Sri Lanka’s Narrative at the UN Human Rights Council’s 60th Session: Key Points and Civil Society Counter-Analysis

Introduction

The 60th Session of the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) in September 2025 once again placed Sri Lanka under international scrutiny concerning its post-war human rights record, reconciliation efforts, and compliance with past UN resolutions. The official submission from the Government of Sri Lanka presented a series of narrative themes, often emphasizing progress, national sovereignty, and an apparent willingness to collaborate with the international community. However, these claims are juxtaposed with persistent critiques from civil society organizations (CSOs), UN agencies, and human rights groups that allege significant backsliding, structural impunity, and insufficient political will to address root causes of the conflict and ongoing violations. This report systematically analyzes each major thematic point in the government’s official submission, juxtaposing them with evidence-based counterpoints that draw on recent UN reports, civil society briefings, and human rights watchdog analyses, in order to provide a comprehensive foundation for advocacy and intervention.

Reconciliation and Post-Conflict Peacebuilding

Government Narrative Summary

· The Government of Sri Lanka reaffirms its “unwavering commitment to reconciliation,” emphasizing progress through domestic mechanisms tailored to Sri Lanka’s socio-cultural realities. The submission highlights the office for National Unity and Reconciliation (ONUR) and ongoing dialogue with all communities. The government asserts that reconciliation is best achieved through homegrown approaches and notes outreach programs, stakeholder consultations, and civil society engagement as markers of this progress¹.

Civil Society/UN Counterpoint

Despite repeated pledges, reconciliation remains widely perceived as superficial and instrumentalized. A key criticism is the lack of genuine inclusivity and independence in reconciliation processes, particularly the marginalization of war-affected Tamil and Muslim communities. Recent reports from the High Commissioner for Human Rights and local civil society highlight that ONUR has limited influence and is widely regarded as ineffective, with most post-war initiatives failing to address core grievances of affected populations. Moreover, the government’s reluctance to acknowledge ethno-religious root causes, and ongoing militarization in the North and East, undermine trust and perceived sincerity of the reconciliation process. Consultations often ignore dissenting voices, and tangible outcomes for victims-such as land returns, justice for disappeared persons, or accountability-remain minimal².

Legal Reform and Judicial Independence

Government Narrative Summary

· The government claims commitment to “comprehensive legal and constitutional reform,” referencing ongoing review processes, amendments to anti-terror legislation, and efforts to strengthen the independence of the judiciary. Amendments to the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) and appointment of new judicial officials are cited as evidence of progress¹.

Civil Society/UN Counterpoint

Civil society and UN experts contend that legal reforms are narrowly construed, insufficient, or purely cosmetic. Multiple analyses state that revisions to the PTA fail to meet core international standards, as amended provisions continue to allow for prolonged detention without charge, vague definitions of offenses, and lack of adequate appellate mechanisms. The process of judicial appointments allegedly remains politicized, with government influence affecting judicial independence, particularly on high-profile human rights or corruption cases. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights specifically called attention at the 60th Session to the need for a “clear, publicly available roadmap” to guarantee impartial rule of law, noting continuing intimidation and surveillance of lawyers and human rights defenders³.

Accountability for Wartime Atrocities

Government Narrative Summary

· The government reiterates its position that accountability for wartime events should be pursued through domestic mechanisms, arguing that international interventions infringe on sovereignty and are unnecessary, given the country’s capacity and progress. It claims to have conducted investigations and initiated prosecutions where warranted, and points to the establishment of various commissions of inquiry as proof of its intent to address grievances¹.

Civil Society/UN Counterpoint

International and local monitors consistently highlight a persistent lack of meaningful accountability for grave violations committed during and after the conflict, including war crimes and crimes against humanity. Numerous commissions of inquiry have failed to yield substantive justice, with findings often shelved or ignored. The repeated government stance on sovereignty is viewed as a delaying tactic, with domestic investigations often lacking independence, transparency, or victim and witness protection mechanisms. The UN’s 2025 report reiterates the absence of high-level prosecutions, pointing to the government’s continued unwillingness to investigate or prosecute senior officials and military actors implicated by credible evidence. There is a deepening sense of impunity that erodes public trust and exacerbates trauma among survivors, further undermining prospects for lasting peace⁴⁵.

