ISSN 2330-717X

UN Resolution Against Sri Lanka Is Partisan And Unfair – OpEd


The UN Human Rights Council has thought it fit to pass a resolution by majority vote against Sri Lanka for what the resolution termed as human rights violation. While reading the resolution, it is necessary to keep in view that it is not a unanimous resolution, but only a resolution by majority votes.

After passing this resolution, one is not sure as to how the UN Human Rights Council would act against Sri Lanka and whether it would go into silence thinking that it has done its “job”.

It is well known by past experience that the UN and the UN Human Rights Council would behave like a toothless tiger in the case of dealing with economically rich and militarily strong countries. Only in the case of weak and developing countries, Human Rights Council will act with “courage of conviction.”

Sri Lanka government had to face strong separatist and militant groups for several years, who were fighting a bloody war demanding separate state for Tamils. In such a condition, the Sri Lanka government had no alternative other than fighting with back to wall to protect its sovereignty and territorial integrity. Every country in the world would have reacted in the same way and have been reacting in the same way in similar situations, as Sri Lanka government did.

Sri Lanka government suffered enormously due to the bloody war and the separatist militant groups were ruthless and have killed not only several Sri Lankans and Sri Lanka military personnel but also several Tamils in northern Sri Lanka, who refused to toe the line of the militants. There were several factions in the militant groups  and one faction fought with another faction and several Tamils were killed in the process.

For several years, the Sri Lanka government could not match its military strength with that of the strongly armed militant groups and it was a losing war for several years. Finally, when Sri Lanka  government could make it’s military strong and fought the war and successfully defeated the militants, there were casualties of hundreds of people on both the sides.

It is a fact that several countries who voted for the resolution against Sri Lanka government passed by the UN Human Rights Commission, provided sort of support to the militants on their soil by allowing them to carry on their activities .

These countries behaved in such a way ,clearly knowing that the accommodation that they provided to the militant groups would harm the territorial integrity of Sri Lanka.

No doubt, the human rights violation happened  during the civil war and it was inevitable in a war like situation and both Sri Lanka government and militants were responsible for this.

It is shocking that UN Human Rights commission has not meaningfully taken note of the human rights violation by the militant groups but has only condemned the Sri Lanka government. Is it not a partisan and prejudiced view, unbecoming of United Nations Organisation?

The countries which voted for the resolution are mostly the so called democracies of western countries, who   habitually only take note of the human rights violation in other countries and not in their own.

These days, very frequently, we hear about US police shooting down mercilessly those who indulge in terrorist like activities. In the same way, European countries such as France and others also ask the police to shoot down those indulging in terrorism. This is as it should be. But, why these countries condemn Sri Lanka government for acting in the same way to fight against the terrorists and violent prone separatists?

Several other countries in Africa  as well as China and Russia also kill the protestors mercilessly in the name of preserving the peace and public order.

The countries criticizing Sri Lanka for “human rights violation” is like the pot calling the kettle black.

Certainly, any discerning and neutral observer would be justified in terming the resolution passed by U N Human Rights Council against Sri  Lanka as unwarranted and  partisan .

One only hopes that in future, the UN Human Rights Council would gain greater wisdom, so that it can view such “human rights violation” in a holistic manner and  see the unavoidable reasons for it in proper perspective and without pre-conceived view.

N. S. Venkataraman

N. S. Venkataraman is a trustee with the "Nandini Voice for the Deprived," a not-for-profit organization that aims to highlight the problems of downtrodden and deprived people and support their cause. To promote probity and ethical values in private and public life and to deliberate on socio-economic issues in a dispassionate and objective manner.

3 thoughts on “UN Resolution Against Sri Lanka Is Partisan And Unfair – OpEd

  • March 24, 2021 at 8:18 am

    Very well said. As a Sri Lankan Tamil, I fully identify with the true feelings of the author whose voice is indeed the voice of the deprived including in Sri Lanka. As indicated, it was no just Sri Lanka on trial but all those who assisted either side for selfish reasons

  • March 24, 2021 at 4:03 pm

    Well said… So called HRs crusaders (the West) are the biggest HR violators in the history. Now they have weaponized HRs, democracy, rule of law to punish the countries like Sri Lanka that don’t by into Western hypocrisy.

  • March 25, 2021 at 8:05 pm

    Very POOR Analysis!

    When analyzing, it should be complete review of all events, situations, root cause to the conflict, collaborators than just analyzing UNHRC vote;

    Most freedom struggles are as a result of state terrorism and oppression and the situation created by colonial rule. For example Scotland wants to separate and there is no violence; But will India allows a referendum in Kashmir? So you cannot compare the British democracy to India?

    No country that voted against SriLanka kills / murders their own people/citizens like those who voted in favour of Sri Lanka (China, Philippines, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Etc) and few abstained including India.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *