- Algeria
- Burundi
- Central African Republic
- Chad
- Cote d'Ivoire
- Democratic Republic of Congo
- Ethiopia
- Ghana
- Kenya
- Liberia
- Mauritius
- Morocco
- Namibia
- Nigeria
- Rwanda
- International Commission of Investigation on Human Rights Violations in Rwanda since 1 October 1990
- International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda
- International Panel of Eminent Personalities to Investigate the 1994 Genocide in Rwanda and the Surrounding Events
- National Unity and Reconciliation Commission
- Gacaca Courts
- Sierra Leone
- South Africa
- Sudan
- Uganda
- Zimbabwe
LATEST UPDATE
The LLRC began its work in August 2010 by holding 20 public sittings in Vavuniya and Colombo, where 500 survivors testified on the final days of the civil war in the north of Sri Lanka. The public sittings ended in February 2011 following the final two public sittings in Matara and in Galle. In addition to public testimonies, the commission gathered evidence from Liberation Tigers of Tamil Elam (LTTE) leaders, army commanders and government officials, who were summoned to testify at the hearings.
TRANSITIONAL JUSTICE PROCESSES
Updated in May 2011
Updated in November 2011
Sri Lanka: Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission
- Details
- Category: Mechanism
- Created on Wednesday, 24 August 2011 23:00
- Last Updated on Wednesday, 14 December 2011 22:36
- Published on Wednesday, 30 November -0001 00:00
- Written by Super User
- Hits: 351
NAME OF MECHANISM
Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission
PERIOD OF OPERATION
May 2010 – November 2011. The Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) was appointed on 15 May 2010 and was originally mandated to report back to President Mahinda Rajapaksa within six months of its appointment. The commission’s mandate was extended twice.
MANDATE AND OPERATIONS
Mandate: The commission was established by the Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry Law of 1978. It was mandated to investigate and report on the facts and events of the armed conflict and whether any person, group or institution bears criminal responsibility. It was intended to recommend administrative and legislative measures that could prevent the recurrence of such a conflict, as well as measures of restitution for persons affected by the conflict and for promoting national unity and reconciliation among all communities.
Staff: The LLRC was composed of eight commissioners, six of whom were former government officials. The commissioners were all appointed by President Rajapaksa and the commission was chaired by former Attorney General Chitta Ranjan da Silva.
Budget: An initial sum of about US$90,500 was allocated to the commission by the government.
RESOURCES
Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission official website
Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission Mandate [2010]
Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry Law [1978]
RESULTS
The LLRC began its work in August 2010 by holding 20 public sittings in Vavuniya and Colombo, where 500 survivors testified on the final days of the civil war in the north of Sri Lanka. The public sittings ended in February 2011 following the final two public sittings in Matara and in Galle. In addition to public testimonies, the commission gathered evidence from Liberation Tigers of Tamil Elam (LTTE) leaders, army commanders and government officials, who were summoned to testify at the hearings [Government of Sri Lanka | Dec 2010].
The commission was expected to give its final report to President Rajapaksa in May 2011 but did not meet the deadline. In September 2010, it made interim recommendations, including that the state ensure that members of the public can use their own language in official communications with government departments, especially when making statements to the police. The LLRC recommended the implementation of measures for speedy disposal of cases relating to persons in detention, as well as keeping family members informed in the event of a change in their location. It also suggested that the government prioritise the strengthening of law and order in former conflict areas and ensure that private land is not used by government agencies in these areas. These interim recommendations were endorsed by the government and an Inter-Advisory Committee established in October 2010 to implement the LLRC’s recommendations [Government of Sri Lanka | Feb 2011]. The Commission submitted its final report in November 2011.
The LLRC has received widespread criticism from international human rights groups, which argue that it has no real mandate to investigate war crimes, lacks any mechanism for protecting witnesses and falls short of minimum international standards of a commission of inquiry. International Crisis Group, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have refused to appear in front of the commission. Human Rights Watch has also alleged that the establishment of the LLRC by the Sri Lankan president was “an apparent attempt to deflect calls for an international investigation” [BBC | 14 Oct 2010]. Similar allegations have been made by other critics, who suggest that the government is under little pressure to pursue real transitional justice given its military victory.
The United Nations panel of experts expressed its concern over the independence and impartiality of the LLRC in its 2011 final report. The panel criticised the LLRC’s mandate, noting that it does not have the power to investigate serious violations of international humanitarian and human rights law or to examine the root causes of the conflict. Overall, the panel found the LLRC to be “deeply flawed” and concluded that it “does not meet international standards for an effective accountability mechanism.”
BACKGROUND
The growth of Sinhala nationalism after Sri Lanka’s independence in 1948 resulted in the eruption of civil war in July 1983, when the LTTE began an armed rebellion against the government of Sri Lanka for a separate state for Tamils [BBC | 4 Feb 2011]. One of the conflict’s main causes was the Tamil minority’s demand for self-determination. The conflict had a territorial aspect, as Tamils regularly demanded greater or absolute sovereignty over the North and Eastern provinces of Sri Lanka. The rebellion was further fuelled by Tamils’ grievances concerning perceived historical injustices at the hands of a Sinhala-majority state in areas such education, public sector employment and language.
The Tamil uprising was met with harsh government repression. The LTTE fought a guerrilla war, bombing government structures and capturing territory. Government forces responded with widespread killings and disappearances of suspected guerrillas and civilians who supported the guerrillas. After 25 years of conflict and three failed attempts to make peace, the conflict ended in May 2009 with government forces taking all Tamil rebel-held territory [USIP | Mar 2011]. The gross human rights violations committed by both sides included forcible recruitment, use of children in the armed conflict, harms to civilians and civilian objects resulting from shelling and other combat activities, killing of captives and combatants seeking to surrender, enforced disappearances and the denial of food and medical supplies to civilian populations [US Dept of State | Aug 2010].
Since the country’s independence in 1948, the government has appointed numerous commissions to investigate human rights violations [ICJ | 2010]. These include the Samsoni Commission established in 1977, the Kokkadicholai Commission established in 1991, the Presidential Truth Commission on Ethnic Violence established in 2001 and the Presidential Commission of Inquiry established in 2006 [South Asia Analysis Group | 25 May 2011].
In November 2006, the president of Sri Lanka established a Commission of Inquiry to investigate “serious human rights violations” that took place during the escalated conflict between the LTTE and government forces from August 2005 onwards. The commission was later suspended and has not released its findings [AI | 2009].
In 2007, President Rajapaksa invited an International Independent Group of Eminent Persons (IIGEP) to monitor the Commission of Inquiry’s work. In the same year, the IIGEP decided to stop its work because its recommendations were largely disregarded by government, stating in its final public statement that it “did not see that continued observation would change the situation.” The IIGEP concluded that the Commission of Inquiry was not “transparent” and that it did not “satisf[y] basic international norms and standards.”
SOURCES
[Amnesty International | 2009]
[BBC | 14 Oct 2010]
[BBC | 4 Feb 2011]
[Anonymous, “Against the Grain: Pursuing a Transitional Justice Agenda in Postwar Sri Lanka,” International Journal of Transitional Justice 5(1) (2011): 31-51]
[South Asia Analysis Group | 25 May 2011]
[United States Department of State | 11 Aug 2010]
[United States Institute of Peace | Mar 2011]