Devolution of Power and Federalism

Government Narrative Summary

· Sri Lanka asserts that it remains committed to devolution “as provided under the Constitution,” primarily highlighting the role of Provincial Councils. However, the government frames any further federalization or power-sharing discussions as inconsistent with the country’s unitary character and past Supreme Court judgments⁶.

Civil Society/UN Counterpoint

Local and international analysts widely critique the stagnation and, in many respects, regression on genuine power-sharing. Elections for Provincial Councils-intended as key vehicles for devolution under the 13th Amendment-have been repeatedly postponed, effectively rendering these bodies non-functional. The Tamil National Alliance and other stakeholders have called for immediate Provincial Council elections and meaningful constitutional reform towards federal arrangements, arguing that mere lip service to devolution entrenches historical marginalization. The UN and the core group of countries at the 60th Session stressed that sustainable reconciliation is fundamentally linked to credible devolution and equal representation for all communities⁶.

Diaspora Engagement

Government Narrative Summary

· The government states it has enhanced engagement with the Sri Lankan diaspora, highlighting consultation initiatives and investment roadshows. It argues that diaspora communities are partners in development and reconciliation, particularly if they refrain from supporting divisive or proscribed groups¹.

Civil Society/UN Counterpoint

Diaspora groups and advocacy organizations counter that engagement is mostly restricted to business actors or diaspora members considered politically “non-controversial.” Long-standing grievances of Tamil and Muslim diasporas-including calls for accountability and memorialization-are marginalized, with many activists still barred from travel or subjected to surveillance. The bureaucratization of engagement is used to fragment and control diaspora voices, while repression of dissenting narratives persists, undermining trust and rendering dialogue performative. The UN Special Rapporteur has previously observed that genuine reconciliation requires open acknowledgment of diaspora contributions to justice-seeking, not just economic participation².

Enforced Disappearances

Government Narrative Summary

· Sri Lanka points to the Office on Missing Persons (OMP) as the centerpiece of efforts to address enforced disappearances, stressing public outreach, family engagement, and recent regulatory reforms to strengthen the office’s mandate. The government expresses its ongoing commitment to “bring closure” to thousands of pending disappearance cases¹.

Civil Society/UN Counterpoint

Victims’ families and international experts overwhelmingly critique the OMP as ineffective and lacking independence. Since its inception, progress on tracing the disappeared, identifying perpetrators, and holding those responsible to account has been virtually nonexistent. Many families boycott OMP proceedings, citing insensitivity and state surveillance. The office also reportedly fails to protect complainants, and there are frequent allegations of pressure on families to accept compensation in lieu of truth or justice. In its 2025 report, the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances highlighted persistent patterns of intimidation and the absence of criminal prosecutions against suspected state actors implicated in abductions, rendering Sri Lanka “one of the world’s highest-ranked countries for unresolved enforced disappearances”⁷².

Land Rights and Resettlement of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs)

Government Narrative Summary

· The government claims major progress in the return and resettlement of IDPs, citing reduced numbers of displacement and state efforts to release land previously under military occupation. It reports the allocation of infrastructure funds and livelihood packages for resettled families¹.

Civil Society/UN Counterpoint

Expert analysis reveals that land release efforts have stalled, with military occupation and land acquisition-often for economic or “security” reasons-still significant in the North and East. Resettlement statistics are challenged by civil society groups who underscore the lack of durable solutions: many returnees remain in protracted displacement, with little access to basic services, housing, or sustainable livelihoods. Reports also highlight discriminatory land policies targeting Tamil-dominated areas and the use of “development” projects as a pretext for continued land grabs. The UNHCR and other agencies note that a significant percentage of formerly displaced persons lack proper documentation, leading to further marginalization⁸⁹.

