At the UN Human Rights Council this week, there was a range of responses from member states over Sri Lanka’s human rights record and the UN’s evidence-gathering mandate, with the EU, UK and several partners reiterating the need for accountability whilst others including Russia, Belarus, Iran, Pakistan, Venezuela and others attacked international scrutiny and urged deference to Colombo’s “domestic processes”.
India reiterated calls for devolution, but strictly within Sri Lanka’s “unity, territorial integrity and sovereignty”.
No member state backed a fully internationalised accountability process that Tamils have demanded for decades.
Europe and partners: accountability, PTA concerns, and support for OHCHR
European Union — The EU welcomed the OHCHR report, saying Sri Lanka now needs “a comprehensive roadmap to translate these commitments into results”.
“We remain concerned over the lack of significant progress on accountability and justice for the victims, especially with respect to the many cases of dead and still missing persons. This situation needs to be addressed urgently and with decisive commitment. Accountability is central to the rule of law and for guarantees of non-repetition.”
The EU also added it remained “concerned about the continued use of the Prevention of Terrorism Act”, yet also said it is “welcoming [Sri Lanka’s] continued cooperation with the United Nations human rights system”.
United Kingdom (Core Group: Canada, Malawi, Montenegro, North Macedonia, UK) — The group urged “meaningful actions on human rights, accountability, reconciliation, good governance and constitutional reform,” stressing, “It is crucial that investigations at mass grave sites are carried out in line with international standards and that journalists, human rights defenders and civil society organisations can operate freely and safely.”
However, they too shied away from speak of international accountability and instead said “Addressing longstanding impunity is essential to build trust among victims and survivors in domestic judicial processes”.
“We support a fully independent and effective public prosecutorial body.”
United Kingdom (individual statement) — London highlighted “concerns around arbitrary detention, custodial deaths, intimidation of human rights defenders, and targeting of minority communities,” and was “deeply concerned about the continued use” of the PTA “despite public commitments to abolish it”.
The UK too also called on Colombo to “re-invigorate the work of domestic institutions focused on reparations and missing persons”.
Switzerland — Bern said the PTA and Online Safety Act “disproportionately restrict freedom of expression,” was “alarmed by the persistent allegations of torture, as well as the intimidation and harassment of human rights defenders and families of the disappeared.”
It urged cooperation with the Sri Lanka Accountability Project, noting “sixteen years after the end of the conflict, it remains essential to ensure truth, justice, and reparation for all victims”.
France — Paris aligned with the EU, welcomed “notable progress in the fight against corruption,” and encouraged a “credible and inclusive justice mechanism,” calling the pledge to repeal the PTA “a positive signal”.
“The new government has demonstrated a clear intention to undertake structural reforms aimed at improving the human rights situation in the country,” it said.
Ireland — Dublin warned the PTA and Online Safety Act risk misuse to arrest people for expression, urging “a moratorium on the use of these Acts until they are in full compliance with international human rights law”.
“We note with concern reports of the continued use of torture and ill-treatment in places of detention,” it said.
Romania — Bucharest called assurances under the “Clean Sri Lanka Project” “very promising” and encouraged cooperation with the Accountability Project “towards all victims and survivors”.
“Ensuring accountability and addressing the root causes of the conflict are indispensable to realizing the Government's vision of national unity,” it said.
North Macedonia — In addition to the Core Group statement, Skopje said “meaningful reform cannot succeed without dealing with the past and advancing accountability,” and backed extending the OHCHR mandate.
New Zealand — Wellington welcomed engagement but was “concerned by ongoing threats to human rights and fundamental freedoms outlined in High Commissioner’s report, including the continued use of regressive laws, and the ongoing surveillance and harassment of families of the disappeared and human rights defender,,” asking how the international community can “support effective accountability and reconciliation”.
Japan — Tokyo “welcomes the strong political commitment of the new Government,” acknowledged efforts in the North and East, and urged “effective measures to achieve a meaningful reconciliation”.
Republic of Korea — Seoul noted pledges to repeal the PTA and tackle corruption, but urged “further concrete steps… to yield tangible results”.
Montenegro — Podgorica supported reopening emblematic cases and said working with the OHCHR Sri Lanka Accountability Project “can significantly strengthen” justice efforts.
