Hybrid is a word unseen in the resolution. It’s presented in an inverted form, more emphatically and in greater detail, in the amended text. The UNHRC report was bold and courageous to use the word ‘hybrid’ upfront. Deception was the intention in the resolution by clouding it with more words and succeeded in looking more alarming.                                                               

Prefer speaking face to face rather than adopting double standards of lavish praise cosmetically applied on the face of the Sri Lankan Government with a knock-out blow directed on the other cheek. The joint resolution shows an associate Sri Lankan fist in the writing: “…affirms in this regard the importance of participation in a Sri Lankan judicial mechanism, including the Special Counsel’s office of the Commonwealth and other foreign Judges, defence lawyers and authorized prosecutors and investigators”.

The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights has released his report dated 16^h September 2015 on the investigations into the incidents which took place between February 2002 and November 2011 plus ‘on going violations’ . His briefing on the report and his suggested hybrid mechanism to investigate into the said incidents and his comments such as some issues are of grave nature and country’s legal system do constitute an assault on Sri Lanka’s sovereignty and the defence forces.

 The investigation of the OHCHR was based on THREE sources.  (1) The report of the Panel of Experts appointed to advise the Secretary General of the UN.  (2) The Channel 4 presentations of Callum Macrae and his team and (3) The petitions received by the OHCHR with regard to the purported incidents relating to war in Sri Lanka.

Former Secretary to the Ministry of Defence Mr Gotabhaya Rajapaksa, addressing the media, has expressed  his regret for finishing the war on terror when he came to the so-called Presidential Commission of Inquiry appointed to investigate serious acts of fraud, corruption and abuse of power, state resources, and privileges (PRECIFAC) few days ago, to give a statement over the Rakna Lanka armoury.
“Today I feel sad to have finished the war. I have had to report to all these commissions just because I finished the war. None of these commissions would be there, if I had not finished the war,” he has said.

Mr Gotbhaya Rajapaksa,  rightly guiding the country’s security forces,  under the  political leadership of  Mahinda Rajapaksa managed to crush the decades long terrorist movement within three and a half years and removed the threat to lives of all the citizens including those of the ungrateful politicians ruling the country today and their supporters. As Mr. Rajapaksa has quite rightly revealed, he had to report to all these commissions as a result of ending the war.

It’s been over a week since the report of the OHCHR investigation on Sri Lanka (OISL) was released to the public, but, to the best of my knowledge, not even a single evaluation of the report, in terms of whether the evidence in the report establishes to any reasonable degree of certainty that the Government in fact committed the various violations alleged, has appeared in any Sri Lankan newspaper, journal or magazine.

This is both unfortunate and surprising.  The Human Rights Council is set to consider a resolution against Sri Lanka on the 30^th of September, based on the conclusions and recommendations of the OISL report, or using it as a backdrop.   Obviously, a rudimentary assessment of the substance of the report is needed before one can decide if further action on the report is justified.