War Crime Allegations Against Admiral Nishantha Ulugetenne

By Wimal Navaratnam, Human Rights Activist

Edited by: Wimal Navaratnam, Human Rights Activist, July 28, 2025

✊ Advocacy Dossier for International Justice: Sri Lanka War Crimes

⚠️ Disclaimer

This document is a humanitarian appeal intended to promote international legal accountability and respect for human rights. It does not seek to interfere with sovereign affairs but aims to uphold justice, truth, and the rule of law as established by international institutions.

📝 Editor’s Note

This dossier urgently appeals to Tamil politicians (both domestic and diaspora), human rights advocates, legal scholars, and global organizations. In light of grave allegations of war crimes perpetrated during Sri Lanka’s armed conflict, there is a moral and legal imperative to intensify diplomatic and public pressure on the international community. Our collective goal: compel the Sri Lankan government to cooperate with the International Criminal Court (ICC) and surrender accused individuals for trial. Only through global action and judicial transparency can lasting peace be achieved.

📚 Research Methodology

Research Area

Techniques Used

Primary Source Review

Analyze UN and NGO reports, firsthand survivor testimonies

Legal Documentation

Examine international statutes (e.g. Rome Statute), ICC precedents

Diplomatic Archives

Investigate UNHRC resolutions, bilateral communications

Media Investigations

Review investigative journalism and declassified reports

Diaspora Engagement

Interviews, surveys, and coalition building with global Tamil communities

Advocacy Mapping

Identify active campaigns, legal interventions, and media strategies

This mixed-methods approach ensures both qualitative depth and legal rigor. All data gathering prioritizes ethical standards and anonymity where applicable.

War Crimes in Sri Lanka’s Civil War and Calls for ICC Accountability

Admiral Nishantha Ulugetenne is a former Sri Lanka Navy commander accused of involvement in serious war crimes and human rights violations during and after Sri Lanka’s civil war (1983–2009). Multiple reports implicate Ulugetenne in enforced disappearances, torture, and attacks on civilians, particularly in the final phase of the war in 2009. These allegations stem from his roles as a frontline naval commander in 2009 and later as Director of Naval Intelligence, positions from which he is alleged to have participated in or overseen abuses. Ulugetenne’s case exemplifies the impunity enjoyed by senior Sri Lankan military officers and underscores the need for international intervention to secure accountability.

Key Allegations and Involvement of Admiral Ulugetenne:

