Sri Lanka Rejects UN Resolution 51/1, Highlights Economic Recovery and Reconciliation Efforts at Human Rights Council

Sri Lanka voiced strong opposition to UN Human Rights Council Resolution 51/1 at the 57th session, rejecting the external evidence-gathering mechanism established by the resolution. The Sri Lankan delegation emphasized the nation’s economic recovery following its worst financial crisis and highlighted domestic efforts for reconciliation and development.

They criticized the report’s focus on economic issues and failure to address LTTE terrorism. Sri Lanka reaffirmed its commitment to democratic processes, with the upcoming presidential election on September 21, 2024, underscoring this dedication.

57th Session of the Human Rights Council:

Statement by Sri Lanka
(as the country concerned, following the Presentation of the Comprehensive Report on Sri Lanka by the High Commissioner for Human Rights)
09 September 2024

Mr. President,

High Commissioner for Human Rights,

Excellencies,

As this Council deliberates on the comprehensive report on Sri Lanka, presented by the High Commissioner for Human Rights, I wish to reiterate Sri Lanka’s longstanding  commitment to constructive engagement with this Council , the Universal Declaration and the related Treaties as well as other human rights mechanisms to which we are party.

Let me restate at the outset, Sri Lanka’s opposition to Human Rights Council Resolution 51/1 which mandated the report under consideration and the establishment of the external evidence-gathering mechanism.  This resolution was adopted without Sri Lanka’s consent by a divided vote within this Council. We disassociate with the report for the reasons stated in our detailed response, available on the OHCHR website.

After facing its worst economic crisis, Sri Lanka succeeded in stabilizing its economy through a combination of prudent economic decision-making and enhanced financial oversight and governance, overcoming unprecedented social and political challenges. The resilience of Sri Lanka’s democratic institutions and economic recovery has been widely recognized domestically and commended by international agencies and both bilateral and multilateral partners.

This fragile but solidly grounded economic stability and the completion of debt restructuring has led to improved economic indicators including a remarkable return to positive economic growth of 5.3% in the first quarter of 2024, currency appreciation, a tripling of remittances, strengthened foreign exchange reserves, and a reduction in inflation from over 70% in September 2022 to 1.7% by June 2024-  As an outcome of these economic measures we are already delivering tangible benefits to Sri Lankans in their daily lives.

Transitioning from a debt-driven economic crisis toward stabilization and inclusive growth involves budgetary restrictions, which cause unfortunate short-term adverse impacts on various segments of society, particularly the vulnerable. This is an unavoidable consequence of the financial crisis and the stringent measures required for economic recovery—a reality not unique to Sri Lanka. Strengthening the economy is vital to the enjoyment of economic and social rights as well as the right to development.

Welfare measures, such as the *Aswesuma* cash transfer program, which will support nearly two million people in 2024, the national school nutrition program, which covers 1.6 million students, and the *Urumaya* land ownership scheme, which aims to grant freehold titles to all communities across 25 districts,mitigate the effects of fiscal austerity on vulnerable groups.

In parallel with our economic recovery, the Government continues to take steps to heal past wounds and to address the residual issues affecting civilians from all communities arising from decades of conflict. These initiatives include rehabilitating ex-combatants and child soldiers, demining and developing the North and East, providing reparations, resettling the internally displaced, releasing private land to original owners, offering livelihood assistance, and continuing inquiries into missing persons.

To promote national unity and reconciliation among our diverse communities, domestic initiatives such as the Office on Missing Persons (OMP), the Office for National Unity and Reconciliation (ONUR), the Office for Overseas Sri Lankans, and the Interim Secretariat for the Truth and Reconciliation Mechanism (ISTRM) have been established. The details of these initiatives are included in our response to the Report.

As one of the oldest democracies in Asia, with Universal Adult Franchise since 1931, Sri Lanka has navigated its challenges while maintaining the stability of our democratic institutions and traditions. Our leaders have been held accountable through free and fair elections, and peaceful transitions of power have been consistently upheld. The upcoming Presidential election on 21st September reaffirms our commitment to this process.

It is most surprising that the report steps far out of its mandated sphere of human rights to comment on macro economics as well as financial and budgetary issues under sovereign parliamentary purview. Contrary to the reaction of the rest of our international partners, it projects a negative overview for Sri Lanka’s future, fails to recognize social stabilization and the preservation of parliamentary democracy overcoming recent severe challenges, the return to normalcy with the restoration of food, energy and public services and stability arising from significantly improved outlook. Furthermore, it makes no mention of the brutal acts of terrorism and human rights violations committed by the LTTE, including child recruitment, suicide bombings, assassination of democratically elected MPs and leaders in SL and abroad, and the disruption of democratic rights and freedoms of the people, especially in the North and the East.

Mr. President,

I wish to once again emphasize Sri Lanka’s strong rejection of Resolution 51/1 and the external evidence-gathering mechanism established within OHCHR. This unproductive and unwarranted mechanism exceeds the Council’s mandate, contradicts its founding principles, and polarizes the Council, undermining the progress we have made domestically. The selective and disproportionate focus on handpicked developing countries while ignoring critical situations elsewhere is unacceptable. We urge the Council to avoid politicization and double standards, and to focus on dire humanitarian situations that require urgent action to maintain its credibility.

Thank you