Confronting the Complexity of Loss

ecommendation:
Leaders on all sides should reach out to each other in humility and make a joint
declaration, extending an apology to innocent citizens who fell victims to this
conflict, as a result of the collective failure of the political leadership on all sides
to prevent such a conflict from emerging. 155
The LLRC also recommended a separate event on Sri Lanka’s National Day to ‘express
solidarity and empathy with all victims of the tragic conflict and pledge our collective
commitment to ensure that there should never be such blood-letting in the country again’.
Such recommendations clearly reinforce the value of certain symbolic forms of
reparation. 156
In this context, it is clear that a victim-centred approach must offer the full gamut of
options in terms of both tangible and symbolic reparations. These options ultimately flow
from a genuine desire amongst victims and survivors to receive reparations.
---
In conclusion, it may be appropriate to reiterate that this study is only a modest
exploration of perspectives on truth, memory and justice in Sri Lanka. Barring certain
convergences in participant views, the study does not present clear and precise trends on
how Sri Lankans approach these subjects. By displaying and analysing the remarkable
heterogeneity amongst participant views, it does, however, contribute towards displacing
any reductive narrative that seeks to construct a particular ‘Sri Lankan approach’. The
principal finding of this study is simply that no singular or reductive narrative on truth,
memory and justice exists in Sri Lanka.
The diversity of views and experiences amongst victims and survivors ought to be
considered carefully when designing a transitional justice mechanism in the future. Such
a mechanism must be victim-centred and must cast its net as wide as possible to
accommodate a broad spectrum of victim and survivor preferences. Moreover, the
mechanism must respond to the diversity of needs and priorities amongst victims and
survivors including their socioeconomic and psychosocial wellbeing, the discovery and
telling of the truth, the memorialisation of events and lost relatives, and the accountability
of perpetrators. The institutional framework established to deliver such a mechanism
must enable contributions by institutions across the thematic spectrum, including those
dealing with social integration, health, criminal justice and development. A truly victimcentred
approach must therefore seek to accommodate all victims and survivors. For they
are unique, complex and often hold views independent of one another. Any future
mechanism aiming to advance transitional justice must accommodate this reality.
155 Ibid. at para.8.303.
156 For a detailed discussion on reparations policy, see Bhavani Fonseka, The Need for a Comprehensive
Reparations Policy and Package, Centre for Policy Alternatives (March 2015).
68