictions imposed on Tamil fishing
communities’ causes drastic impact on livelihood and returning to normalcy which existed before
the end of military conflict.

5.2.3 Resettlement
Progress in the resettlement has been extremely slow, according to the government’s own figures
as at 1st July 2011, 258,446 had been ‘returned’ or ‘resettled’ from welfare camps not necessarily
to their own villages, leaving 12,661 in camps. The returnees have no access to proper health
and education; they find themselves without basic facilities such as housing, sanitation,
healthcare and education, in particular, deprived of secondary education which is inconsistent
with national standards.

5.2.4 Systematic Evictions, Land Grabs and Occupation

Members of armed forces are forcibly and often without any explanation taking over public or
private property and land, in areas to which Tamil people are returning after being displaced
due to the war. Several schools are currently under army occupation and access to irrigation of
lands belonging to Tamils has been denied. Land and coastal areas are being allocated for
commercial development without public notification and not considering the environmental
impact.

18
North East Sri Lanka – Situation Report submitted to Sri Lanka Parliament by Tamil National Alliance (TNA)
on 21 October 2011 http://transcurrents.com/news-views/archives/5396

12
Discussion paper – LLRC Report and Situation in Tamil Eelam (Sri Lanka)

5.2.5 Creation of Sinhala Settlements

The demography of the North of Sri Lanka is undergoing forcible change: Systematic removal of
Tamils from the civil service by transfer/sending compulsory leave and replace them with
Sinhala civil servants, Bringing in Sinhala labour force to work on government programs,
forced eviction of Tamils take place and land, houses and school are given to Sinhala
communities and followed by building of a number of Buddhist statues, viharas and stupas in
places inhabited by Tamils.

5.2.6 Social Issues

Following social issues prevent return to normalcy: Psychological trauma, caused by heavy
military control and presence in the North, Harassment and molestation of women and girls
mainly by Sinhala workers employed government contractors in the Tamil areas, Hunger and
malnutrition caused by soaring levels of unemployment, School drop outs reported in one area
in the East, Breakdown of social fabric there are reports of young Tamil girls becoming pregnant
by Sinhalese soldiers, Institutionalization of children due to incidents of infanticide and child
abandonment in the North and East were reported throughout 2011 and causes Fear psychosis.

5.2.7 Legal Issues

Normalcy has not returned to Tamil areas, but government is imposing more and more new
regulations causing anxiety among the people: Registration of Persons against the direction by
the Supreme Court in February 2011 to suspend immediately; The land circular issued by Land
Commissioner General on 22nd July 2011, which exclusively deals with land in the Northern and
Eastern provinces temporarily suspending all distribution of land in the North and East except for
national security and special development projects; Prevention of Terrorism Act (changes given
in ICG report); Reduction of parliamentary seats in Jaffna Electoral District under the
proportional representation system at the last General Election from nine to six is being
considered; NGO secretariat comes under Ministry of Defense moving it away from Social
Services Ministry, since mid 2010; a matter of grave concern is the non-issuance of death
certificates to many IDPs who have lost relatives and family members in the war. This results in
difficulties in relation to title to land and property, and other administrative services.

5.3 Tamil National Alliance (TNA) Leader

“Tamils Not Treated as Equal Citizens” says R Sampanthan TNA Leader19 in an interview to
the media and he has similar concerns as above. In respect to colonization of Tamil homeland
more details are given his interview: “Deliberate efforts are being made by the Government to
further change the linguistic and cultural identity of the Northern and Eastern provinces”. There is
no doubt whatever that the Government is aggressively pursuing a sinister program to change the
demographic composition of the Northern and Eastern provinces in such a manner as to weaken
the Tamil presence and increase the majority Sinhala presence. We do not make this complaint
against the Sinhala people as such but we certainly make this complaint against the Government.

This is in violation of policies pursued by stalwart leaders such as the late Mr. S. W. R. D.
Bandaranaike, the founder of the SLFP, and Mr. Dudley Senanayake, the founder of the UNP,
who accepted that the Tamil speaking people had a legitimate interest in the preservation of the
linguistic and cultural identity of the Northern and Eastern provinces. Such deliberate actions on
the part of the Government have a very negative impact on the prospect of reconciliation.”

