sri lanka's commissions of inquiry - Law & Society Trust

BRIEF STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The year 1983 stands out in Sri Lanka’s history for its unprecedented
levels of State sanctioned communal violence by the Sinhala
majority against the Tamil minority. July 1983 – or Black July as
it is commonly called – is often cited as the beginning of the war
between the Government of Sri Lanka and the Liberation Tigers of
Tamil Eelam, although many commentators point to earlier dates.
The violence, which had been foreshadowed by communal violence
in 1958 and 1977 and the attack on the Jaffna Public Library in 1981,
forever transformed the nature and identity of Sri Lanka and its people.
After almost two decades of silence, the government of Sri Lanka
appointed a Presidential Commission of Inquiry – which it called a
“Truth Commission” – to inquire into the nature, causes and extent
of gross violations of human rights and the destruction of property
between January 1981 and December 1984.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS:
As is evident in the Report, the Commission was a “truth commission”
in name only. 83 It was neither designed nor intended to be an actual truth
commission, which had, as its fundamental objective, the search for
truth. As such, the Report is weak on findings. Instead, the commission
devotes a significant portion of its report to excerpts and quotes from
83.
The Commission did not have, as its primary objective, the search for truth. Further its
mandate was limited, both in terms of substance and time. Although extensions were
subsequently given, the Commission originally was given a mere six months to submit its
report. There was no transparent process that gave rise to the Commission. It was not part
of a process of national reconciliation, although the language of reconciliation was used in
both the mandate and the report. Although this was the first time a Sri Lankan commission
of inquiry was actually named a “truth commission,” the term “truth commission” has been
loosely used at times to refer to some of Sri Lanka’s prior commissions of inquiry, namely
the disappearances commissions. See, for example, Bulankulame, Indika “The Debates on
Truth Commissions: A Retrospective Healing Process?”, Law & Society Trust, 2004. The
use of the term is indicative of the term’s currency internationally, and does not adequately
reflect the reality of Sri Lanka’s commissions. Never has the requisite forethought and
deliberation been devoted to the creation of any of Sri Lanka’s commissions of inquiry.
Rather, they have been ad hoc and expedient institutional mechanisms that serve practical
political ends while, in some cases, also serving important fact-finding, relief and
rehabilitation functions.
70