Former Sri Lankan President Ranil Wickremesinghe has reiterated his opposition to international accountability for Sri Lanka, particularly against the prospect of the country being taken to the ICJ. He criticized perceived double standards by the West regarding international responses to human rights issues. His comments reflect a continuing trend among Sri Lankan governments to reject foreign scrutiny in favor of domestic mechanisms for justice, despite ongoing calls for independent investigations.
In a recent interview, former Sri Lankan President Ranil Wickremesinghe expressed his steadfast opposition to taking Sri Lanka to the International Court of Justice (ICJ). As reported by the Jaffna daily Maalaikathir, he accused Western nations of double standards and emphasized that Sri Lanka’s contributions during World War II played a crucial role in the establishment of the modern human rights framework.
Wickremesinghe maintained his position against international involvement, advocating for justice for Tamil victims to be sought through domestic avenues instead. He urged for greater authority and responsibility to be granted to Provincial Councils, following his administration’s failure to fully implement the 13th Amendment. Acknowledging the need for accountability, he stated that all perpetrators must be held responsible and past commitments to the UN complied with.
His statements come at a time when Tamil victims and international bodies continue to urge for independent investigations into alleged war crimes. Wickremesinghe’s rhetoric aligns with the posture of previous Sri Lankan governments that have resisted international scrutiny while promoting national mechanisms, despite inadequacies in delivering justice and reform.
Amid continuing international pressure, Wickremesinghe also criticized perceived inconsistencies regarding the international response to the situation in Ukraine, arguing that Western nations have favored Ukraine and permitted greater autonomy in decision-making compared to Sri Lanka. He remarked on the meeting between leaders of the United States and Ukraine, questioning, “If they can go after President Trump, what chance do we have?” hinting at the perceived selective application of international standards.
Furthermore, Wickremesinghe directed criticism towards the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). He suggested that while former Commissioner Navanethem Pillay held a differing view, Sri Lanka should have been allowed to engage in constructive dialogue, rather than facing accusations. He indicated that the current OHCHR’s approach could lead to deterioration unless they acknowledged Sri Lanka’s contributions.
In an audacious claim, Wickremesinghe stated, “we liberated Europe,” asserting that the participation of Sri Lankans, alongside Indians and Africans, in World War II was pivotal in defeating Hitler, subsequently enabling the foundation of a human rights charter.
In summary, Ranil Wickremesinghe’s remarks underscore a persistent resistance within Sri Lankan leadership to uphold international accountability concerning human rights violations. His assertions regarding double standards in international responses and insistence on domestic remedies for justice illustrate a broader reluctance to conduct independent inquiries into historical grievances. Despite pressing calls for accountability, Wickremesinghe’s rhetoric aligns with previous government stances opposing external intervention, while emphasizing the need for dialogue with international bodies.
Original Source: www.tamilguardian.com