Counter-Terrorism and National Security Measures

Government Narrative Summary

· Referring to threats from “violent extremism” and “divisive political actors,” the government justifies the maintenance of emergency powers and counter-terrorism legislation. It claims a rights-respecting approach and points to recent reforms as evidence of improvement, further pledging to review laws as necessary¹⁰.

Civil Society/UN Counterpoint

Civil society, UN mandates, and international legal experts continually cite the abuse of counter-terror laws to stifle dissent, detain activists, and suppress minority voices-particularly under the Prevention of Terrorism Act. Changes to the law fall far short of international best practices, as indefinite detention, lack of access to legal counsel, and coerced confessions persist. UN special procedures and the Human Rights Council have sounded alarm over the arbitrary use of national security narratives to silence journalists, lawyers, and those calling for accountability. Figures from the Human Rights Watch 2025 report suggest little practical change in those targeted, with Muslims and Tamils disproportionately affected³.

Freedom of Expression and Media Freedom

Government Narrative Summary

· The government asserts respect for the freedom of press and expression, referencing new guidelines to protect journalists, investigation of reported attacks, and engagement with media associations. It frames allegations of censorship or harassment as “isolated incidents under review”¹.

Civil Society/UN Counterpoint

Media watchdogs and the UN High Commissioner find that Sri Lanka remains an unsafe environment for critical voices. Journalists and civil society activists experience intimidation, surveillance, and even physical attack, particularly when reporting on sensitive topics such as war crimes or corruption. Investigations into violence against journalists rarely lead to prosecutions, fostering a climate of impunity, while the proposed Online Safety Bills raise fears of broad censorship. International news organizations have also been subjected to visa restrictions. The 2025 world press freedom indexes place Sri Lanka far below regional peers, with systematic self-censorship used as a survival strategy².

Rights of Religious Minorities

Government Narrative Summary

· The submission reiterates the government’s “equal treatment of all religious groups,” and points to action taken against hate speech, regular interfaith dialogues, and protection of places of worship. Authorities highlight legal prosecution against those inciting religious violence as proof of their commitment¹.

Civil Society/UN Counterpoint

UN and civil society reports indicate recurring patterns of religious discrimination, particularly targeting Muslims and Christians. Key examples include arbitrary arrests under anti-extremism laws, demolition or attacks on places of worship, and the use of blasphemy or public order provisions to curtail religious practice. The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom and Amnesty International report cases of local government officials either tolerating or facilitating violence by majoritarian Buddhist groups. Despite prosecution claims, conviction rates for those accused of religious violence are low, and victims face systemic barriers to justice, including police inaction and hostility¹¹².

Gender-Based Violence and Women’s Rights

Government Narrative Summary

· The government claims robust legal and policy frameworks protect women and girls, referencing the work of dedicated ministries, legal reforms, and increased prosecutions for gender-based violence. Initiatives to address sexual and domestic violence, and promote women’s participation in public life, are cited as evidence of improvement¹⁰.

Civil Society/UN Counterpoint

Women’s rights organizations and UN agencies stress the gap between policy and practice. Actual service provision for survivors of gender-based violence is limited, particularly in post-conflict areas. Law enforcement practices-ranging from insensitive treatment to outright hostility-discourage reporting. Conviction rates remain low, and support services are underfunded. Critically, the intersection of ethnic, religious, and gender identity further exacerbates vulnerabilities for minority women, including war widows and returnee IDPs. Analysis at the 60th Session noted the urgent need for gender-sensitive transitional justice mechanisms and greater involvement of women’s groups in policy design and monitoring².

Anti-Corruption Initiatives

Government Narrative Summary

· The official submission points to new and strengthened corruption investigations, the establishment of an Independent Commission to Oversee Public Procurement, and adherence to UN anti-corruption conventions. Several high-profile indictments and reforms in state enterprises are highlighted to demonstrate the government’s intent¹⁰.

