UNSC must help undo some of the damage that its previous inaction helped foster-HRW
The United Nations Security Council should make sure that its existing commitments to protect civilians during armed conflict are actually carried out, Human Rights Watch said today in a letter to council member states.
Even though there is no fighting in Sri Lanka's "no fire zone", HRW said: "There is still a need, however, for the council to urgently address the continuing humanitarian and human rights crisis and help undo some of the damage that its previous inaction helped foster.
In its letter, Human Rights Watch identified the Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan, Chad, and Sri Lanka as examples of nations in which the Security Council has failed to take meaningful action to address and prevent civilian suffering during armed conflict. Persistent problems needing attention in those countries include: sexual violence, lack of justice and accountability for abuses, continuing violence toward internally displaced people and refugees, and violations of international humanitarian law.
Full text re: Sri Lanka, in HRW's Letter to UN Security Council Regarding the Debate on Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict
The Security Council's indifference to the plight of the Sri Lankan civilians caught up in the fighting between government forces and the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in the final months of the armed conflict this year represents a failure of historic proportions. According to UN estimates, more than 7,000 civilians - and perhaps as many as 20,000 - died from January through May 2009 in the midst of serious violations of international humanitarian law by both the Sri Lankan army and the LTTE. And yet, the Security Council failed even to discuss the issue, except in the context of an "informal interactive dialog," which precluded in advance the possibility of any council action.
The Secretary-General's seventh report on the protection of civilians emphasizes the suffering of Sri Lankan civilians both during the recent conflict and continuing today. Both sides in the conflict showed wanton disregard for human life in violation of international humanitarian law. The LTTE used civilians as human shields and forcibly prevented civilians from escaping the conflict zone. The Sri Lankan government also committed grave violations, none of which are excused by its claims of fighting terrorism. Despite denying the use of heavy weapons to council members, government forces repeatedly shelled densely populated areas, including hospitals.
It is now too late for the Security Council to act to protect the civilians killed and wounded in the government's erroneously named "no-fire zone." There is still a need, however, for the council to urgently address the continuing humanitarian and human rights crisis and help undo some of the damage that its previous inaction helped foster.
Nearly 300,000 ethnic Tamil civilians are now detained in the government's closed "welfare camps," including entire families who are prevented from leaving either for work or to move in with relatives or other families. The council should act to protect them by pressing for the rights to liberty and freedom of movement of civilians placed in government camps and basic human rights protections for persons the government suspects of being LTTE members; ensuring access to humanitarian organizations, the media, and human rights organizations to internally displaced persons and former conflict zones; and creating an international commission of inquiry to investigate alleged violations of international human rights and humanitarian law by both sides during the recent fighting.
Conclusion
As the Secretary-General says in his latest report on civilian protection in armed conflict, the debate on June 26 provides an opportunity for "determined action" and "reinvigorated commitment by the Security Council, Member States, and the United Nations to the protection of civilians." We urge the council to use the debate to urgently remedy existing shortfalls in civilian protection.
The Council should act more robustly and strategically to confront the appalling conditions suffered by civilians in armed conflict in these four countries and worldwide. Protection of civilians needs to be made a priority in reality, not just in words.
Sincerely,
Steve Crawshaw
United Nations Advocacy Director
6 Comments
What is this Steve guy crawing about?
Dodn't he forget the recent UN security Council resolution which was unanimoucly WON on the basis of against any such action?
Who is the more AUGUST assembly than that.
Steve himself and his ilke of Hate mongers?
- Ajith Boralugoda
It is obvious whatever the cause for srife be, when
it comes to use of Force, the veto power is used,
indiscriminately, as in the case of Sri Lanka and
the two allied culprits Russia and China.
Another type of leverage should be applicable in
cases of Human Rights violations that exceed the needs of a Council and such should be without Veto powers,as practived by the SC presently. So much is lost in words and time that lives are being sacrificed, for want of remedial measures.
You can set up a organisation get funds and issue statements.They don,t support human rights but terorisom.When prabakaran killed thousand of innocent people these organisations did not criticise them.All human rights concerned people must thank the present regime for crushing ltte and saving thousand of innocent lives.
Who is responsible for taking meaningful action against Human Rights Watch ???
How many civillians did UK & USA protect in Iraq and Afganistan and in Pakistan ?????
Steve crawshaw feeling for his backbone at the insistence of HRW who are spineless miscreants in the International Society.
The sooner the collapse of the United Nations the better for us all. It is nothing more than a Political Tool. Those who put their faith in the UN as some sort of Supreme Organization of Justice for the world are Delusional Fools.
There does not need to be a UN inquiry into Sri Lanka's internal affairs. It was a necessary war, one that Sri Lanka was forced into so now that we won, we will do things OUR WAY. Those who push for one are Sri Lanka's Enemies trying to manipulate the situation to attack Sri Lanka. Fact of the matter is that Sri Lanka will never give up its War Heros to UN prosecution. LTTE Activists who are Bitter and Writhing from Defeat can try to pressure the UN and its cohorts into doing so all they want, but at the end of the day WE DECIDE...not them.
Steve C. seems to be an 'advocate' who continues to promote the hidden agenda of modern day western colonisers, who try to undermine sovereign states through direct and indirect methods. At least in case of Sri Lanka, those countries bitterly failed at the UNHRC Special Session in Geneva on Sri Lanka as majority of the UN Member Countries supported Sri Lanka, openly and clearly giving the message that bullying small countries may in turn boomrang sponsors of such punitive action without a base.
Now after the defeat of the LTTE, speculation and exaggeration seem to be the agenda of the day in order to keep preasure mounting on Sri Lanka. Those champions of Human Rights either by ignorance or callousness continue to ignore human rights violations in other places including Swat Valley in Pakistan or Mindanao, the Philippines where millions of refugees are living in same or worse conditions as in Sri Lanka.
We Sri Lankans deeply sympothise with our fellow citizens who were pushed to war by the ruthless LTTE and the wealthy diaspora. I sense in the South among Sinhalese that there is feeling for helping-resettling and long term development for the IDPs. If Stevs and likes are trying to drag the problem by accusing Sri Lanka, this would again take in to the same circle of debates votes-accusations and at the end nothing.
At least the SL government has agreed to accept the relief iems sent by some UK Tamil groups. This could be a good start for reconciliation. Diaspora can get to gether and channel their support through SL Red Cross or Sarvodaya, which were in the ground for a long time earning support from all parties in conflict. If they dream of further protesting-attacking Sinhalese and commit violence in their host coutries, that option is also there but in no avail, only costing money that can help their own community here. How many diaspora activists have thought of iniotiating adiologue with the Sri Lanka government - how much money have they contributed for IDP welfare?