Leaders from Nationalist Movement team up against UNHRC resolution

A coalition of nationalist leaders and legal experts launched a campaign to expose and neutralise the external mechanism created under UNHRC Resolution 46/1, a statement from them said.

The initiative is timed ahead of the UN Human Rights Council sessions in Geneva this September, where the High Commissioner will present a report on the mechanism.

The campaign leaders explained that, despite claims that the mechanism is only a repository of complaints, it is in fact designed to build a permanent database against Sri Lanka and to actively pursue legal and political action against the country and its armed forces.“Once established, this mechanism will spell doom for Sri Lanka, by undermining the morale of our armed forces, leaving them exposed to perpetual risk of prosecution, and even opening the door for separatist claims,” said former Governor Anuradha Yahampath.

Former Cabinet Minister Sarath Weerasekera traced the history of accountability resolutions, pointing out that, unlike earlier reports, the new mechanism is officially sanctioned by the Council but operates without transparency.

“The government has rejected it, but citizens remain vulnerable. The evidence it holds is secret, meaning those accused will never see the case against them,” he said.

Attorney Dharshan Weerasekera emphasised the legal flaws. “Article 2(7) of the UN Charter prohibits interference in domestic affairs. Resolution 60/251 requires cooperation and dialogue. A mechanism that continues despite state rejection, and withholds evidence from both the Government and the Council, is in clear violation of both,” he said.

He also highlighted concerns about the credibility of the repository, which, according to the UN High Commissioner’s 2023 report, includes material from nine unnamed NGOs and academic sources.

The group confirmed that they had written to High Commissioner Volker Türk in June 2025, outlining these concerns and requesting a response within 30 days.

Having received none, they are now taking the issue to international scholars, watchdog agencies, and reform-minded organisations.

“This is not only about Sri Lanka,” the statement concluded. “It is about defending the integrity of international law itself from a dangerous precedent.”