  • Attacks on Civilian Safe Zones (2009): During the war’s final months, Ulugetenne commanded the Navy’s 4th Fast Attack Craft Flotilla and the SLNS Nandimithra. Under his command, naval units took part in bombardments of designated “No Fire Zones” – areas that the government had marked as safe for civilians but were nevertheless shelled heavily. Tens of thousands of Tamil civilians were massacred in these assaults. By targeting supposed safe zones with heavy artillery and missiles from naval gunboats, Ulugetenne’s flotilla contributed to indiscriminate attacks on civilians, a clear war crime. Naval shelling was instrumental in the onslaught; contemporary evidence indicates that virtually every hospital and sheltering site in the war zone was hit by artillery fire during this period. For example, on April 8, 2009, Sri Lankan army shelling killed women and children waiting in line for food in one such zone, illustrating the kind of civilian targeting that naval units also abetted. As a navy commander at the front, Ulugetenne is alleged to have either ordered or knowingly carried out unlawful strikes on civilian concentrations.
  • Command Responsibility for Torture Sites: After the war, from 2011 onward, Ulugetenne served as Director of Naval Intelligence, during which time the Navy operated a secret detention and torture site at the Trincomalee naval base known as “Gun Site” (also referred to as “Gota’s Camp”). Investigations by human rights groups (including the International Truth and Justice Project) have documented that hundreds of Tamils, including surrendered LTTE members and civilians, were held incommunicado at Gun Site between 2009–2012, where they were subjected to torture and sexual violence. Ulugetenne is **implicated as one of the officials who supervised or at least knew, or should have known, about these secret prisons and the abuses occurring within them. Gun Site was an underground detention chamber in Trincomalee where detainees were brutally beaten, suffocated, raped, and disappeared by navy intelligence units. Ulugetenne worked closely with other senior naval officers who ran this facility, and his name appears in reports as an alleged perpetrator by command responsibility. Notably, a 2019 ITJP report “The Sri Lankan Navy: A Collective Blind Eye” listed Ulugetenne among navy commanders who enabled or allowed systematic torture at Gun Site and failed to prevent these crimes. This suggests he may be culpable for crimes against humanity such as torture and enforced disappearance committed under his watch, even if not physically present.
  • Enforced Disappearances and Abductions: Ulugetenne has also been directly linked to at least one incident of abduction and disappearance outside the immediate war zone. In July 2025, Sri Lanka’s Criminal Investigation Department (CID) arrested Admiral Ulugetenne in connection with the kidnapping and disappearance of a young man from Pothuhera (northwestern Sri Lanka). The disappearance dates back to Ulugetenne’s tenure as naval intelligence chief, when an illegal detention center in Pothuhera allegedly operated under his supervision. Police sources indicate the victim was abducted and held at this clandestine site, raising “serious concerns about potential abuses under his command” according to news reports. The magistrate’s filings note that Ulugetenne is being investigated for possible involvement in enforced disappearance, a crime in which state agents secretly abduct and often kill individuals. This arrest – a rare event of a top-ranking officer being held to account – highlights longstanding allegations that Sri Lankan navy intelligence units ran “death squads” or kidnapping for ransom rings targeting (mostly Tamil) youths during the war and its aftermath. In fact, Ulugetenne’s own predecessor as Navy Commander, Admiral Wasantha Karannagoda, was named by the CID in a notorious case involving the abduction of 11 Tamil youths in 2008–2009 who were held at naval sites and murdered. The CID told courts that such operations could not have occurred without the knowledge of the naval command. Ulugetenne’s alleged role in similar crimes points to an entrenched pattern of systematic disappearances orchestrated by the Navy’s intelligence wing.
  • Diplomatic Postings to Evade Prosecution: Despite these serious allegations, Admiral Ulugetenne ascended to the highest echelons of the Navy, becoming the 24th Commander of the Sri Lanka Navy (2020–2022). Upon retirement, he was appointed as Sri Lanka’s Ambassador to Cuba in late 2023. Critics note that this appointment is part of a troubling pattern in which Sri Lanka assigns military figures accused of war crimes to diplomatic positions, potentially to confer immunity and shield them from legal action. In Ulugetenne’s case, his ambassadorship was announced alongside two other senior officers similarly accused of atrocities. Diplomats typically enjoy immunity from prosecution under international law; placing alleged perpetrators in such posts has been described as a deliberate tactic to frustrate justice. For example, an Army general linked to mass atrocities, Shavendra Silva, served as UN envoy and avoided a 2012 lawsuit by Tamil victims by claiming diplomatic immunity, even though he is now barred from travel to countries like the United States due to his human rights record. Likewise, another accused general, Jagath Jayasuriya, fled his ambassadorial post in South America after human rights groups filed lawsuits against him in 2017. Ulugetenne’s posting to Cuba appeared aimed at a similar evasion of accountability. The fact that Sri Lankan authorities arrested him in 2025, despite his status, is therefore highly significant – it “marks a rare instance of accountability involving a former top-ranking military official”. It remains to be seen if domestic proceedings will earnestly follow through. Given Sri Lanka’s past reluctance to prosecute its military, many observers fear that without international oversight, Ulugetenne’s case could be quietly dropped or inadequately pursued, allowing him to escape justice as so many others have.