5.4 Freedom from Torture – Medical Foundation20

19
Tamils Not Treated As Equal Citizens, Interview with R Sampanthan TNA Leader,
http://www.thesundayleader.lk/2011/11/20/tamils-not-treated-as-equal-citizens-sampanthan/
20
Out of the Silence of ongoing Torture in Sri Lanka 2009 -2011
http://www.freedomfromtorture.org/sites/default/files/documents/Sri%20Lanka%20Ongoing%20Torture_Freed
om%20from%20Torture_Final%20Nov_07_2011.pdf

13
Discussion paper – LLRC Report and Situation in Tamil Eelam (Sri Lanka)

In the detailed analysis and examination of evidence of torture which took place between May 2009
and early 2011, as documented in the case sample of 35 completed medico-legal reports prepared by
Freedom from Torture, following conclusions have been made:

• Torture perpetrated by state actors within both the military and police has continued in Sri
Lanka after the conflict ended in May 2009 and is still occurring in 2011;
• Those at particular risk of torture include Tamils who have an actual or perceived association
with the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE);
• A variety of different types of torture have been perpetrated in a significant number of
locations around Sri Lanka during the post-conflict period;
• A wide range of different forms of torture have been used, often in combination, to inflict
severe suffering on victims of torture with devastating psychological and physical
consequences;
• Many Sri Lankan torture victims are left with visible scarring attributable to both blunt force
trauma and burns which suggests impunity for perpetrators of torture in Sri Lanka.

In another article by “Freedom from Torture”21 says that Sri Lanka’s LLRC ignores torture and
evade accountability. It concludes “unconvincing efforts to demonstrate that it is ready to deal with
atrocities committed by both sides during the end of the brutal civil war reached the end of the line”
with the publication of the final report by LLRC. This report and other earlier observation made by
International Humanitarian Organizations and video evidence broadcast Channel 4 and other available
videos and photographic evidence show that there are plenty of publicly available information that
need to be scrutinized to know the truth as to what happened and currently happening in Sri Lanka.

5.5 Is Genocide Taking Place in Sri Lanka?

Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 9 December 194822 in
Article II says genocide is any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in
part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

a) Killing members of the group;

b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical
destruction in whole or in part;
d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

No one is discounting the criminal acts of LTTE, a non state player; what is being considered is a
state which has the responsibility to defend their citizens. Furthermore, it is important to note that
most of LTTE leaders are killed as claimed by GSL, but few of the surviving LTTE leaders, who can
be charged for war crimes, are with GSL. Anyone who takes an unbiased look at what has happened
and what is happening presently in Sri Lanka, it can be concluded that the first three offences
tantamount to genocide are continuing to happen against Tamils in North East Sri Lanka The Tamil
Genocide by Sri Lanka23 by Francis A Boyle points out the global failure to protect Tamil Rights
under International Law. Further evidence24 has emerged, implicating GSL senior leaders with war
crime charges. Unless, the International community acts immediately, it may be too late to prevent a
Nation being eliminated; almost one million has left voluntarily and involuntarily Sri Lanka,

21
Sri Lanka’s Truth Commission Ignores Torture and Evades Accountability
http://www.freedomfromtorture.org/news-events/news/5939
22
Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 9 December 1948
http://untreaty.un.org/cod/avl/ha/cppcg/cppcg.html, http://www.preventgenocide.org/law/convention/text.htm
23
The Tamil Genocide by Sri Lanka, Francis A Boyle, Clarity Press, Inc. 201
http://www.claritypress.com/Boyle-Tamil.html
24
EXCLUSIVE: Sri Lankan government gave orders to commit war crimes, new evidence shows
http://www.theinternational.org/articles/184-exclusive-sri-lankan-government-gave-ord

14
Discussion paper – LLRC Report and Situation in Tamil Eelam (Sri Lanka)

definitely the current GoSL has committed and continuing to commit war crimes and crimes against
humanity that need investigation by an independent international group.

6. International Criminal Court

The International Criminal Court (ICC)25 is currently pursuing action for war crimes and crimes
against humanity against: Ivory Coast's former President Laurent Gbagbo; Jean-Pierre Bemba, the
former vice-president of the Democratic Republic of Congo; Thomas Lubanga, the leader of a militia
group in DR Congo; Congolese militia leaders Germain Katanga and Mathieu Ngudjolo Chu;
outstanding arrest warrant against Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir - the first against a serving head
of state which includes charges of genocide.

The charges laid against the above by the ICC are very much less in magnitude than what has
allegedly taken place at the end of conflict on 18 May 2009 and continuing to take place currently in
Sri Lanka under the commander in chief President Rajapaksa and his subordinate military
commanders and surviving LLTE commanders with GSL. Should an Independent International
Inquiry be set up to determine the truth? So that justice will be done to people of Sri Lanka the same
way it is being done to people in Africa.

7. Concluding Remarks
As part of the agreement signed between President Rajapaksa of Sri Lanka and the United Nation
Secretary General, LLRC and UNSG’s Expert Panel were set-up to investigate military operations
between Sri Lanka army and LTTE until the end of conflict on 18 May 2009. UNSG’s Expert Panel
report has received universal approval from organizations and a number of countries Worldwide.
Furthermore, additional evidence to substantiate Expert Panel findings has been provided by Chanel 4
video and International human rights organizations. LLRC report was finally released by President
Rajapaksa, after 30 months from the end of conflict in 18 May 2009. The LLRC report neither meets
the intended accountability process nor recommends measures to meet the grievances of the victims,
as earlier agreed by President Rajapaksa and UNSG Mr Ban Ki Moon; also fails to answers many of
the alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity as pointed out in the UNSG’s PoE report. The
International Human rights Organizations and many others have outright condemnation for the
process and conclusions drawn by LLRC, which failed to meet the International standards. World
leaders have highlighted a few of the positive recommendations in the LLRC report and called upon
the GSL to implement them without delay.