Civil Society/UN Counterpoint

Despite formal anti-corruption efforts, systemic corruption-and impunity for politically connected figures-remains widespread. Watchdog organizations have raised doubts about the independence of anti-corruption bodies and the selectivity of prosecutions, often targeting political opponents or low-level officials, while entrenched interests escape accountability. International watchdogs have declined to upgrade Sri Lanka’s corruption status, and recent economic crises further exposed cronyism and misallocation in state contracts. Calls for genuine whistleblower protection and third-party oversight have gone unheeded, undermining donor and public confidence in reforms²³.

Socio-Economic Development and Poverty Alleviation

Government Narrative Summary

· The government emphasizes a commitment to inclusive growth and poverty reduction, pointing to increased health and education spending, infrastructure development, and targeted fiscal measures for vulnerable populations. The submission cites progress on Sustainable Development Goals and post-pandemic economic stabilization¹.

Civil Society/UN Counterpoint

UNDP and civil society research argue that many programs are undermined by corruption, politicization, or inefficiency, with marginalized groups-IDPs, war widows, and minority populations-bearing a disproportionate burden of poverty and exclusion. Deep economic crises in 2022-2024 led to drastic reductions in social safety nets and increased inflation. Infrastructure investment is often channeled through military or politically connected contractors, stoking public skepticism. Rights-based development and economic recovery remain contingent upon addressing underlying political exclusion and land/property rights-issues not sufficiently reflected in the government’s development narrative³.

Transitional Justice Mechanisms

Government Narrative Summary

· Sri Lanka highlights domestic mechanisms such as the Office for Reparations and the OMP, reiterating its opposition to external mechanisms and asserting that domestic initiatives are tailored to Sri Lanka’s context. “Commemorative events” and “community healing programs” are cited as further efforts to address post-war trauma¹.

Civil Society/UN Counterpoint

International organizations and victim advocacy groups broadly reject the sufficiency of domestic mechanisms, pointing to their lack of independence, powers to compel testimony, or ability to prosecute those most responsible for serious violations. The rejection of hybrid or internationalized justice elements is characterized as calculated avoidance of accountability, and the “commemoration” processes run under heavy state oversight have been criticized as tokenistic or even retraumatizing. The 2025 UN report calls for a “credible, victim-centered transitional justice process” with international involvement and oversight as indispensable for real progress³⁴.

International Cooperation and UN Recommendations

Government Narrative Summary

· Sri Lanka emphasizes its ongoing cooperation with OHCHR and UN bodies, engagement with regional partners, and periodic voluntary reporting as evidence of constructive dialogue on human rights. It asserts that UN resolutions should be “fair, balanced, and reflective of realities on the ground,” and stresses respect for national sovereignty in implementation¹.

Civil Society/UN Counterpoint

UN agencies and many states note a pattern of selective engagement-cooperation on matters with low political risk, while rejecting core demands such as international investigations, independent monitoring, or timelines for implementation. Reports at the 60th Session cite repeated unfulfilled pledges, the reversal of previous commitments (as under UNHRC Resolution 30/1), and continued obstruction of access for UN rapporteurs and experts. The core group at the UNHRC, alongside major donor states, warned that “dialogue without action” perpetuates impunity, threatening long-term security and human rights for all Sri Lankans¹²⁵.

