The informal consultations on the US draft resolution on Sri Lanka held at the Palais des Nations in Geneva last morning proceeded in the same vein it has unfolded in past years, UNHRC observers said.

Russia, China, Cuba and particularly Pakistan strongly backed the dilution of language of the resolution, while the EU, Switzerland, Ireland, Canada and the core group of sponsors reiterated support for the draft.

Kicking off the discussion, the Pakistan delegation insisted that the US resolution on Sri Lanka would only be ‘fruitful’ if it had the full support and acceptance of the country concerned. “It’s important for the international community to strengthen the Government of Sri Lanka’s hand and not to weaken it internally,” the Pakistani diplomat told delegates at the informal session.

The Russian delegation urged the sponsors of the resolution to “heed Sri Lanka’s concerns” about the draft.

The Chinese delegation raising issue with Operative Paragraph 4 of the draft resolution, opposed the inclusion of international judges, investigators and prosecutors in Sri Lanka’s accountability mechanism, saying the language eroded Sri Lanka’s “judicial sovereignty”.

Cuba also opposed the draft resolution, saying it was repetitive and selective. “Each country should decide internally how to promote human rights,” the Cuban delegate said.

Pakistan held firm for Sri Lanka, requesting clarity on paragraphs in the draft referring to demilitarisation of the North and insisting that it was up to the people of Sri Lanka and its Government to find a solution to the issues.

“Trying to internationalise this process through a hybrid mechanism to solve the problems is as if to say they are not capable of doing that. Theirs is a civilisation thousands of years old,” the Pakistani envoy asserted. Pakistan said it would oppose the resolution unless the country concerned – Sri Lanka – was “fully onboard” with its language. Pakistan also demanded to know if the continuous assessment recommended in the resolution by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights would have budgetary implications.

Head of the US delegation in Geneva, Ambassador Harper responded that they were not aware of any budgetary implications so far, and insisted that the aim of the resolution should be to make the accountability mechanism in Sri Lanka “credible”. “The key term here is credibility. Whatever this resolution does, it must make the mechanism more credible,” Ambassador Harper noted during the informal session.

Responding to Pakistan’s request for clarity on the demilitarisation clauses, Ambassador Harper said that militarisation of the region has been a “driver of human rights issues”. “This has been reflected in OHCHR reports and also domestic reports – it is a core concern,” the US Envoy reiterated.

The Irish delegation also had several inputs supporting the draft resolution, and urged Sri Lanka not to view the international element recommended to its accountability process as intrusive or judgmental. “From our own experience in Ireland, we found the international role to be helpful. The international dimension could assist rather than undermine,” the delegate from Ireland explained. Ireland called for a “strong international element” which it said was crucial to the credibility of the accountability mechanism in Sri Lanka.

The delegations of both Norway and Switzerland urged that the resolution call for an oral report from High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein in March 2016, instead of one year ahead in September 2016, as the resolution currently recommends.

“The credibility and success of any transitional justice mechanism is enhanced by international assistance and expertise,” the Norwegian delegation noted.

The EU delegation called for a “robust international component” in the accountability process in Sri Lanka, in line with the High Commissioner’s report on war crimes released last week.

Sri Lankan human rights activist Dr. Nimalka Fernando making an intervention on behalf of civil society, praised the overall framework of the draft resolution. She said had built on the “pain and agony of victims in Sri Lanka”.

Dr Fernando told member states that there has been clear indication in the language of the Sri Lankan Prime Minister, the commitments of the President and remarks by the Cabinet Spokesman that the political leadership was seriously considering the need for an international role and engagement of the international community in the reconciliation and accountability process.