A/HRC/25/23 statement to the Committee had been based on the instructions received. Ekneligoda’s wife faced hostile questioning from State counsel over her activities at the Human Rights Council side event held in March 2012, in Geneva.41 The Government has reported that a magisterial inquiry is in progress. This case, together with many of this kind, will not fall within the mandate of the new Commission of Inquiry on Disappearances, which is mandated to examine cases of disappearances only in the northern and eastern provinces. VI. Conclusions and recommendations A. Conclusions 65. Despite the significant progress achieved in the physical aspects of resettlement and recovery, and the implementation of some of the recommendations made by the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission, the Government of Sri Lanka has yet to satisfy the call made by the Human Rights Council for a credible and independent investigation into the allegations of serious human rights violations that persist or to take the necessary steps to fulfil its legal obligations to ensure justice and redress. 66. It is important for the Human Rights Council to recall the magnitude and gravity of the violations alleged to have been committed by the Government and the LTTE, which left many thousands of civilians killed, injured or missing. In its report, the Secretary-General’s Panel of Experts concluded that, if proven, some of these acts would amount to war crimes and crimes against humanity. During her visit to Sri Lanka in August 2013, the High Commissioner was struck by the overwhelming sense of grief and trauma among victims and survivors that, if left unaddressed, will continue to undermine confidence in the State and reconciliation. 67. The Government has launched initiatives and established mechanisms, such as the military courts of inquiry and the Commission of Inquiry on Disappearances, but none of these have the independence to be effective or to inspire confidence among victims and witnesses. The military courts of inquiry lack independence and transparency and are limited in scope. Past commissions of inquiry have not always completed their mandate, their reports have not been published and their recommendations have not been implemented or followed by prosecutions. The Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka, although handling many routine cases, has a poor record in responding credibly to serious violations committed by the military and security forces.42 68. For the past several years, Sri Lankan courts have been compromised by politicization and interference by the executive.43 Cases or presiding magistrates and judges are often transferred from one court to other, thereby delaying judicial 41 42 43 16 See A/HRC/21/18. For example, the attack on the Vavuniya prisoners and subsequent custodial deaths, in June 2012; the prison riot and subsequent custodial deaths in Welikada prison, in November 2012; and excessive use of force and subsequent deaths in Weliweriya, in August 2013. In her oral update to the Human Rights Council (A/HRC/24/CRP.3/Rev.1), the High Commissioner highlighted concerns about the degree to which the rule of law and independence of the judiciary had been undermined in Sri Lanka, notably by the 18th amendment and controversial impeachment of the 43rd Chief Justice in January 2013. The 18th amendment abolished the Constitutional Council, which once recommended appointments to the independent bodies, such as the Elections Commission, the Police Commission and the Human Rights Commission.