SRI LANKA CONTINUES TO RESIST PRESSURE IN HUMAN

C O N F I D E N T I A L GENEVA 000180

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/07/2018
TAGS: PHUM PGOV PREL UNHRC CE
SUBJECT: SRI LANKA CONTINUES TO RESIST PRESSURE IN HUMAN
RIGHTS COUNCIL

REF: GENEVA 108

Classified By: Political Counselor Michael Klecheski. Reasons: 1.4 (b/
d).


1. (C) SUMMARY: The EU continues to hold out the prospect of
tabling a resolution critical of Sri Lanka in the Human
Rights Council, but it has failed to pressure the GoSL into
dropping its opposition to establishing an independent
presence on the ground of the Office of the High Commissioner
for Human Rights (OHCHR). Sri Lanka's Human Rights Minister
again visited Geneva to make his government's case and to
meet with High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour in
what proved a fruitless discussion. Meanwhile, a
Swiss-hosted meeting of delegations seeking to further
increase the pressure concluded, inter alia, that gaining the
support of non-Western countries, notably India, would be
highly useful, and that the Council's new Universal Periodic
Review mechanism might be helpful. In Geneva, Sri Lanka has
been effective in its strategy of gaining support from less
developed countries as it fends off pressure from Western
delegations. END SUMMARY

EU RESOLUTION STILL LOOMING
--------------


2. (C) As the month-long March Human Rights Council session
got underway last week, discussion continued over how to use
it and other Geneva-based mechanisms to address Sri Lanka's
deteriorating human rights record. The EU, which has long
had a draft resolution on Sri Lanka ready for tabling, again
decided to use that resolution as a pressure point but not
table it. The EU recognizes that, were the resolution to be
tabled, it would likely be defeated. While this inevitably
reduces its effectiveness as a threat, EU members and others
remain convinced that Colombo feels at least somewhat
concerned, and that this helps explain Sri Lanka's continued
intense public relations campaign in Geneva (reftel and
previous).

PRESSING FOR AN INDEPENDENT OHCHR PRESENCE
--------------


3. (SBU) As part of that campaign, the GoSL again deployed a
sizable delegation, led by Minister of Disaster Management
and Human Rights Mahinda Samarasinghe, for a series of
bilats, meetings with regional groups and side events on the
margins of the first week of the Council session, as well as
to speak at the session's High Level Segment. In a meeting
with Arbour, Samarasinghe reportedly offered to allow a few
more OHCHR staff to be based in Sri Lanka, as long as they
worked under the auspices of the country's national human
rights structure. Arbour, in turn, continued to insist on an
independent monitoring presence in Sri Lanka. In a Western
Group meeting and several others, we joined other delegations
in pressing the GoSL to reconsider its opposition to an
independent OHCHR presence.


4. (C) Responding to that view during those meetings,
Samarasinghe argued that the GoSL was cooperating with UN
organs, having welcomed Arbour, Special Rapporteur on Torture
Manfred Nowak, Special Representative of the Secretary
General on IDPs Walter Kalin, and most recently Assistant SYG
for Political Affairs Angela Kane for visits. Samarasinghe
continued to argue, as he has in the past, that an
independent OHCHR presence was unnecessary, would be used for
propaganda purposes by the LTTE, would undercut national
human rights institutions, and would demean the country. In
private, he told us that officials of countries that had
accepted such arrangements, including Colombia, had warned
him against doing so. In a March 5 meeting with Ambassador
Tichenor, Colombian Vice President Francisco Santos Calderon,
also in town for the Council's High Level Segment, said that
he had told the Sri Lankans that the independent OHCHR office
had long been a thorn in the government's side but was now
proving very helpful. (Note: Colombia and Nepal are usually
cited as the two most successful models of an independent
OHCHR office on the ground.)

HOW TO PRESSURE SRI LANKA?
--------------


5. (C) Also on the margins of the Council session, the Swiss
government hosted a March 6 meeting with several delegations,
including us, to discuss how to increase the pressure on the
GoSL, notably in Geneva, to improve its human rights
behavior. Key suggestions included:

-- Pursuing a cross-regional approach. There was general
agreement that Sri Lanka, and in particular its outspoken

ambassador here, were effectively playing off the West
against less developed countries. Pursuing a cross-regional
approach was therefore essential. Norway's Special Envoy for
Sri Lanka, John Hanssen-Bauer, argued that getting India to
exert pressure was possible and would be particularly
effective. Prospects for China's support were less certain,
although of tremendous value. Reaching out to moderates in
the Latin American and African regional groups might also
prove fruitful.

-- Using the Universal Periodic Review (UPR). Sri Lanka will
come up for UPR review in June. UPR is to be a cooperative
process, and using it to attack Sri Lanka could backfire, but
ensuring that the review includes tough questions on all
aspects of its human rights record could be effective. Sri
Lanka has failed to implement most of the recommendations of
special rapporteurs; highlighting that point through
questions about implementation would also be useful. If Sri
Lanka proves uncooperative on UPR, this could open the door
to tabling the EU's resolution or holding a special session.

-- Using Sri Lanka's Council candidacy as a pressure point.
Sri Lanka is running for membership in the Council. Most of
the meeting's participants believed their governments would
not vote for Sri Lanka under any circumstances, with a French
representative reporting that FM Kouchner had responded
coolly to an appeal for support from his Sri Lankan
counterpart. Even though the GoSL likely realizes this,
there might be ways to leverage its candidacy to exert
pressure, at minimum by highlighting that human rights
records are key factors in countries' voting decisions on
this issue.

-- Highlighting Sri Lanka's poor record. The GoSL holds
numerous events during Council sessions to lay out its
position, whereas critics of Sri Lanka's record are less
active. Discreetly encouraging NGOs critical of Sri Lanka to
arrange side events could be useful. A member of the
International Independent Group of Eminent Experts, possibly
its (Indian) Chair, might also be invited to Geneva to
discuss Sri Lanka's human rights situation.

-- Underscoring the value of independent OHCHR field offices.
Highlighting OHCHR's successful field offices, particularly
those in Colombia and Nepal, might undercut Sri Lanka's
position on the issue. It also would make the broader point
about the value both of an independent OHCHR and of that
Office's strong presence on the ground, thus countering the
current efforts in the Council to undercut OHCHR's
independence. UK Foreign Office Human Rights Group head
Susan Hyland also raised the possibility of encouraging a
study of the role an independent OHCHR office could play in
Sri Lanka.

SUMMARY
--------------


6. (C) As in the past, Sri Lanka's delegation took a tough
and often acerbic tone in its latest public relations
campaign in Geneva. While this may in part reflect the
personality of its ambassador in Geneva, Dayan Jayatilleka,
it also reflects a strategy of appealing to NAM countries, to
whom it argues implicitly (and probably explicitly, behind
closed doors) that it is willing to stand up to the West,
which is unfairly picking on it. That message resonates
particularly strongly in the Human Rights Council, further
complicating our efforts to use that body to pressure Sri
Lanka on its human rights record. That said, the ideas laid
out in the March 6 meeting appear to us to be worth pursuing.
TICHENOR