UNSG’s Expert Panel report claimed up to 40,000 civilians were killed in the last stages of the war
which ended on 18 May 2009. Catholic Diocese of Mannar, Sri Lanka, in its submission to LLRC
raised the question of 146,679 people missing, which is the discrepancy between the 258,446 people
who came to government controlled areas between October 2008 – May 2009 and the population
reported to be in Vanni in early October 2008, according to government census. LLRC failed to
account for missing civilians nor number of civilians killed during the conflict; but readily reported
the exact number of Army personnel killed and injured, and number of LTTE militants killed for three
year period ending on 18 May 2009. This is understandable because LLRC depended entirely on
Security and Military personnel for assessment of the military conflict. Will GSL account for the
number of civilians killed and missing during the conflict to bring an end to this saga? There are a
number of women as refugees in Australia without knowing whether their spouse is living or dead?

Examination of the past acts of the current regime of President Rajapaksa of Sri Lanka, do not give
any assurance that much can be expected on its own accord without persuasion from International
community. Previous bodies appointed by President Rajapaksa of Sri Lanka handed their reports to
him: Justice Udalagama commission which looked into 16 charges, subjected to scrutiny of
International Independent Group of Eminent Persons, had a premature end and All Party
Representatives Conference (APRC) submission with recommendations to settle the long standing

25
Q&A: International Criminal Court, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-11809908

15
Discussion paper – LLRC Report and Situation in Tamil Eelam (Sri Lanka)

political conflict in Sri Lanka; both have neither been released nor been implemented and not much
can be expected out of the LLRC report. Independent International Group of Eminent Persons
(IIGEP) withdrawal letter from monitoring the judicial process of Justice Udalagama commission and
adverse observations made in International Commission of Jurists publication about the
independence of the executive, legislature, and judiciary do not give much hopes in guaranteeing
remedies and reparations for victims of human rights violations in Sri Lanka.

Earlier, situation in Tamil Eelam attracted little attention from countries, International organizations
and media, but since events leading up to and end of conflict on 18 May 2009, receiving more
attention because of alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity which took place during the last
stages of the conflict. Reports from International Crisis Group, Tamil National Alliance members of
parliament and from others give a very bleak picture in Tamil Eelam. Plans that are being
implemented in North East Sri Lanka by the current regime of President Rajapaksa and his brothers -
emphasizing that Sri Lanka is a Buddhist Sinhala country while ignoring Sri Lanka is a multi-lingual,
multi-religious, multi-ethnic country as recognized at the time of Independence in 1948 from the UK -
falls within Article II of “Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of
Genocide, 9 December 1948”

It is important for the International community to take note that successive governments in Sri Lanka
have failed to implement any of the previous reports from Commission of Inquiries or agreements
signed between GoSL and the parties representing Tamils. Therefore not much can be expected from
the publication of LLRC report which has been shown to fail the international standards and at the
same time there is sufficient evidence beyond any reasonable doubt that structural genocide of Tamil
Eelam is taking place. Tamil Community is at the mercy of International community for survival as a
Nation in Sri Lanka, we call upon for immediate following actions:

A. Consider all measures to implement call by UNSG’s PoE to GSL: to comply with
International obligations, initiate accountability process and commence genuine investigation
and UNSG should explore avenues to establish independent international mechanism to
monitor GoSL’s domestic accountability process, Investigate independently into alleged
violations, collect and safeguard all information for future use;
B. Though LLRC failed to address all issues raised by UNSG’s PoE, GSL should be persuaded
to implement recommendations of LLRC as World leaders have called for. At the same time
it is very important and critical to prevent Sri Lanka pursuing activities that are tantamount to
genocide of Tamil Nation in Sri Lanka. International community should consider possible
political and economic action against the current regime, if it failed to stop such activities.
C. UNHRC should consider all available materials leading up to end of conflict on 18 May
2009 and what is happening currently in Tamil Eelam to take appropriate action in the forth
coming meeting on March 2012; and
D. To promote steps that will assist ICC to take actions against leaders of current regime in Sri
Lanka, if allegations are proven, similar to that is being pursued against African leaders. The
alleged war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide charges against Sri Lankan leaders
are far more serious than that committed by the African leaders who have been charged by the
ICC.
E. International community and UNHRC should take immediate action to proceed with the
above four that would prevent structural genocide of Tamil Eelam proceeding any further.
When justice is done to the victims, then reconciliation between people will follow.

16