Delays, Dilution And Deal-Making Mar Establishment Of OMP: Friday Forum

February 1, 2018

 

The Friday Forum charged those responsible for the establishment of the Office on Missing Persons (OMP) of deliberately delaying, diluting and indulging in deal-making.

Pointing out that the OMP was one of the four mechanism the Government had promised to put in place in what it claimed was a ‘comprehensive approach to dealing with the past, Friday Forum in a media release expressed regret and concern that little has been done to operationalize the same, although 28 months have passed since the plan was announced.  

Friday Forum also argue that the process has been marked by sloth, lack of transparency, weak engagement with victims and political actions designed to undermine the institution’s independence.  

The full text of the media release is given below: 

Establishing the Office of Missing Persons: Delays, Dilution and Deal-making

 

The Office on Missing Persons is one of the four mechanisms that the government promised in its ‘comprehensive approach to dealing with the past’. Whilst OMP is the only mechanism on which any formal progress has been made in the 28 months that have passed since the government announced its plan, even this has not yet been formally constituted and operationalised. Each step of the process thus far to establish the OMP has been marked by slow progress, a regrettable lack of transparency, poor engagement with victims and troubling political actions to undermine the independence of the institution.  

 

In mid-2016, a Bill to establish the OMP was drafted by a small government-appointed committee that was not publicly announced, working in parallel and disconnected from the ongoing ‘victim-centric’ process to consult the Sri Lankan public on the proposed reconciliation mechanisms that had been initiated by the government in January 2016. 

When civil society actors challenged the government on why it was preempting the Consultation Task Force (CTF) process and report, the government’s Secretariat for Coordinating the Reconciliation Mechanisms (SCRM) responded that the government’s rush to establish the OMP was to expedite support to families of the missing and disappeared. Over one and half years later, in the absence of minimally constituting the OMP, these claims ring very hollow.

Responding to criticisms about the lack of consultation of victims, prior to finalizing the OMP Bill to be presented in Parliament, the SCRM arranged a brief consultation in Colombo for the drafting committee with a few family members of disappeared persons. The CTF was also requested to provide early submissions on the OMP to the drafting committee. In response, the CTF provided an oral submission, and also produced an Interim Report in August 2016 which compiled OMP-related submissions that it had received from the public. 

Since most of the CTF’s public consultation work had not taken place at the time of writing, the CTF’s Interim Report was based solely on written submissions that it had received as of 17th July 2016 and a few consultation meetings conducted before 8th August 2016. 

 

Questionable Passage of the OMP Act

A Bill to legally establish the OMP was submitted to Parliament and was passed on 11th August 2016 following unorthodox procedures after a disruptive debate. The brief, truncated debate, and passage of the Bill without a vote, seriously undermined the sense of the OMP as an institution established following a considered due democratic process.  

Lack of Consideration of Victims Voices and Concerns

It was unclear whether the 8th August 2016 Interim Report of the CTF was reviewed by the government prior to the hurried passage of the Bill on the 11th August, or even if its content was considered later when subsequent amendments were made to the Act, before it was formally signed into law on 23rd August 2016. When the CTF’s Final Report was released on 3rd January 2017, it was apparent from Annex 15 of that document that the government had not incorporated a single one of the CTFs Interim Report recommendations reflecting the content of public submissions and victims views into either the draft Bill or the final OMP Act.

Given the government’s declared haste in enacting legislation to institute the OMP, it is ironic that it was only at the 3rd January 2017 launch of the CTF Final Report that the Foreign Minister announced that the Gazette on the OMP Act had finally been signed by President Sirisena – giving effect to the law after several months of inaction.

The OMP Act was further amended on 22nd June 2017 by a unanimous vote in Parliament which removed a key paragraph that explicitly had allowed the OMP to enter into independent financing arrangements with external sources. Many victims groups and analysts saw this as seriously compromising the independence of the OMP because it would now be entirely dependent on the government for finances.

Laying the Foundation for the OMP on Uncertain Ground

Read More