The Bias and Conflict of Interest of Ms. Navi Pillai in investigating Sri Lanka at UNHRC
So that is the expert report!
Navy Pillai came but never visited the Sinhala massacre villages, nor found out about the ethnic cleansing of the Sinhalese and Muslims- over 200,000. by the LTTE!
So much for the ‘Pillai Navy’!
NAVI PILLAI IS A TAMIL and being a Tamil it is highly unethical and immoral for her to investigate Sri Lanka in a controversial human rights dispute involving Tamils especially when there are so many people of other nationalities whose neutrality will not be questioned and are capable of conducting an investigation without bias and without a conflict of interest.
Nemo iudex in causa sua (or nemo iudex in sua causa) means no one should be judge in their own cause.
Will a Jew allow a Palestinian to hear a case between Jews and Palestinians? No
Will a Palestinian want a Jew to hear a case between Jews and Palestinians? No
Do you think it right for Navi Pillai to conduct an investigation on Sri Lanka? What is wrong with that you may ask…. there is something wrong here and the problem is just like the Jews and Palestinians…. Navi Pillai is a TAMIL and is biased towards Tamils.
Sri Lanka’s issue that is said to be between Sinhalese and Tamils cannot have a Tamil to hear the case.
Is that not wrong, is that not unethical, is that not immoral for Navi Pillai, a TAMIL to conduct an investigation against Sri Lanka and listen to only one side – the Tamil side. She has shown a pathological hatred and bias against the Sinhalese consistently.
Let us explain this further…..giving our reasons why Navi Pillai is disqualified from carrying out a Commission of Inquiry / International Investigation / UNHRC Investigation against Sri Lanka.
1. Nemo iudex in causa sua (or nemo iudex in sua causa) means no one should be judge in their own cause. This is a principle of natural justice that no person should judge a case in which they have an interest. Justice should not only be done but should be seen to be done. That cannot happen when there is a suspicion of improper interference in the course of justice.
UN ETHICS GUIDELINES says that UN Officials must can in a neutral, impartial, unbiased and emotionally detached manner.
How can she do that when Navi Pillai is a TAMIL.
2. Navi Pillay’s Indian Tamil community in South Africa was said to be aligned with LTTE, funding LTTE and secretly operating military camps to train LTTE – these camps were dismantled by President Mandela after consultations with former Foreign Minister Lakshman Kadiragamar.
Separatism started in Tamil Nadu with Tamils wanting to separate from India. The quest for a HOMELAND FOR TAMILS is very much alive. There are 76million Tamils. 72million of them live in Tamil Nadu – it is where the Tamil Homeland is.
3. Navi Pillai, a TAMIL is consistently partial and biased. She does not hesitate to issue a statement from Geneva whenever anything happens in Sri Lanka. If this is a general practice then she has nothing other to do than issuing statements for every incident that takes place all over the world. But her statements are mostly against Sri Lanka. Just look and count the records.
4. Navi Pillai, a TAMIL uses as source of reference TAMILNET – the LTTE website. How credible is to use this terrorist promoting website as reference?
5. Navi Pillai, a TAMIL did come to Sri Lanka. Did she meet the victims of the war? She did have time to meet Ananthi Sasitharan whose husband was a LTTE leader and had conscripted the most number of children as child soldiers.
6. Navi Pillai, a TAMIL has also committed procedural bias. She circulated her report but she purposely did not include the Government of Sri Lanka’s response. How ethical was this childish act?
7. Navi, Pillai, a TAMIL the bias is such that even after been given statistics of rape in the North of Sri Lanka she includes in her report incriminating the armed forces of rape when in 5 years there are only 18 cases of rape as against 504 committed by Tamils against Tamils. She purposely manipulated the information.
8. Is this the PERSON the US DRAFT RESOLUTION proposes to conduct an investigation against Sri Lanka unless those proposing wish the investigation to be biased.
9. Navi Pillay did what the imperialists wanted her to do. She became the 1st UN official to call for war crimes against President Assad of Syria, she has referred Syria to ICC to facilitate the eventual military intervention, she suspended Libya’s membership so that Libya would not get a chance to defend itself when she called for international intervention, as judge for the Tribunal on Rwanda she punished the victims and let off the perpetrators…. no wonder the US, UK and Allies are promoting Navi Pillay to conduct an investigation against Sri Lanka.
10. The West – the wonderful people who loves democracy so much asked Crimea to vote and decide. Crimeans went to vote and decided. 97% of the people wanted to belong to Russia. What does the US and EU do – they refuse to accept the vote and they slap Russia with sanctions, asset freezes etc… and watch out what Navi Pillay will do on their behalf next.
UNHRC Member nations – can decide. UNHRC Member nations need to wonder how fair, how ethical, how moral it is to allow Navi Pillai, a Tamil to conduct an investigation against Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka is already the guilty party before investigations have even started!
Are they going to be part of this charade …. or are they going to come together join the rest of the world – Africans, Asian, Latin Americans and demand that the US, UK, EU and UN stop their bullying ways…. Third World can do without First World but First World cannot do without the Third World….
The Bias and Conflict of Interest of Ms. Navi Pillai
The current High Commissioner Ms. Navi Pillay has been accused of bias and conflict of interest by informed observers from many parts of the world in the discharge of her duties relating to the crisis in Libya, Rwanda, Syria and particularly in respect to her handling of the allegations on human rights violations relating to Sri Lanka.
Ms Navi Pillay is a South African of Indian Tamil origin who has never hesitated to declare her firm loyalties to her ethnic affinities with pride in public. The question has been raised whether Ms. Pillay having emotional, genetic and ethnic ties being an ethnic Tamil with roots in Tamil Nadu, India (her Tamil grandparents had migrated as part of indentured labour from Tamilnadu to South Africa sponsored by the then British colonial Government in the early part of the 20th century) can function evenhandedly, and in an unprejudiced and unbiased manner and be emotionally detached and act impartially in this matter. The weight of opinion is very much in favour of the view that Ms. Navi Pillay cannot perform her role dispassionately.
The neutrality of judges or commissioners is sine quo non in a fact finding or judicial process and whenever a judge or Commissioner realizes that he or she cannot look at a case dispassionately the correct thing to do in such an event is to withdraw and arrange for a totally neutral person to take over. Judges, investigators or anyone else acting in a quasi – judicial capacity are expected to recuse themselves from cases when personal conflict of interest may arise.
Ms. Navi Pillay is morally and ethically obliged to do so in respect to her dealings with and in relation to Sri Lanka. Her failure to perform this obligation i.e. Recusal (act of abstaining from participation) is tantamount to serious misconduct or impropriety. A conflict of interest exists even if no unethical improper act results. A conflict of interest can create an appearance of impropriety that can undermine confidence in the process of an UNHRC investigation or inquiry. “Not only must Justice be done; it must also be seen to be done.”
It appears that Ms. Pillay is unsuited to function in any role where Sri Lanka is concerned or for that matter any issue relating to India given the strident nature of Tamil Nadu calls for separatism and establishment of a greater sovereign Tamil nation with major parts of Sri Lanka annexed to it.
814 Viewers
