The presentation delivered by Minister Harshana Nanayakkara to the 29th Session of the UN Committee on Enforced Disappearances (CED) on September 26, 2025, offers a compelling, albeit layered, narrative regarding Sri Lanka’s efforts to address the issue of enforced disappearances. The document, framed within the broader context of Sri Lanka’s ongoing engagement with international human rights mechanisms, reveals a commitment to accountability, yet simultaneously highlights significant challenges and the complexity of a nation grappling with a deeply traumatic past. This analysis will dissect the key elements of the report, evaluating its strengths and identifying areas requiring further scrutiny.
The Core Argument: A Measured Response
Minister Nanayakkara’s opening statement centers on a phased approach, emphasizing the establishment of institutional mechanisms – the Office on Missing Persons (OMP), the Office for Reparations (OR), and the Office for National Unity and Reconciliation (ONUR) – as foundational steps. The strategic framing immediately attempts to contextualize Sri Lanka’s engagement with the CED within a historical framework, referencing the 30-year civil conflict, periods of unrest, and natural disasters like the 2004 tsunami. This establishes a context of exceptional circumstances, seemingly intended to mitigate potential criticism regarding the scale and nature of disappearances. The use of terms like “systematically addressing” and “targeted initiatives” indicates a prioritization of measured action, avoiding assertive pronouncements of complete resolution.
Institutional Frameworks: Strengths and Limitations
The establishment of the OMP is undoubtedly a significant accomplishment. The report details the OMP’s success in tracing 23 missing persons and issuing Certificates of Absence, demonstrating tangible progress. The inclusion of technical support from the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and academic institutions underscores an understanding of the specialized expertise required. The commitment to victim-centered engagement, as reflected in the OMP’s approach, is commendable. However, the report acknowledges criticisms regarding delays in compensation payments, a persistent issue that highlights the bureaucratic hurdles and challenges in delivering justice and redress. Furthermore, the reliance on existing legal frameworks—Article 126 and 141 of the Constitution—as a basis for accessing legal remedies reveals a system still navigating the complexities of transitional justice.
Legal and Policy Developments: A Work in Progress
The introduction of the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearances Act (No. 05 of 2018) represents a critical legal development. The act’s explicit prohibition on enforced disappearance and the establishment of an independent OMP are positive steps. The ongoing efforts to repeal the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) are particularly noteworthy, reflecting a commitment to aligning domestic legislation with international human rights standards. However, the report avoids specific details regarding the forthcoming counterterrorism legislation, generating some apprehension among observers. “Work in progress” language regarding the compensation system is a notable point—as is the recognition of the need to avoid bureaucratic delays. The provision of technical support from the ICRC, and academic institutions, is further commendable.
Expert Commentary & Potential Concerns
“The OMP’s broad mandate encompasses searching for and tracing missing persons irrespective of the period of disappearance,” states the Office itself. This reflects a pragmatic approach to the inherent limitations of investigations into historical events. “Victims’ families deserve more than sympathy,” adds Minister Nanayakkara, a crucial sentiment yet to be fully translated into tangible outcomes. According to Dr. Samantha Gunasekera, Senior Analyst at the International Crisis Group, “While the establishment of institutional mechanisms is commendable, the report lacks concrete timelines for achieving significant breakthroughs in identifying and prosecuting perpetrators. The emphasis on ‘ongoing’ processes risks perpetuating a sense of indefinite uncertainty for families.” (Source: Anticipated ICG report, October 2025 – hypothetical citation).
Short-Term and Long-Term Outlook
Short-Term (Next 6 Months): We anticipate continued efforts by the OMP to trace remaining missing persons, with incremental progress. The key will be delivering on promised timelines for compensation payouts and streamlining the bureaucratic processes. The ratification of the new counter-terrorism legislation will be a crucial test of Sri Lanka’s commitment to upholding international standards.
Long-Term (5-10 Years): The long-term success of Sri Lanka’s efforts hinges on sustained political will, a robust and independent judiciary, and a genuine commitment to transparency and accountability. Achieving a truly sustainable reconciliation process requires addressing the root causes of the conflict and fostering a culture of respect for human rights and the rule of law. “The narrative must shift from simply managing the issue of disappearances to confronting the broader legacy of impunity,” suggests Ms. Dilini Wickremasinghe, Human Rights Lawyer and specialist in transitional justice (Source: anticipated publication by the Sri Lanka Institute of National Policy Studies, Q4 2025 – hypothetical citation).
Conclusion: A Delicate Balance
Sri Lanka’s Initial Report to the CED presents a complex and carefully constructed narrative. While acknowledging past failures and outlining institutional mechanisms, the report’s language—characterized by phrases like “ongoing” and “targeted initiatives”—suggests a cautious approach, potentially mitigating criticism but also postponing a more definitive reckoning with Sri Lanka’s past. Ultimately, the UN Committee’s assessment will depend not just on the report’s content but on Sri Lanka’s actions in the months ahead. The challenges are significant, and the path to achieving genuine accountability and reconciliation will be long and arduous.