Govt. discusses impasse over ICCPR

By Ayesha R. Rafiq

Solicitor General C.R. de Silva led a team from the Attorney General’s Department for talks with members of the United Nations Human Rights Committee (UNHRC) in Geneva this week to discuss ways and means of implementing Sri Lanka’s international obligations.

The team returned to the country on Thursday, but members were tight-lipped about the discussions they had had with the UNHRC following a recent Supreme Court decision which held that Sri Lanka’s accession to the Optional Protocol of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) was unconstitutional.

The Sunday Times learns, however, that the Government is expected to explore the possibility of enacting legislation which would enable international treaties to have a more binding effect on Sri Lanka by introducing domestic laws to enable easier acceptance and implementation of these international obligations.

The move also comes in the wake of increasing criticism of Sri Lanka’s Human Rights track record.

During discussions in Geneva, the question arose from the recent decision of the Supreme Court on an application made by Nallaratnam Singarasa, convicted for offences under the Prevention of Terrorism Act. Mr. Singarasa alleged that his conviction was on the basis of an involuntary confession, and requested the Court to revise its decision, taking into consideration the views of the UNHRC, to which he had earlier appealed, claiming that his conviction violated his right to a fair trial.

The Supreme Court, however, held that due to the absence of implementing legislation in the form of domestic laws, the ICCPR does not have internal effect and the rights under it were not rights under the law of Sri Lanka, and furthermore, that Sri Lanka’s accession to the Optional Protocol of the ICCPR, which enables individuals to submit complaints directly to the Human Rights Committee - was unconstitutional.

The Sunday Times learns that the UNHRC at its meeting with the AG’s Department officials expressed the view that the Singarasa’s application was misconceived, as the judgment of a court cannot be set aside on the basis of an UNHRC recommendation.

The Committee has stated clearly that it has no judicial power and thereby its views cannot be enforced through any court in Sri Lanka, and that the State is bound to give effect to the Committee’s recommendations only subject to its domestic laws.

Unless legislation to this effect is enacted by Sri Lanka’s Parliament, applications submitted by Sri Lankan citizens to the UNHRC in Geneva will continue to be heard and decided, but its orders will carry no binding weight.

This in turn, will question Sri Lanka’s continued commitment to maintaining its image as a country that respects and maintains her international obligations.