In sum, Admiral Ulugetenne faces credible allegations of war crimes (such as deliberately attacking civilians), crimes against humanity (torture and disappearance as part of a systematic policy), and related grave breaches of international law. These allegations are backed by investigative journalism, witness testimony, and reports by UN bodies and NGOs. The gravity of the claims against him – and the broader pattern of naval involvement in wartime atrocities – underpin the call for robust international action, including an investigation by the International Criminal Court (ICC), to ensure accountability.

War Crimes Against Tamil Civilians in Sri Lanka: Context and Legacy

The accusations against Admiral Ulugetenne cannot be viewed in isolation. They are part of a broader pattern of war crimes and human rights abuses perpetrated against Tamil civilians in Sri Lanka’s Northern and Eastern provinces during the 26-year civil war, especially in its cataclysmic final phase (2008–2009). Numerous authoritative sources – including UN investigations, human rights organizations, and eyewitness accounts – have documented large-scale atrocities committed by Sri Lankan government forces. These include mass civilian massacres, indiscriminate shelling of hospitals and refugee zones, extrajudicial executions of surrendering persons, widespread torture, sexual violence, and tens of thousands of enforced disappearances. The scale and severity of these violations have led international observers to characterize the end of Sri Lanka’s war as one of the worst humanitarian tragedies in recent history. This section provides context on those war crimes against Tamil people and underscores why justice for these crimes remains an unresolved and urgent issue.

Massacres and Indiscriminate Attacks on Civilians (2008–2009)

The final months of the war (often referred to as the “Mullivaikkal massacre”) saw tens of thousands of Tamil civilians killed by government forces. A UN Secretary-General’s Panel of Experts initially estimated around 40,000 civilian deaths, but later evidence indicated the toll was far higher. Local census data and analyses by groups like the International Truth and Justice Project suggest that between 70,000 and 169,000 people may have been killed in early 2009 alone. These deaths were not incidental crossfire, but largely the result of systematic bombardment of civilian concentrations. Notably, the Sri Lankan military repeatedly shelled so-called “No Fire Zones” (NFZs) – areas it had demarcated and encouraged civilians to gather in for safety, only to then subject them to relentless fire. One survivor described huddling in a sand bunker on the Mullivaikkal beach, only for the army to overrun the area: “We saw blood flowing and body parts. We will never forget.”. Such firsthand accounts are chillingly common. Human Rights Watch reports that for weeks in 2009, hundreds of thousands of Tamil civilians were trapped on a shrinking strip of coastline, being pounded day and night by Sri Lankan Army artillery, multi-barrel rocket launchers, and naval gunfire. The government had drastically under-reported the number of civilians in the zone, in order to justify limited humanitarian supplies and blanket the area with heavy weapons.

Independent inquiries have catalogued numerous indiscriminate or deliberate attacks on civilian objects during this period. According to the UN Panel of Experts, “virtually every hospital in the Vanni [the northern war zone], whether permanent or makeshift, was hit by artillery” in the final onslaught – a striking indicator that hospitals, ambulances, and medical centers were systematically targeted, in flagrant violation of international humanitarian law. In one well-documented incident on 8 April 2009, dozens of women and children were killed by army shelling while waiting in line for milk powder at an aid distribution point. Entire families were obliterated in their bunkers by direct hits from bombs or shells. Photographic and satellite evidence later showed huge craters in civilian encampments and corpses strewn across areas designated as “safe zones”. The Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights’ investigation (OISL) in 2015 concluded that the pattern of attacks was widespread and systematic: government forces repeatedly struck large civilian clusters despite knowing their location, indicating these were not accidental but intentional or reckless strikes. The OISL report found reasonable grounds to believe that Sri Lankan troops committed gross violations of international humanitarian law that could amount to war crimes and crimes against humanity. It described scenes of unimaginable horror: “hundreds of bodies of people killed by shelling scattered” in the mud, relatives forced to abandon the dying, and the stench of death everywhere. For the Tamil civilian population, the end of the war was an “overwhelming and unmerciful” assault that survivors liken to genocide.

