Today’s U.N. Human Rights Council special session on Sri Lanka (click for UN Watch speech) ended in disgrace, with the U.N. lavishing praise on the very government it was meant to hold to account. Following is the play-by-play.
First, Sri Lanka proposed an updated revised text of its self-congratulatory resolution. Though this incorporated some of the non-contentious proposals of the Swiss-EU draft, the text remained a shameful distortion of reality and of human rights.
The European Union responded by proposing amendments that would express grave concern at the situation, call for the respect of international law, call on Sri Lanka to ensure “full, rapid and unimpeded access of humanitarian assistance,” and demand accountability and follow-up to the situation in Sri Lanka.
Cuba then took the floor to call for a “no-action” motion to prevent debate on the amendments. This motion is based on rule 117 of the General Assembly’s Rules of Procedure, which states that “A representative may at any time move the closure of the debate on the item under discussion.”
The ensuing vote on this motion resulted in 22 in favor, 17 against, and 7 abstaining (Jordan did not vote).
In favor: Angola, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Madagascar, Malaysia, Nicaragua, Pakistan, the Philippines, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and South Africa.
Against: The 7 EU members (France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Slovakia, Slovenia, and the UK) along with Argentina, Bosnia, Canada, Chile, Japan, Mauritius, Mexico, South Korea, Switzerland, and Uruguay.
Abstaining: Azerbaijan, Brazil, Gabon, Nigeria, Senegal, Ukraine, and Zambia.
Switzerland then called for a vote on Sri Lanka’s text, which passed with 29 in favor, 12 against, and 6 abstaining.
In favor Angola, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Madagascar, Malaysia, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, the Philippines, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, South Africa, Uruguay, and Zambia.
Against: the EU 7 (France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Slovakia, Slovenia, and the UK), Bosnia, Canada, Chile, Mexico, and Switzerland
Abstaining: Argentina, Gabon, Japan, Mauritius, South Korea, and Ukraine.
Just before the final vote, Sri Lanka made a dig at the EU. It happened after Germany’s speech on behalf of the EU when there was a problem with the speaker system. It was soon discovered that Germany had forgotten to turn off its microphone so the President of the Human Rights Council told Germany to do so. When the ambassador of Sri Lanka took the floor, he arrogantly said, “My headphones must have malfunctioned. For a moment I thought I heard the president tell Germany to turn off its megaphone, not its microphone.”
Sri Lanka made a number of other undiplomatic comments during the session. It complained about the work of certain NGOs, seemingly as a means to justify not letting in these aid workers. It said, “We want NGOs who bring aid, but we don’t want people sitting around begging for crubs from rich men’s tables that should go to our poor citizens.”
Sri Lanka complained that the session’s sponsors are the same people who “told the world that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, so I wouldn’t buy a used car from them.” It said the “true value” of its self-congratulatory resolution is that it is not a “manifesto for a lynch mob.”
