http://www.dailynews.lk/2012/03/23/pol01.asp


Only one vote majority for resolution; 24 say ‘yes’, 23 decline
to support:
Might overrules right
*China, Russia and Cuba vote in favour
*Abstentions, a plus for Lanka
*‘Misconceived, unwarranted and ill-timed resolution’
*‘Those who live in glass houses are best advised to exercise caution before
throwing stones’
The United Nations Human Rights Council(UNHRC) yesterday passed the U S
sponsored resolution against Sri Lanka with 24 countries in favour and 15
against with eight abstentions, which were essentially countries who are
supporters of Sri Lanka. This brought the voting tally to 24 for and 23 against
the resolution. Cuba, China and Russia, strong allies of the country voted
against the resolution.
Minister Mahinda Samarasinghe
Earlier in the day, the chances of the US sponsored resolution on Sri Lanka
being carried with a majority vote, increasingly looked the likely scenario with
many of the countries who had hitherto pledged their allegiance to Sri Lanka
backing away in the wake of intense pressure mounted by the USA and its allies.
Despite this Minister Mahinda Samarasinghe and the rest of the delegation
made a fervent bid to change the minds of the uncommitted delegates to consider
Sri Lanka’s case in a favourable light,but it was apparent that a majority were
prepared to vote in favour of the resolution or abstain due to the pressure
exerted by US and its ability to wield its economic clout. However, only 24
countries voted in favour of the resolution in the 47-member Council.
Minister Mahinda Samarasinghe addressing the Council before the vote
yesterday said that after 30 long years of instability and violence Sri Lanka
has now achieved stability and peace.
"We need to be given time to further consolidate the clear progress that has
been achieved in a short period of three years" he added.
He said "it is against this backdrop that my country is compelled to face a
misconceived, unwarranted and ill-timed draft resolution, which embodies several
harmful elements that clearly violates important principles that will have
adverse ramifications, not only for my country, but many other countries"
The minister added " This is why we took a decision, on a matter of
principle, that we will not accept such a resolution, in an endeavour to also
ensure that a bad precedent is not established by this council" The minister
also said that the resolution also runs counter to the principle of
international law that domestic remedies must be exhausted and should be the
first resort, prior to superimposing external mechanisms.
"In respect of Sri Lanka's situation it is barely three months since the
presentation of the domestic mechanism's report. Is it fair for this council to
pre-judge our commitment to all aspects of the domestic process at this
juncture", he questioned.
He also pointed out that Sri Lanka has been a role model of, consistently and
unambiguously, engaging with everyone in the council at all times over the
years, including during the height of terror. Many other countries too spoke in
favour of Sri Lanka while endorsing the country's view that it needs more time
and space to address relevant issues without external interferences.

[Voting at the UNHRC sessions in Geneva]
It is against any country putting pressure on others in the name of rights
violations. Sri Lanka has made rapid progress on Human Rights and realization of
reconciliation process - China
The resolution was not necessary at this point of time. Sri Lanka should be
given time to implement the recommendations of the Lessons Learnt and
Reconciliation Commission (LLRC). We understand the trauma that Sri Lanka went
through due to the war – The Maldives
We oppose the resolution as it is an attempt to dictate terms on a sovereign
State how it should handle domestic issues - Russia
The Human Rights Council should not take a biased approach on Sri Lanka. Sri
Lanka has shown willingness to improve its human rights situation. It has
appointed the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission to investigate issues
in the aftermath of the conflict - Equador
We question the legitimacy and credibility of the draft resolution put
forward by the US on Sri Lanka branding it “unjustified and unnecessary”. The US
had still not closed its prison at Guantanamo despite President Barrack Obama
promising that it would be. This could possibly become a point of confrontation
and that it would be best if the resolution on Sri Lanka could be postponed -
Cuba
Sri Lanka is struggling to rise out of the ashes of 30 years conflict which
claimed thousands of innocent civilians in the country. It should be given more
time to promote reconciliation. The resolution makes a negative impact on the
smooth process of reconciliation of Sri Lanka - Bangladesh
We are against the resolution against Sri Lanka at this juncture as three
years have only elapsed after the conflict - Kuwait
The technical advice mentioned within the resolution should not be used as an
instrument of pressure on the have-nots. - Philippines
Sri Lanka as a member of the Non Aligned Movement has taken tremendous
efforts to promote reconciliation in the aftermath of conflict - Qatar
Sri Lanka should be given more time to heal the wounds of conflict - Congo
Sri Lanka has taken many positive steps towards the implementation of the
LLRC commission and external pressure at this juncture is totally unwarranted -
Indonesia
We oppose the efforts to meddle with internal affairs of Sri Lanka –
Thailand
Sri Lanka eradicated terrorism which destroyed the country for over three
decades. The country has taken a number of steps to promote reconciliation –
Uganda
We are of the view that Sri Lanka should have more time for reconciliation
– Saudi Arabia
Lanka has made tremendous strides towards development in the aftermath of
conflict - Mauritius