Execution of Surrendering Persons and Disappearances

Beyond battlefield carnage, Sri Lankan forces are accused of executing or “disappearing” hundreds of Tamils who did surrender or were captured alive in the final days. On May 18, 2009, as the LTTE admitted defeat, thousands of combatants and civilians, including women, children, and the elderly, surrendered to the army – many waving white flags. Instead of abiding by the laws of war that protect prisoners and non-combatants, there is compelling evidence that Sri Lankan troops summarily executed a large number of these surrendering individuals. The OISL investigation found reasonable grounds to conclude that several LTTE political leaders who surrendered – such as Balasingham Nadesan and S. Puleedevan – were executed shortly after they were taken into custody. This infamous episode is often called the “White Flag Incident.” Likewise, lower-level fighters and even civilians who gave themselves up were not spared. One high-profile victim was Colonel Ramesh, a Tamil Tiger officer filmed alive in army custody and later found shot dead. Another was Balachandran Prabhakaran, the 12-year-old son of the LTTE leader: photos show the boy alive in Sri Lankan custody and later show his body riddled with bullets. A female TV presenter for LTTE, Isaipriya, was captured, seen in footage semi-nude and alive under army guard, and was subsequently executed (with strong indications she was sexually assaulted before being killed). Gruesome video clips smuggled out (some aired in Channel 4’s documentaries) depict Sri Lankan soldiers laughing and shooting blindfolded, naked prisoners and dumping their bodies – stark evidence of war crimes.

In addition to outright executions, enforced disappearance was employed as a tactic. Many Tamils who were led away after surrender simply vanished. In 2021, the ITJP published a list of at least 293 individuals (LTTE members and civilians) who were seen surrendering to Sri Lankan forces on or around May 18, 2009, and have never been heard from again. Among them was a Catholic priest, Fr. Francis Joseph, who mediated surrenders; he boarded an army bus with surrendering civilians and then disappeared. These cases form part of the broader phenomenon of mass disappearances: Sri Lanka has one of the highest numbers of unresolved enforced disappearance cases in the world. The UN Working Group on Enforced Disappearances reports 6,117 outstanding cases from Sri Lanka, the second-highest of any country globally (only Iraq has more). Most of these victims are Tamils from the war’s final phase or the preceding years of conflict. The war created countless broken families like that of “Lakshmi,” a Tamil mother who has spent years searching for her 21-year-old son after he surrendered to the army in 2009 and was never seen again. Sri Lankan authorities have consistently failed to reveal the fate of the disappeared. Domestic commissions have tallied over 20,000 disappearance complaints (including those from the 1980s insurgencies), but virtually no perpetrators have been held accountable and truth has been denied to families. As Human Rights Watch observes, “the fate of the thousands of ‘disappeared’ has never been revealed”, and mothers of the missing protesting for answers have faced surveillance and harassment by the state. This scourge of enforced disappearance – a crime against humanity – has left a permanent scar on the Tamil community.

Torture and Sexual Violence

During and after the war, torture was systematically used against Tamils suspected of LTTE links, often accompanied by horrific sexual violence. Sri Lanka’s security forces ran clandestine detention centers (like the Navy’s Gun Site mentioned earlier, and army camps such as the notorious Joseph Camp in Vavuniya and others) where detainees were brutally tortured. The methods included beatings with pipes, waterboarding, asphyxiation, electric shocks, burning with cigarettes, and rape. Many men and women taken into custody – either during army round-ups in the final surrender or in the years immediately after – reported sexual torture, including rape, forced nudity, and genital mutilation. The UN Secretary-General’s Panel of Experts noted that rape of Tamil women in the final stages was likely under-reported, but multiple sources (including video evidence from soldiers’ phones) showed female corpses who appeared to have been sexually assaulted. The later UN OISL investigation uncovered that sexual violence was not isolated but widespread, often “extremely brutal,” and perpetrated by Sri Lankan security forces against both women and men. It concluded that rape was used as a tool of terror and torture, including in formal detention facilities after the war’s end. For instance, witnesses recounted soldiers taking away surrendering women into the bushes and hearing screams and gunshots shortly after. Men were not spared: male detainees also suffered sexual abuse (such as anal rape or coercive acts targeting genitals) at the hands of interrogators. Such acts, when part of a systematic campaign, amount to war crimes and crimes against humanity. To date, no member of the security forces has been convicted for sexual violence from the war, despite numerous survivor testimonies submitted to courts and international bodies. This climate of impunity has been perpetuated by a lack of political will to honestly investigate these egregious violations.

