Untitled - International Commission of Jurists

measures recommended in regard to reparations have also not been implemented
beyond paying the victims small amounts of compensation. In addition, important
limitations apply to their reports being made public. Consequently, public
expectations in regard to the appointment of such commissions are minimal and
invoke the most profound cynicism.
9. Methodology
The analysis proceeds on an examination of published commission of inquiry reports
together with confidential documentation that were part of these reports. In addition, it
uses the vast resource base of information contained in other reports by government
bodies (some of which are not easily accessible) and non-governmental organizations.
This is supplemented by key interviews with those closely involved with the working
of commissions of inquiry as well as with Sri Lanka’s justice system.
As anticipated, analysis of the data in this regard was limited by the absence of an upto-date
database of information as well as by inherent difficulties in accessing any
information available in the first instance, given that there is no right to public
information in court registries and/or information in the hands of the Attorney
General. Access to court records in Sri Lanka is fraught with difficulties; court
registries only entertain requests for information on a particular case from a lawyer
appearing in the case or a party proven to have a sufficient interest. Applications
made in the public interest are generally disallowed. A statutory right to information
which addressed, inter alia, the public’s right of access to information held in
government departments and courts still remains to be enacted into law though a draft
bill was approved by the Cabinet as far back as 2003.
In addition, though statistical information in relation to prosecutions for grave human
rights violations is given in the periodic reports that Sri Lanka furnishes to the United
Nations treaty bodies through the periodic reporting procedure, this information is, at
times, incoherent and disjointed. Consequently, reference to such statistics is based on
best available information, supplemented as much as possible through information
supplied ad hoc by the Attorney General’s Department in the context of previous
research engaged in by non-governmental organizations during alternative report
writing to the UN treaty bodies.
A further observation is that the alleged perpetrators implicated in many of the
incidents of grave human rights violations examined in this report are still serving in
official positions, including some who were subsequently promoted. Politicians
implicated in these crimes are also still in active politics. Thus, caution has been taken
in referring to these alleged perpetrators insofar as specific identification of
individuals is concerned.
17