Arc of the moral universe finally bending towards justice

Karim Khan, the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC), said last week that a senior elected leader, presumably from a Western country, told him that the ICC was built for Africa and “thugs like Vladimir Putin”, the Russian president. Khan did not specify which elected leader or leaders he was referring to but expressed his disapproval at apparent threats from the United States over the ICC’s intention to seek arrest warrants against Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel. The court also asked for an arrest warrant for Yoav Gallant, Israeli Defence Minister. Both men have been accused of war crimes.

Last week, US Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, the third most senior political leader in the country said, “America should punish the ICC and put Karim Khan back in his place. If the ICC is allowed to threaten Israel’s leaders, we know that America will be next.” The US has not endorsed the Rome statute that established the ICC, nor has it accepted its jurisdiction.

The ICC is the first and only permanent international court with jurisdiction to prosecute individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and aggression. The court’s member states are obliged to immediately arrest the wanted person if on their territory.

Though international justice against Israel is not swift as it may have been for a third world country without diplomatic protection from the sole hegemon, the events of the last few weeks at the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court demonstrate that the days of total immunity for certain countries may be limited. 

It is in this light that Sri Lankan leaders should evaluate their own approach to accountability and justice for alleged crimes committed within our own country. Since 1971 hundreds of thousands of citizens, mostly civilians, have been tortured or subjected to enforced disappearance or extrajudicial killings. Yet hardly any individual in authority has been held accountable. Time and time again the judiciary has failed to deliver justice to the victims and the organs of the executive, the Police and the Attorney General’s Department have failed to investigate and prosecute agents of the State. 

In the absence of genuine efforts to address the country’s outstanding accountability gap, calls have been raised for international jurisdiction to take over. Already the UN Human Rights Council has mandated the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to establish an accountability mechanism which has now been operational for three years. This mechanism works without any contribution or knowledge of the Sri Lankan State. Where it may take the accountability process next is unclear but for certain the Sri Lankan Government will have little say in its trajectory. 

Even more concerning should be the calls for Sri Lanka to be referred to the ICC. Despite Sri Lanka not being a signatory to the Rome Statute very high-level political leaders, international human rights organisations and even the UN human rights office have continuously called for this referral. Sri Lanka does not have the diplomatic clout or cover of the likes of Israel, and if there is little progress in the domestic sphere concerning accountability further international action would be inevitable. Rather than burying our heads in the sand and hoping these issues will go away, the political leadership will be better served if a genuine effort is made to deliver justice domestically to the many victims who have suffered at the hands of the Sri Lankan State for over 50 years.