Impunity and Aftermath

The aftermath of the war in Sri Lanka has been marked by impunity, denial, and ongoing abuses, which compound the suffering of Tamil victims. The war officially ended in May 2009, but for survivors and families of victims, the struggle for justice began anew. Successive Sri Lankan governments (over the 15+ years since) have failed to hold perpetrators accountable. Instead, there have been numerous ad-hoc commissions of inquiry – ostensibly to investigate wartime abuses – which have “in practice, blocked investigations and shielded the abusers”. For example, the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) in 2011 acknowledged civilian casualties but recommended mostly restorative steps, and its accountability recommendations were largely ignored. Later efforts, such as the Office on Missing Persons (OMP) and a promised special court, have been slow and met with political obstruction. Meanwhile, many of the military commanders implicated in atrocities have ascended to powerful positions instead of facing scrutiny. Major General Kamal Gunaratne, who led an army division in the final offensive (accused of atrocities at Mullivaikkal), is today the country’s Defense Secretary. Shavendra Silva, who commanded the 58th Division (also accused of shelling civilians and executing surrenders), was elevated to Army Commander in 2019 (though he is sanctioned and travel-banned by several Western nations). Former President Gotabaya Rajapaksa – defense secretary during the war and widely considered the architect of the ruthless endgame – actively protected accused officers and aggressively denied any wrongdoing by the forces, even dismantling the limited accountability mechanisms set up by his predecessors. This entrenchment of alleged war criminals at the highest levels has entrenched a culture of impunity in Sri Lanka’s governance.

For Tamil civilians in the war-affected North and East, the post-war years have continued to bring hardship and trauma. The regions remain heavily militarized, with the Army still maintaining thousands of troops and many camps on ancestral lands. Peaceful commemorations of Tamil victims (such as annual Mullivaikkal remembrance events) have been met with surveillance and crackdowns under draconian security laws. Human rights defenders and journalists in the Tamil areas face intimidation – as evidenced by the fact that Sri Lanka is among the most dangerous places in the world for journalists, particularly Tamil journalists, dozens of whom were killed during and after the conflict. This oppressive environment means that Tamils seeking justice or answers continue to risk harassment. Yet, the families of the disappeared and other victims have not given up their calls for accountability: Tamil family associations have held continuous roadside protests for years (over 2000 days in some cases) demanding to know what happened to their loved ones. In a letter to the UN Human Rights Council, Tamil families of the missing pleaded for the international community to “accelerate the process to proclaim meaningful justice” and not allow each International Day of the Disappeared to pass as a mere ritual. They specifically urged the UN General Assembly and Security Council to establish international investigations, tribunals, and prosecutions so that their decades-long tragedy can finally see justice.

The legacy of Sri Lanka’s wartime abuses thus remains an open wound. A 2024 Human Rights Watch commentary pointed out that the “unaddressed legacy of the war has bequeathed the country practices of abuse, impunity and misgovernance” that even contributed to recent crises. The sheer magnitude of the crimes – mass killing of civilians, rape, torture, and disappearance on a scale that may constitute international crimes (war crimes and crimes against humanity) – demands accountability beyond what Sri Lanka’s domestic institutions have delivered so far. It is against this backdrop that international intervention, including the involvement of the International Criminal Court, is increasingly seen as necessary to achieve justice for the Tamil victims.