Comparative Table: Government Narrative and Counterpoints per Thematic Area

Thematic Area	Government Narrative (Summary)	Civil Society/UN Counterpoint
Reconciliation	Commitment to domestic reconciliation mechanisms, ONUR, outreach	Superficial, non-inclusive; lack of progress for affected groups; militarization persists
Legal Reform	Legal/constitutional review, PTA amendments, judicial independence	Amendments inadequate; judiciary politicized; core deficiencies remain
Accountability	Domestic investigations, commissions of inquiry, sovereignty defense	No substantive justice; impunity for senior actors; commissions ineffective
Devolution	Commitment to 13th Amendment, Provincial Councils	Provincial elections delayed; meaningful power-sharing lacking
Diaspora Engagement	Consultations, economic investment, inclusion	Political diaspora marginalized; surveillance and restrictions target dissenters
Enforced Disappearances	OMP’s work, family engagement, regulation reforms	OMP ineffective; no prosecution of perpetrators; intimidation of families
Land/IDP Resettlement	Land released, IDPs resettled, infrastructure funded	Many still displaced; military occupation/unresolved claims; discriminatory land policies
Counter-Terrorism	Emergency powers to counter threats, PTA reforms	Laws used to silence dissent/minorities, indefinite detention persists
Freedom of Expression	New journalist protections, incident investigation	Intimidation, attacks on press, censorship; rare prosecutions
Religious Minorities	Interfaith dialogue, hate speech prosecution, protection efforts	Systemic persecution, weak prosecutions, official complicity/bias
Women’s Rights	Legal protections, prosecutions, empowerment policies	Poor implementation, low convictions, intersectional vulnerabilities for minority women
Anti-Corruption	New commissions, indictments, adherence to conventions	Independence of bodies disputed; major corruption under-prosecuted
Socio-Economic Development	Inclusive growth, SDG progress, targeted assistance	Exclusion, politicization, insufficient support; military-dominated development
Transitional Justice	Reparations, OMP, community healing initiatives	Mechanisms lack powers/independence, victim participation; calls for international oversight
International Cooperation	Engagement with UN, voluntary reporting, sovereignty invoked	Selective engagement, implementation gaps, rejection of international mechanisms

This comparative analysis details the major submission themes and the prevailing, evidence-based counterpoints for each. In nearly every thematic area, purported government advances are called into question by a broad and consistent body of findings: implementation is inadequate, independence is lacking, and the unwillingness to acknowledge structural causes of historical and ongoing violations persists. The interplay between national sovereignty and international obligations remains a core friction point-one that the government frames as necessary defiance against external overreach, but that victims, civil society, and UN actors overwhelmingly see as a self-serving shield for impunity⁵¹³.

Conclusion

Sri Lanka’s submission to the UNHRC 60th Session attempts to chart a narrative of steady progress through nationally owned initiatives in reconciliation, rights protection, and governance. Yet, almost every major claim is directly or indirectly contradicted by findings from UN agencies, international human rights organizations, and local civil society actors. Key obstacles remain unaddressed: entrenched impunity for war-era and ongoing abuses, the narrowing of civic space, selective implementation of reforms, and the systematic marginalization of minority voices, especially in the pursuit of accountability and justice.

For effective advocacy, the evidence supports the following overarching positions:

· Reconciliation without truth, justice, and structural reform is insufficient; mere symbolic acts or engagement, without accountability or victim participation, will not remove the roots of conflict.
· Legal and institutional reforms must be genuinely independent and benchmarked against international standards. Cosmetic changes or unconsultative processes deepen mistrust.
· Domestic mechanisms have not delivered justice and require international oversight or participation. The government's invocation of sovereignty rings hollow without meaningful progress on prosecutions and reparations.
· Marginalized and minority groups require not only consultative engagement but also devolution of political power and substantive socioeconomic rights.
· International cooperation entails both constructive engagement and willingness to embrace accountability mechanisms, not simply procedural compliance or deflection.
For advocates preparing rebuttals and oral interventions, it is recommended to:
· Ground interventions in specific findings from reputable organizations cited above (OHCHR, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Working Groups, national civil society coalitions).
· Highlight the gaps between official narrative and lived realities as documented by affected communities, particularly survivors, women, and minorities.
· Call for time-bound, transparent, and inclusive benchmarks for reform, with clear international oversight and consequence frameworks for noncompliance.
· Insist on the centrality of accountability and reparations in reconciliation, not just economic or symbolic gestures.

The government’s narrative at the 60th Session underscores the continuing contestation over truth, justice, and sovereignty in postwar Sri Lanka. The international community and domestic advocates must remain vigilant, informed, and evidence-driven to ensure these critical issues remain at the center of policy and diplomatic engagement.