Communication to the Human Rights Committee Submitted Pursuant to the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights AHIMSA WICKREMATUNGE for herself and on behalf of LASANTHA WICKREMATUNGE Victims ― v. ― DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA, Respondent INITIAL SUBMISSION Nushin Sarkarati Catherine Amirfar Carmen Cheung Natalie L. Reid CENTER FOR JUSTICE & Elizabeth Nielsen ACCOUNTABILITY Duncan Pickard One Hallidie Plaza, Suite 750 Alyssa T. Yamamoto San Francisco, CA 94102 Sebastian Dutz United States Samantha B. Singh DEBEVOISE & PLIMPTON LLP 919 Third Avenue New York, NY 10022 United States 8 January 2021 CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................... 1 A. The Authors and Victims .............................................. 1 B. Request to Prioritize the Case ....................................... 1 II. FACTS ........................................................................................ 1 A. Country Context ........................................................... 2 B. The Victims’ Story ....................................................... 6 III. THIS COMMUNICATION IS ADMISSIBLE .......................... 15 IV. SRI LANKA HAS VIOLATED THE COVENANT ................. 18 A. Right to Life (Article 6) .............................................. 18 B. Right to Freedom from Torture or Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (Article 7)...... 20 C. Rights to Freedom of Expression and Opinion and Non- Discrimination Based on Same (Articles 19 and 26).... 22 D. Right to Effective Remedy (Article 2)......................... 24 V. SRI LANKA MUST REMEDY ITS VIOLATIONS .................. 25 VI. RELIEF REQUESTED .............................................................. 26 i I. INTRODUCTION 1. This communication requests the Committee’s assistance in securing justice for Sri Lanka’s January 2009 assassination of Lasantha Wickrematunge, a leading independent journalist covering the Sri Lankan civil war, and the Government’s subsequent failure to investigate or prosecute those responsible for his death. A. The Authors and Victims 2. Counsel for Lasantha Wickrematunge’s daughter, Ahimsa Wickrematunge, submit this communication in their capacity as her legal representatives and on behalf of both Lasantha and Ahimsa Wickrematunge as victims of violations of the Covenant by the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka (“Sri Lanka”). At the time of his death, Lasantha Wickrematunge, born on 5 April 1958, was a citizen and resident of Sri Lanka. Ahimsa Wickrematunge, born on 14 February 1992, is a citizen and resident of the Commonwealth of Australia. Notifications for this communication should be sent to [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], and [email protected]. B. Request to Prioritize the Case 3. The authors respectfully request that the Committee prioritize review of this Communication due to the significant impact that a decision by the Committee may have on the protection of rights and freedoms of currently vulnerable journalists in Sri Lanka. 1 Such a decision would address urgent and ongoing issues of “harassment, intimidation, surveillance and attacks against journalists” and “impunity for past cases” that are of such “general concern” that the Committee has elected to study them in connection with its sixth periodic review of Sri Lanka’s implementation of the Covenant. 2 Indeed, Lasantha’s case is referenced expressly in the Committee’s report on Sri Lanka. 3 II. FACTS 4. Lasantha became a Government target due to his reportage on senior officials during the civil war, which ended several months after his assassination. International observers, including the United Nations, have extensively documented human rights violations committed by Sri Lanka, including torture, extrajudicial killing, and failure to investigate gross human rights violations committed by State 1 Cf . Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Informal Guidance Note by the Secretariat for the States Parties on Procedures for the Submission and Consideration by Treaty Bodies of Individual Communications (2017), ¶ 34. 2 Sri Lanka, CCPR/C/LKA/Q/6 (2020), ¶ 26. 3 See Sri Lanka, CCPR/C/LKA/Q/6 (2020), ¶ 26. 1 actors. The Government, now led by the senior officials that Lasantha criticized, continues to target journalists with impunity to this day. A. Country Context 5. At all relevant times for this communication, Sri Lanka has been a dangerous, and even deadly, environment for journalists. 