The Case for International Criminal Court (ICC) Involvement

Despite the extensive documentation of war crimes and crimes against humanity in Sri Lanka, domestic efforts to achieve accountability have been woefully inadequate. This has led victims’ groups, human rights advocates, and even UN officials to call for international justice mechanisms – foremost among them, the International Criminal Court – to intervene where local authorities have failed. The case for ICC involvement rests on two pillars: the proven unwillingness or inability of Sri Lanka’s justice system to prosecute these grave crimes, and the necessity of impartial international action to deliver truth and justice for thousands of Tamil victims and to deter future atrocities. In this section, we outline why local investigations alone have not delivered justice and how the ICC could play a pivotal role, with Admiral Ulugetenne’s situation serving as a prime example of someone who might only be held accountable through international prosecution.

Failures of Domestic Accountability: Sri Lanka’s record in pursuing war crime cases internally is virtually nonexistent. In the 15+ years since the war’s end, no senior military or political figure has been convicted for the massacre of civilians, extrajudicial executions, or systematic abuses. Successive governments have often promised accountability in international forums, only to renege or stonewall when it came to implementation. As noted, numerous Presidential commissions and investigative bodies were established (e.g., the LLRC, Paranagama Commission, etc.), but these have largely served to mollify international pressure while delaying or diverting genuine justice. Human Rights Watch observes that Sri Lankan authorities not only failed to prosecute those responsible for atrocities, but in many cases “appointed a series of commissions…while in practice blocking investigations and shielding the abusers.” For instance, even when the Criminal Investigation Department identified navy officers in the “Trincomalee 11” abduction case (including implicating Admiral Karannagoda), political and legal interference ensured that prosecutions stalled and suspects were freed on bail. The Office on Missing Persons (OMP), set up in 2018 to trace the disappeared, has been criticized as ineffective and lacking independence – it has so far failed to unearth the truth about any missing person or hold any perpetrator accountable, dashing the hopes of waiting families. Domestic court cases related to wartime crimes have frequently been delayed, transferred, or undermined. A climate of fear persists in Sri Lanka’s North-East, where survivors and witnesses are often afraid to testify, and with good reason: whistleblowers and witnesses in high-profile cases have reportedly faced threats (one prime witness in the Navy abductions case survived an assassination attempt in 2017). The judiciary and police, meanwhile, face allegations of political interference whenever cases edge close to implicating powerful figures.

The consequence of these failures is that impunity reigns. The lack of accountability for past crimes has emboldened security forces to continue abusive practices. Even in recent years, human rights watchdogs have documented incidents of torture and custodial deaths in Sri Lanka, suggesting that the **“unaddressed legacy of the war” continues to fuel abuses. This impunity also deeply wounds the victims and hinders reconciliation; Tamil communities perceive a gross injustice, seeing men whom they accuse of massacring civilians now promoted as heroes of the state. This dynamic was starkly illustrated when accused war criminals were incorporated into the highest levels of government – for example, Gotabaya Rajapaksa (allegedly responsible for ordering attacks on civilians) became President, and ex-general Kamal Gunaratne (accused of commanding brutal assaults) became Defense Secretary. With the state itself unwilling to punish – or actively protecting – the alleged perpetrators, survivors have little faith that they can obtain justice within Sri Lanka’s domestic system. Even the recent arrest of Admiral Ulugetenne by the CID, while a positive step, was met with skepticism by victim advocates who have seen past cases falter. Indeed, the government’s reluctance is often evident: in one instance, the state told the UN Human Rights Council that it “will not allow war heroes to be prosecuted,” effectively assuring immunity for the armed forces. In such an environment, local investigations are insufficient – they lack credibility, independence, and political backing.

