States of Emergency - Centre for Policy Alternatives
States of Emergency - Centre for Policy Alternatives
States of Emergency - Centre for Policy Alternatives
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
But as Gross and Ní Aoláin observe, “In theory, these [procedural]<br />
mechanisms are reasonably well equipped to cope with the<br />
inception <strong>of</strong> an emergency. Their fundamental weakness revolves,<br />
however, around the willingness <strong>of</strong> states to be constrained by<br />
such procedures, and the willingness <strong>of</strong> international (and<br />
domestic) judicial and quasi‐judicial bodies to en<strong>for</strong>ce them<br />
robustly at the preliminary juncture.” 201 The validity <strong>of</strong> these<br />
observations are borne out by the Sri Lankan experience. The<br />
domestic judicial attitude as represented by the Supreme Court to<br />
co‐operating with the treaty regime and en<strong>for</strong>cing the ICCPR,<br />
especially in relation to the First Optional Protocol has been one <strong>of</strong><br />
outright hostility. In this context, the issue <strong>of</strong> en<strong>for</strong>cement <strong>of</strong> the<br />
ICCPR within the jurisdiction <strong>of</strong> Sri Lanka becomes an issue, which<br />
we discuss below. 202<br />
All three systems impose the principle <strong>of</strong> proportionality in<br />
respect <strong>of</strong> any derogating measure, as well as consistency with<br />
other international obligations. The purpose <strong>of</strong> proportionality is<br />
to ensure that a clear necessity <strong>for</strong> extraordinary measures<br />
restricting fundamental rights is established. In General Comment<br />
No. 29, the Human Rights Committee goes even further to state<br />
201<br />
Gross and Ní Aoláin: p.261<br />
202<br />
The issue has come to a head in the debate about the renewal <strong>of</strong> the<br />
‘GSP Plus’ tariff beneLits scheme <strong>of</strong> the European Union <strong>for</strong> Sri Lanka,<br />
which requires ‘ratiLication and full implementation’ by the beneLiciary<br />
country <strong>of</strong> 27 international treaties including the ICCPR: see <strong>Centre</strong> <strong>for</strong><br />
<strong>Policy</strong> <strong>Alternatives</strong> (2007) ‘Press Release on the Draft Bill Purporting to <br />
enact the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)’, 3 rd<br />
October 2007; Rohan Edrisinha & Asanga Welikala (2008) ‘GSP Plus’ <br />
BeneKits: The Need <strong>for</strong> Constitutional Amendment’ available at http://<br />
www.cpalanka.org/Newspaper_Articles/Article_on_ICCPR.pdf; Rohan<br />
Edrisinha & Asanga Welikala (2008) ‘GSP Plus and Constitutional Re<strong>for</strong>m: <br />
What We Did and Did Not Say’, The Sunday Island, 26 th June 2008;<br />
discussion in Chapter 6, infra<br />
123