The Minister stated that under these circumstances, and in light of the commencement of public inquiries into incidents under inquiry and investigation, it cannot be concluded that the relevant competent authorities have not paid due regard to recommendations made by the IIGEP. Thus, the government is of the view that the reasons cited by the current membership of the IIGEP to justify their resignation, are of little merit.

 He further stated that notwithstanding the premature departure of the current membership of the IIGEP, the Government is confident that the Col will continue to function independently, impartially and engage in investigations and inquiries in a comprehensive and transparent manner, and in accordance with applicable international norms and standards.

 "The Government will continue to provide necessary resources to the Col enabling it to efficaciously give effect to its mandate. This remains the case even if the Government decides that IIGEP will not be re-activated."

 He further added that all previous Public Statements were issued to coincide with international events such as Sessions of the UN Human Rights Council, where interested parties attempted to make use of these Statements. The 5th Public Statement was issued four weeks ago, to coincide with the 7th Session of the UN Human Rights Council. The present 6th Public Statement is issued at a time when preparations are underway for Sri Lanka's first appearance before the new Universal Periodic Review (UPR) mechanism before the Human Rights Council.

 The Government views such conduct and any attempt to promote unwarranted international intervention in Sri Lanka with the utmost disfavor, the Minister stated.

Asked whether the mechanism of IIGEP will be retained or terminated, he stated that the IIGEP is a mechanism created by the President and therefore, it remains the prerogative of the President to continue to retain the mechanism or terminate it.

Attorney General, C. R. De Silva addressing the media stated that on a request made to himself by the Commission of Inquiry, a five member panel of counsel was nominated by the AG, and the CoI appointed them to assist the Commission. Officers of the AG's Department assisting the Commission have not exercised discretionary statutory authority vested in them under the normal law when attending to functions of the criminal justice system.

He pointed out that they have merely 'assisted' the Commission on the direction of the Commissioners. At all instances, these officers have functioned on directives given by the Commission and on instructions of the Commissioners.

Officers of the AG Department have not faced any 'conflict of interest' or 'competing interest' when assisting the Commission.

In addition to the officers of the AG's Department, over the past six months, several members of the unofficial bar including Mr. R.K.W. Goonasekera and Mr. Ranjit Abeysuriya, President's Counsel, representing the unofficial bar have been invited to assist the Col. To prevent unnecessary controversy, the Attorney General offered to withdraw his officers from the Commission even if one of the eight Commissioners felt that it was not necessary or inappropriate to retain the services of such counsel.

Neither the Commission nor any individual Commissioner had made such indication.

Under such circumstances, it was not possible for the Attorney General to withdraw the services of officers of the Attorney General's Department from the Commission of Inquiry, he stated.

The IIGEP members in their part conducting a media briefing this morning stated that it is with "deep regret" that they were withdrawing from its independent observer role of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry (CoI) setup to investigate into 17 cases.

(Courtesy : Department of Information)