Return to War - Human Rights Watch

The 12 witnesses who spoke with Human Rights Watch provided no support for the
government’s claim. None of the people at or around the Kathiravelli camp that day
reported any LTTE artillery fire that morning. The nearest LTTE military base was
about two kilometers away, three people said. Six others explained how the LTTE
had blocked them from leaving the Vaharai area along the roads, including one
incident in which LTTE fighters shot and wounded a displaced person (see above).
But none of them said the LTTE had used anyone as a “human shield,” that is,
purposefully using civilians to render an LTTE fighter immune from attack. 75
Similarly, Human Rights Watch spoke with three international organizations with
direct knowledge of the Vaharai area and the Kathirivelli incident, and none of them
had any direct knowledge, or had heard credible reports, of the LTTE using civilians
as “human shields.”
In addition, the location of the displaced persons camp was known to the
government and should have been known to local army commanders. The camp had
opened on August 8 and received regular supplies from the ICRC and the Italian Red
Cross. Aerial observers would have spotted the numerous tin and palm-leaf huts on
the school grounds.
As alleged evidence of LTTE military activity in the school, the government pointed to
the many bunkers on the school grounds. Displaced persons who spent time in the
camp readily admitted to Human Rights Watch that they had dug bunkers. The
purpose was to protect their families from government shelling, they said—a
common practice in Sri Lanka’s militarily contested areas. “We built a bunker for
ourselves in the camp for our protection,” said the man who lost his wife.
“In the daytime, the LTTE didn’t carry weapons, so I don’t know who was LTTE,” said
a man who was in the school during the attack. “In the school after the bombing I
75 The practice of human shielding is specifically outlawed by international humanitarian law. Article 28 of the Fourth Geneva
Convention states, “The presence of a protected person may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from
military operations.”
43
Human Rights Watch August 2007