The Need for International Intervention and ICC Investigation: Given Sri Lanka’s internal failures, international justice mechanisms are increasingly seen as the only viable path to accountability. The International Criminal Court is particularly invoked because it is the permanent tribunal with a mandate to prosecute war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide when national courts cannot or will not do so. Sri Lanka is not a state party to the ICC (having not ratified the Rome Statute), which complicates matters – normally the ICC cannot prosecute crimes on Sri Lankan soil unless the UN Security Council refers the situation or Sri Lanka accepts ICC jurisdiction. Nonetheless, there is a growing chorus urging creative avenues to bring Sri Lanka’s perpetrators before the ICC. Notably, in January 2021 the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Michelle Bachelet, explicitly urged UN member states to explore referring Sri Lanka to the ICC. In her report to the Human Rights Council, Bachelet warned that Sri Lanka’s persistent impunity posed a grave threat to human rights, and she stated that Member States can take steps to refer the situation to the ICC and also pursue prosecutions under universal jurisdiction. She encouraged countries to actively support efforts for international accountability – for example by opening investigations into Sri Lankan war crimes within their own courts (extraterritorial jurisdiction) and by applying targeted sanctions (travel bans, asset freezes) against officials responsible for grave abuses. This was a remarkable recommendation coming from the top UN human rights official, effectively acknowledging that Sri Lanka had demonstrated an unwillingness to achieve justice on its own.

International momentum has indeed been building along these lines. The UN Human Rights Council passed Resolution 46/1 in March 2021, which strengthened the mandate of the OHCHR to collect and preserve evidence of crimes in Sri Lanka for use in future prosecutions. This initiative, akin to an evidence repository, is meant to prepare files that could be shared with an ad hoc tribunal or national prosecutors abroad. Countries like the United States, Canada, and the European states have imposed travel bans and sanctions on a few Sri Lankan military leaders (for example, the US banned Shavendra Silva in 2020, and in 2023 Canada sanctioned former Presidents Gotabaya and Mahinda Rajapaksa and others). These measures signal that parts of the international community are willing to take action, albeit limited, against Sri Lanka’s culture of impunity.

Significantly, Tamil diaspora groups and Sri Lankan Tamil politicians have been vocally calling for an ICC referral for years. In March 2019, over 100 global Tamil organizations jointly urged the UN to refer Sri Lanka to the ICC, frustrated by the lack of progress through local mechanisms. Again in September 2022, a coalition of Tamil civil society activists wrote to UNHRC member states pressing for an ICC referral via the UN Security Council. The Transnational Government of Tamil Eelam (TGTE) and other advocacy groups have formally petitioned the UN for an international tribunal if the ICC route is blocked by geopolitics. These voices argue that justice delayed is justice denied – every year that passes without accountability increases Tamil disillusionment and entrenches the perception that states can literally get away with mass murder of minority populations.

In Admiral Ulugetenne’s case, the arguments for ICC involvement are particularly pointed. As outlined, he is accused of crimes (like torture and disappearances) that were part of a systematic campaign by Sri Lankan security forces against Tamils, potentially meeting the threshold of crimes against humanity. Should Sri Lankan courts fail to adequately prosecute him – a distinct possibility given past precedent – international prosecutors could indict him. Universal jurisdiction principles allow foreign courts (in countries like Switzerland, Germany, or others) to charge individuals for torture, war crimes, or crimes against humanity committed abroad, and some Sri Lankan suspects have indeed been investigated when traveling overseas. However, bringing a case against someone as high-ranking as a former Navy Commander would require considerable evidence and political will. An ICC investigation, if it could be triggered, would carry far greater weight and resources. The ICC could in theory investigate not only Ulugetenne but the full chain of command of which he was a part, including those who gave the orders for the carnage in 2009. It could provide a comprehensive accounting of crimes, affording due process but without the local patronage networks that hamper justice in Sri Lanka. Crucially, an ICC process would put the victims at the center, acknowledging their suffering on an international stage and creating a historical record of the truth, which Sri Lanka’s state narrative has long distorted.

