Since the end of Sri Lanka’s 36-year civil war in 2009, well-founded allegations of war crimes and human rights abuses, perpetrated by both government forces and Tamil militants, have not resulted in guilty parties being brought to account. This is despite bipartisan appeals and international pressure. Reports of such crimes are thorough and numerous, and tens of thousands are still unaccounted for even after years after the end of the conflict. This report aims to analyze the government’s insufficient responses to international pressure to investigate these allegations and highlight the vital role that accountability and justice must play in Sri Lanka’s rehabilitation process.

Following decades of tension and flares of violence between the minority Tamil and majority Sinhalese populations, civil war broke out in 1983 as the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) mounted an insurgency against the Sinhalese government. Representing an extreme branch of Tamil resistance, the LTTE demanded an independent state as a response to perceived persecution at the hands of the Sinhalese establishment. By 2009, the military had neutralized the last of the Tamil resistance in the north of the island, and victory was declared.

Various human rights violations have been recorded from throughout the 36-year conflict by domestic and international human rights groups, such as Human Rights Watch and the Sri Lankan Campaign for Peace and Justice. The types of allegations vary, from displacement and extended unlawful detention, to reports of rape and military bombardment of civilian areas. This continues while the UN states there are credible allegations against both sides of the conflict. The final days of battle in May 2009 are a particular point of investigation: it is still not known exactly what transpired, but what is clear is the fighting entered a no-fire zone, resulting in large populations of mostly Tamil civilians becoming trapped between the two armies. Tens of thousands were killed. While government forces are adjudged to have been careless in their attacks, Tamil militants are also accused of using human shields. Human Rights Watch’s broad allegations of war crimes have been endorsed by leading members of the international legal community, such as Manfred Nowak and Juan Mendez, respectively the former and current UN Special Rapporteur on Torture. The three-decade war is littered with flash-points of unlawful conflict that, in all likelihood, demand further investigation. Indeed, 50,000 individuals are still unaccounted for as a result of the war.

Aside from military operations, the Sri Lankan population was subjected to government authoritarianism in civil society. A report by Amnesty International describes a culture of state-enforced killings and disappearances, with ‘human rights defenders, aid workers, journalists, government critics, and prominent community leaders’ being targeted alongside known LTTE affiliates in a government crackdown that endured throughout the three decades of conflict.

To compound these wartime violations, there is a lot of evidence to suggest that the Rajapaksa regime (Sri Lankan President 2005-2015) and the present Sirisena government have continued to abuse human rights in the post-conflict period. Recent amendments to the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) have failed to curtail the broad powers that it permits, including powers of an 18-month detainment without charge. Human Rights Watch has further reported that “torture remains endemic throughout Sri Lanka,” and many of those arrested under the PTA since the war have given accounts of “torture, mistreatment, forced confessions, and denial of basic rights such as access to lawyers or family members.”

Since 2009, a power struggle has continued between the United Nations, assisted by various human rights groups, and the Sri Lankan government, which has seen a variety of complex resolutions, reports, pledges, deadlines, and declarations that have amounted to virtually no tangible results. It is difficult to find any examples of guilty individuals being brought to justice. Significant UN actions include: the tabling of Sri Lankan war crimes at the 25^th Session of the UN Human Rights Council, 2015’s Resolution 30/1, and Sri Lanka’s resulting pledge to enact accountability by establishing a Consultation Task Force among other promises of more rigorous internal investigation. In 2015, it was hoped that the newly elected president, the moderate Maithripala Sirisena, would bring a change to the procedural stalemate that had developed under that authoritarian presidency of Mahinda Rajapaksa. Optimism has deteriorated since 2015 however, as the new administration remains stubbornly inactive on the issue of war crimes, and continues to mount counter-allegations of colonial interference at the international community’s recommendations.

The resulting reports and recommendations of these various UN manoeuvres have either been ignored, rejected, or feebly appeased by successive Sri Lankan governments, who have not yet enacted a sufficient process of justice. A Veritie Research reports that on the implementation of government, pledges made to the UN concluded that ‘poor progress has been achieved with respect to half of commitments contained in Resolution 30/1.’ Though a governmental Office for Missing Persons has been established, it is yet to become effective, and is the latest of ten presidential commissions that have been launched and disbanded on missing persons since the 1990s. Of the few reports produced by these commissions that have been made public, none have been acted upon.

When the government has decided to take action, it’s measures have more often than not proven limp and ineffective, as if the administration is ‘afraid to do the right thing,’ as Tamil MP Mathiaparanam Sumanitiran argues. Indeed, Dr Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu, founder of Sri Lanka’s Centre for Policy Alternatives, asserts that ineffectual missing persons legislation was only passed to ‘appease the international community.’

The rehabilitation of Sri Lanka, still less than a decade after the close of conflict, can only fully advance if its government is willing to bring about accountability for the crimes that took place during the civil war and since, and justice served for its victims. A key driver of this reality is the fact that the calls for justice are bipartisan, coming from both Tamil and Sinhalese populations. It is widely recognized that both sides were, to some extent, victims and perpetrators of illegalities during the conflict. Sri Lankan families and communities may have been ethnically, politically, and militarily opposed, but their human suffering was common, thus the search for answers is a unifying, common agenda in the country. The denial of justice is therefore universally aggravating.

Though the government argues that investigations will have a destabilizing effect on the delicate state of peace in the country, it is clear that a lack of answers will only stoke social unrest. Indeed, at the time of writing, protests persist in the northern city of Kilinochchi as its Tamil population have grown restless at the government’s inaction with regard to missing persons from the war. On-going hunger strikes in Vavuniya similarly demonstrate that the government’s ignoring of injustices will not see them forgotten in aggrieved communities. Truth remains in the missing ingredient in Sri Lanka’s peace-building process.

As detailed in the Centre for Policy Alternatives’ report, ‘Victim-Centred Transitional Justice in Sri Lanka,’ the rehabilitation of the country must be driven by the needs of victims of the conflict. Given the ethnic roots of the conflict, creating unity and understanding between communities after decades of war and suspicion is of vital importance to the country’s advancement. This starts with the Sri Lankan government interacting with and empowering victims within a broader agenda of accountability.

It is clear that the government must act quickly to dismantle the cycles of injustice that dog Sri Lankan society. The issue remains that it refused to do so. Though the international community and human rights groups have certainly been active in their research of possible abuses and constructing recommendations to the Sri Lankan government, the lack of progress calls for a change in approach. While the work of the UN has been thorough, its output has been diffuse, producing a web of reports, resolutions, and initiatives that the Sri Lankan establishment has circumnavigated without needing to produce results. The challenge is for the international community, articulated through the UN, to apply greater pressure while still respecting Sri Lanka’s sovereignty. Though this is clearly a demanding task, the implementation of sanctions or the withdrawal of alliances could force the government to take the steps that are clearly necessary for its own rehabilitation process and for the principles of human rights.