State Violence in Sri Lanka - World Organisation Against Torture

11
State Violence in SRI LANKA
Introduction
The Asian Legal Resource Centre (“ALRC”) is a regional, independent nongovernmental
organization (“NGO”) with General Consultative Status with
the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations. Its mission is to promote
and protect human rights by strengthening the rule of law, further
administration of justice at national and local levels and promote effective
implementation of international human rights treaties at the national and
local levels.
The World Organisation Against Torture (“OMCT”) is the largest international
coalition of non-governmental organizations fighting against torture,
summary executions, forced disappearances and all other forms of cruel, inhuman
or degrading treatment.
This document focuses on some of the more basic issues relating to the implementation
of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
(“ICCPR”) in the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka (“Sri Lanka”).
Sri Lanka acceded to the ICCPR in 1980. It presented periodic reports to the
Human Rights Committee (“HRC”) in 1983, 1990, 1994 and the latest on
18 September 2002. Although Sri Lanka has been a party to the ICCPR for
over 22 years, Sri Lanka has failed to effectively implement some of the principle
provisions of the ICCPR. In fact, the shortcomings mentioned in this
report are so fundamental in nature that they have affected the rule of law and
the basic democratic framework of Sri Lanka.
Often analysis of human rights in Sri Lanka is based on the assumption that
rights violations are mostly due to civil strife in the northern and eastern parts
of the country and that, consequently, the most effective way to improve the
situation is to resolve the conflict. However, close observation of the sequence
of events leading to the breakdown of law and order in Sri Lanka demonstrates
that such an assumption is not only simplistic but also fatally flawed. It
can even be argued that without a serious attempt to improve the institutional
framework of the rule of law and democracy in the country as a whole, no
lasting solution can be found to the conflict in the northern and eastern parts
of the country. In fact, the ceasefire agreement in effect in recent months
shows that in order to make further progress, it is essential that the country’s
longstanding problems with rule of law be addressed. Moreover, institutional
flaws and subsequent delays in dealing with the denial of basic rights have