Local vs International Justice – Why ICC Is Indispensable: It is important to emphasize that seeking ICC involvement is not about sidelining Sri Lanka’s sovereignty, but about upholding international justice when national systems prove unable to do so. The Sri Lankan experience is analogous to other post-conflict situations where the ICC or international tribunals stepped in – such as the former Yugoslavia, Rwanda, or Sierra Leone – in each case because the scale of crimes and political context required external intervention. The atrocities against Tamil civilians, as documented by the UN, are on par with those grim examples. The ICC’s mandate is precisely to act as a court of last resort. Given that Sri Lanka’s judiciary has not delivered accountability at the top level after a decade and a half, the ICC is the logical forum to investigate and prosecute individuals like Ulugetenne, who are allegedly responsible for some of the worst crimes of the 21st century.

There are, admittedly, significant political hurdles. A referral through the UN Security Council could be vetoed by Sri Lanka’s allies (China or Russia). Nonetheless, advocacy for ICC referral keeps pressure on the international agenda and signals to Sri Lanka that the world has not forgotten these crimes. Additionally, even absent a formal ICC case, Sri Lankan perpetrators remain at risk of arrest if they travel to jurisdictions with active universal jurisdiction investigations. In recent years, we have seen proactive steps: for instance, in 2020 a Swiss court indicted a former LTTE fighter for recruiting child soldiers – showing that no one is beyond reach when there is evidence. Likewise, if Admiral Ulugetenne or others were to set foot in certain countries, victims’ groups could initiate legal action. The threat of international action can also have a deterrent effect on current officials, reinforcing that impunity is not absolute.

Finally, ICC involvement is demanded as a matter of justice for the victims and survivors. Over a decade has passed, and the mothers, fathers, wives, husbands, and children of those killed or disappeared have waited in agony. They have provided testimony to countless investigations, only to see recommendations ignored. For these victims – many of whom have campaigned bravely within Sri Lanka at great personal risk – an ICC investigation would represent a recognition of their suffering and a concrete step toward justice. It would show that the international community is willing to act when a state fails to protect its own citizens’ basic rights. As one Tamil activist put it, “We have knocked on every door in Sri Lanka. Now we knock on the world’s door for justice.”

In conclusion, the case for ICC involvement in Sri Lanka is compelling. The crimes committed during the civil war, especially in 2009, rank among the most serious violations of international law. Key suspects like Admiral Nishantha Ulugetenne remain unpunished domestically, and Sri Lanka’s institutions have proven either unwilling or unable to prosecute these crimes impartially. International intervention – whether through the ICC, a special ad-hoc tribunal, or universal jurisdiction cases – appears necessary to break the cycle of impunity. The ICC, with its global mandate, stands as the most prominent symbol of that intervention. An ICC investigation into Sri Lanka’s war crimes would demonstrate that no one, not even high-ranking military officers, is above the law. It would also fulfill a moral imperative: to deliver a measure of justice to the tens of thousands of Tamil victims who have thus far seen very little. As the UN’s own review concluded, the egregious violations in Sri Lanka “must be promptly, thoroughly, and independently investigated and those responsible should be brought to justice.” International justice, spearheaded by the ICC, may be the only way to finally achieve that accountability.

Ultimately, pursuing Admiral Ulugetenne and others at the ICC would send a powerful message – that the world will not stand by in the face of war crimes, and that the cries of the victims in Sri Lanka’s North and East have been heard. Only through such action can the long shadow of Sri Lanka’s war be lifted, and a measure of accountability and closure be provided to the survivors.



     In solidarity,

     Wimal Navaratnam

     Human Rights Advocate | ABC Tamil Oli (ECOSOC)

      Email: tamilolicanada@gmail.com



References

8

 

Comments

Post a Comment

We would love to hear your thoughts! Whether you have feedback, questions, or ideas related to our initiatives, please feel free to share them in the comment section below. Your input helps us grow and serve our community better. Join the conversation and let your voice be heard!- ABC Tamil Oli (ECOSOC)