India: devolution within a unitary frame
India — New Delhi reiterated support for Tamil “equality, justice, dignity and peace within the overall unity, territorial integrity and sovereignty of Sri Lanka,” calling for “full and effective implementation of the Sri Lankan Constitution, early conduct of Provincial Council elections, and meaningful devolution of powers”.
States pushing back against scrutiny and the OHCHR mandate
Russia — Moscow said it saw “no reason to raise concerns,” and condemned HRC resolutions empowering OHCHR to collect evidence “for some future judicial processes,” insisting justice is the “exclusive prerogative of the Sri Lankan authorities”.
“Against this background, the ongoing attempts to exert political pressure on this sovereign state under far-fetched human rights pretexts are a cause for concern.”
Belarus — Minsk decried pressure via a “non-consensus mechanism (OSLAP),” calling OHCHR recommendations on “external judicial actions… unnecessary,” and demanding reports reflect “positive results”.
“We consider the OHCHR recommendations regarding external judicial actions against a sovereign country to be unnecessary.”
Iran — Tehran opposed “the continued extension of the so-called Sri Lanka Accountability Project (SLAP),” arguing for “technical cooperation and capacity-building — not external imposition”.
“Iran reiterates its principled position in rejecting any initiatives that undermines, distorts, or overshadows national efforts.”
Pakistan — Islamabad said money for the Sri Lanka Accountability Project “could no doubt be put to better use,” praising “Sri Lanka’s demonstrable success in protecting the people from the pernicious human rights risks posed by terrorism”.
“Continuing progress in missing persons and reparations cases are additional bright spots,” it added.
Venezuela — Caracas condemned “resolutions promoted by some hegemonic countries which use the cause of human rights and the mechanisms established by this Council to harass sovereign countries.”
It went on to say Sri Lanka’s progress “is not properly valued,” urging the Council to “abandon its interventionist approach”.
Zimbabwe — Harare said “no country has a perfect human record”.
“Imposition of country specific mechanisms on targeted countries therefore undermines the Human Rights Council’s core principles of objectivity, non-selectivity and constructive dialogue.”
It urged support focused on “developing the capacities of the Government”.
Gulf Cooperation Council (on behalf of GCC states delivered by Kuwait) — The GCC noted reform pledges and urged “technical cooperation, capacity building, and constructive dialogue,” looking to legislative reforms and “national reconciliation”.
“The GCC countries are following with interest the recent developments in Sri Lanka, particularly the formation of the new government and its reform pledges and commitment to promoting transparency and good governance.”
Egypt — Cairo urged “universality, objectivity, and non-selectivity when considering human rights issues in Sri Lanka,” and warned against “the politicization of human rights and their exploitation to interfere in internal affairs”.
It also urged “coordination with Sri Lanka to ensure positive outcomes… with full respect for its sovereignty”.
Philippines — Manila emphasised “the importance of providing Sri Lanka with the necessary `policy space to lead its national processes,” saying durable solutions must be “owned and led by national institutions,” and urged “cost-effective approaches”.
Vanuatu — Port Vila stressed “nationally owned processes” and called to “avoid reliance on parallel processes that risk polarizing rather than healing”.
Burundi — Bujumbura backed domestic mechanisms and the proposed TRC, saying “any attempt at external interference can only hinder” and reiterating “full support for Sri Lanka”.
Côte d’Ivoire — Abidjan welcomed “progress… since the 2024 presidential and parliamentary elections,” urging support via “technical assistance, and capacity building,” and warned against “politicization of debates”.
Turkey — Ankara noted “a positive trajectory” and “three successful elections,” insisting Sri Lanka “should be supported in developing national solutions… inclusive and acceptable to all segments of society”.
Maldives — Malé “commends” pledges to “restore the rule of law, advance reconciliation, and strengthen accountability,” expressing confidence that reforms reflect “the will of its people”.
Nepal — Kathmandu welcomed engagement, “commend[ed] Sri Lanka for the legislative reforms,” and offered to share its “experience in transitional justice… supporting… accountability”.
Colombia — Drawing on its own experience, Bogotá urged mechanisms that “guarantee the right to truth, justice, comprehensive reparation, and guarantees of non-repetition,” stressing “a victim-centered approach”.
