Allegation: “Civilians were deliberately targeted by Sri Lanka’s Armed Forces”

 

WHO ARE THESE “CIVILIANS”?

1. LTTE combatants, including child soldiers, who engaged in hostilities while in civilian clothing
2. LTTE civilian armed force operating in combat while in civilian clothing
3. Civilians forced to engage in combat/hostilities under coercion
4. Civilians who had no role in hostilities/combat

 

Only the 4th type retains full civilian protection under International Humanitarian Law.

WHAT WERE CIVILIANS DOING INSIDE A WAR ZONE?

• LTTE took civilians as hostages
• LTTE used civilians as human shields
• LTTE forced recruitment of civilians including children
• LTTE trained civilians in combat and used forced labour
• LTTE prevented civilians leaving the conflict zone
• LTTE shot at civilians attempting to escape to Govt controlled areas
• LTTE placed military assets among civilians
• LTTE fired at the Armed Forces from within civilian concentrations
• LTTE operated media channels from war zone & inflated situation
• LTTE used suicide bombers among civilians who attacked refugee centres killing both civilians and military personnel

 

LTTE RESPONSIBILITY

LTTE stands guilty of all above and by their own actions is the cause of civilian casualties.

In taking civilians and keeping civilians with LTTE, LTTE showed no concern for Tamil civilians (men, women, elderly, pregnant, sick, children).

LTTE should have faced its enemy directly instead of using the very people they claimed to represent.

WHAT THE ABOVE CLEARLY SHOWS

1. The LTTE exercised physical control over civilian movement – LTTE held the sole decision to allow civilians to escape to safety or not
2. The LTTE deliberately increased civilian exposure to combat – LTTE compromised the lives of its own people
3. The LTTE used civilians as a tactical protective layer – LTTE betrayed its own people
4. The LTTE actively prevented civilian evacuation to safe areas

LTTE placed civilians in a vulnerable situation.
LTTE compromised civilian lives.
LTTE’s conduct is directly responsible for civilian casualties.
LTTE fired from civilian areas and expected the Armed Forces not to respond.

 

The LTTE deliberately destroyed the civilian–combatant distinction by removing separation between armed cadres and civilian population

Let it also be noted that the close to 12,000 LTTE combatants who surrendered were all in civilian clothing

 

UNDER INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW

• Civilians are protected unless and for such time as they take direct part in hostilities
• The presence of civilians does not prohibit attacks on legitimate military objectives
• The use of human shields is a serious violation of IHL by the party employing them

 

LEGAL CONTEXT

Where:
• Civilians are forcibly retained in combat zones
• Combatants are embedded within civilian populations
• Civilians are used as shields against military attack

Then:
Civilian casualties occurring in such conditions cannot be interpreted as deliberate targeting by the opposing force.

 

• The LTTE systematically embedded civilians within its military operations
• Civilian harm resulted from this deployment strategy
• LTTE deliberately dismantled the separation between civilians and combatants
• The Armed Forces operated in a context where civilian-combatant separation had already been destroyed by LTTE actions
• An attack directed at a legitimate military objective does not become “deliberate targeting of civilians” simply because civilians are present or harmed in the vicinity
• Where one party unlawfully creates conditions that place civilians in harm’s way, responsibility for resulting civilian risk exposure must be assessed in light of those actions

 

This invalidates the allegation of “deliberate targeting of civilians by the Armed Forces”, as LTTE used civilians as shields, hostages, and operational cover.

 

If civilians are intermingled with combatants
If civilians are forcibly retained in combat zones
If military positions are embedded within civilian structures
If LTTE fires from these positions

Then civilian casualties cannot automatically be interpreted as deliberate targeting.

 

 

Shenali D Waduge