6. Lasantha was assassinated in the final months of Sri Lanka’s decades-long civil war between the Government and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (the “LTTE”), a victim of the Government’s violent campaign against independent journalists and political dissidents. The Sri Lankan civil war ended amid allegations that the LTTE and the Government had committed serious violations of international humanitarian law. In March 2011, a U.N. Panel of Experts found sources showing that as many as 40,000 civilians were killed in the final stages of the conflict to be credible and concluded that these casualties, if proven, would establish international criminal liability for LTTE leaders, military commanders, and senior government officials. 4 7. Today, the Government, which includes many former military officials and veterans of the violent campaign against journalists during the civil war, continues to threaten and suppress independent journalists. 1. The Rajapaksa Regime’s Systematic Attacks on Journalists During the Civil War 8. Two brothers were the chief architects of the Government’s violent campaign and corresponding crackdown on journalists and political dissidents: from November 2005 to January 2015, Mahinda Rajapaksa served as President, while Gotabaya Rajapaksa played a key role in the Government’s security apparatus as Secretary of Defence. 9. As the most senior civil servant in the Ministry of Defence at the time of Lasantha’s assassination, then-Sec. Rajapaksa oversaw all Sri Lankan security and intelligence services, including the military and national police. 10. Then-Sec. Rajapaksa directed investigations involving “national security” and “terrorism,” which he expansively applied to investigate media workers, humanitarian aid workers, human rights activists, and individuals the Government deemed “Tiger sympathizers.” 5 A number of wartime measures, including the 1979 Prevention of Terrorism Act and the 2005 Emergency Regulations under the Public Security Ordinance, gave sweeping powers to the Government when 4 See Report of the Secretary-General’s Panel of Experts on Accountability in Sri Lanka (2011), pp. ii-iv, 41, https://perma.cc/WNL4-7B58. 5 See Report of the Secretary-General’s Panel of Experts on Accountability in Sri Lanka (2011), pp. 8, 17, https://perma.cc/WNL4-7B58. 2 acting to protect “national security.” Under the 2005 Emergency Regulations, the Secretary of Defence could order arrests and detention if he “is of [the] opinion” that the individual is acting “in any manner prejudicial to the national security or to the maintenance of public order.” 6 The Prevention of Terrorism Act was broadly worded to criminalize a wide array of conduct, such as any act causing “communal disharmony or feelings of ill-will” between different communities. 7 That Act also granted government officials broad immunity for actions undertaken “in good faith” for the protection of national security.8 11. Sensitive to criticism of its war effort and allegations of corruption, the Rajapaksa regime invoked these laws to justify an assault on the free press, routinely harassing journalists, editors, and other media workers. Although the Rajapaksa regime often denied playing any role in the attacks against journalists—including abductions, assaults, torture, and killings—investigators, including from the United Nations, have traced many attacks to Government security forces reporting to the Secretary of Defence.9 More publicly, the Rajapaksa regime arrested, deported, and sued journalists and attempted to enact laws and regulations limiting the free press. 10 12. Many journalists fled Sri Lanka, and international press bureaus and independent media outlets downsized or closed.11 Independent journalists who remained active in the country and did not exercise “self-censorship” were targeted for attack. Press freedom organizations documented serious threats to media workers throughout the Rajapaksa regime, including after the war. 12 During the Rajapaksas’ 10-year rule, violence against journalists spiked. At least 15 journalists and media workers were killed and many others were threatened, 6 Emergency (Miscellaneous Provisions and Powers) Regulations No. 1 of 2005, Part 4, ¶ 18, https://perma.cc/9SAA-DYZH; see also Sri Lanka: Practice Relating to Rule 99: Deprivation of Liberty , INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE OF THE RED CROSS , https://perma.cc/M4FZ-2DEH (quoting Sri Lanka’s Emergency (Miscellaneous Provisions and Powers) Regulations No. 1 of 2005, Part 4, ¶ 18). 7 Prevention of Terrorism Act (1979), § 2(1)(h), https://perma.cc/CGT6- R6W8. 8 Prevention of Terrorism Act (1979), § 26, https://perma.cc/CGT6-R6W8. 9 See, e.g. , Report of the Secretary-General’s Panel of Experts on Accountability in Sri Lanka (2011), p. 17, https://perma.cc/WNL4-7B58. 10 See Journalists Attacked in Sri Lanka since 1992 , COMMITTEE TO PROTECT JOURNALISTS , https://perma.cc/H3SW-SFVZ. 11 Report of the Secretary-General’s