Transitional Justice In Sri Lanka: 2019 & Beyond

By Esther Hoole –

Esther Hoole

In September 2015, the Government endorsed the Human Rights Council Resolution 30/1, and made an unprecedented commitment to transparency and accountability via a transitional justice process. It promised State-endorsed avenues to pursuing truth, justice, reparations and institutional reform, particularly in connection to the conflict. Immediately after the signing of the resolution it appeared that the transitional government was making concrete strides towards effectively dealing with the crimes committed by previous regimes and armed groups.

Three and a half years later, Sri Lanka’s political situation is remains unstable, and any commitment to transitional justice within Government seems to have waned. The political coup at the end of 2018 highlighted the serious cracks within the coalition government, the immense corruption within party politics, the vulnerability of some State institutions to the whims of the President, and the fragility of the entire transition. In relation to transitional justice, the few who supported it from within the Government have increasingly disengaged from it, as resistance to credible accountability grows stronger. Efforts to fulfill the commitments under Resolution 30/1 have been rushed, centered around the Human Rights Council sessions.

In 2019, we approach a series of major elections, that could re-define or put an end to any transitional reform process, including transitional justice. In the few months of the coup, with members of the former regime regaining power, there was an increase in surveillance and threats towards activists and victim groups, as well as the curtailment of media freedom – a reminder that a return to pre-2015 repression is a very possible outcome of these elections.

The prevalent political uncertainty indicates that in Government, there will be little to no political will or energy expended on transitional justice in the coming year, because of the controversy surrounding it. It is likely that any space left for a reformist agenda will be expended on passing a new constitution.

Given this broader context, we are left with the questions – 1) should transitional justice remain a priority in 2019?, and 2) how can transitional justice be advanced in this year despite increasing hurdles?

Transitional justice is underpinned by the global understanding that societies must address legacies of past crimes and human rights abuses to move forward into lasting peace and reconciliation. Although this coming May will mark ten years since the end of the conflict, Sri Lankan society is still far from a general acceptance that crimes were committed by both sides during the conflict, and from a credible accountability process. If we are to transform into a society which – in the long term – is reconciled, egalitarian, democratically stable, and which honours the law, implementing the transitional justice process of Resolution 30/1 is vital.

There is also a more politically realist point to be made here. One of the greatest contributors to the 2015 transition was the overwhelming support of minority communities, which also contain the largest victim communities. If the current government fails to perform on election promises of establishing the truth and judicial accountability within the coming year, it risks losing a significant – perhaps defining – portion of its 2015 voter base. For the continuation of a more liberal government post-2019, and the long-term political stability and peace of Sri Lanka, transitional justice must remain a priority, both domestically and internationally.

It is undeniable however, that the scope for transitional justice in Sri Lanka has narrowed dramatically in the past few years, with little to no political will, and a much stronger opposition. Advocates for transitional justice – diplomats, civil society and media – must alter their approach accordingly. In 2015, the modus operandi was to engage directly with the top tiers of Government – that door is fast closing. In the coming year, stakeholders must prioritize strengthening the gains of the past few years, building capacity and knowledge on transitional justice within lower tiers of government institutions and mobilizing public support for transitional justice.

Read More