The demand by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Prince Zeid, that Sri Lanka should scrap the Commission on Missing Persons and assign its work to a credible body, is “unwarranted and intolerable” says Prof.G.L.Peiris, an acclaimed legal expert and a former Lankan Foreign and Constitutional Affairs Minister.

“Zeid’s asking for the scrapping of the Missing Persons’ commission and for changing the Lankan legal system, go way beyond the mandate of the UN Human Rights Council and his own office,” Peiris told Express.

Zeid’s statement on his report and the investigations on which it was based, was an indirect confession that he had exceeded the mandate given to the UNHRC and his office, the former Minister said.

“ When he presented the report, he himself stated that it was rather unique, and that his office had conducted such an investigation for the first time.” Peiris pointed out.

Instead of “abjectly capitulating” and committing “Harakiri” by praising and owning the draft US resolution calling for a “hybrid court”, Colombo should have made use of established international humanitarian and human rights laws on rescuing hostages to argue that it cannot be blamed for its actions in the final stages of the war, Peiris said.  

“The LTTE had taken 300,000 civilians hostage and kept them confined in a narrow strip of land and shot at those who tried to flee. What the Lankan military conducted was a hostage rescue operation clearly sanctioned by international law,” Peiris argued.

Sri Lanka could also have used the fact that in the March 2014 session of the UNHRC, the majority of the 47 members did not go along with the US resolution calling for an international investigation into war crimes charges.

“While 24 voted for the resolution, 12 voted against and 12 abstained. Again when Para 10, specifically calling for an international investigation, was put to vote, it did not get majority support. India abstained from voting on the resolution as a whole but it voted against Para 10,” Peiris recalled. In the case of Para 10, out of the 47  members, 23 voted for, 14 voted against and 10 abstained.

(The New Indian Express)