Geneva is Not a Political Escape Route: SLPP's Misguided Move on Namal Rajapaksa
By Legal Correspondent
GENEVA, September 7, 2026 – The Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna's (SLPP) reported plan to dispatch Milinda Rajapaksa to Geneva to complain to the UN Human Rights Council over Namal Rajapaksa's remand is a fundamental misunderstanding—or deliberate misuse—of the Council's mandate. The Geneva forum is not a legal escape hatch for politicians facing legitimate domestic corruption charges .
Namal Rajapaksa was remanded by a Sri Lankan court until September 18, 2026, over allegations of receiving a substantial bribe in the multi-million dollar Airbus aircraft deal . The case is being pursued by Sri Lanka's Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption (CIABOC)—a domestic anti-corruption body. The Human Rights Council's Complaint Procedure is a confidential mechanism designed to address patterns of gross and reliably attested human rights violations—not to intervene in individual corruption cases or serve as a protective shield for politicians .
International Precedent: When is the Council's Involvement Legitimate?
Recent international examples highlight the legitimate—and illegitimate—uses of the Human Rights Council. For instance, in Kenya, human rights groups successfully used the Council's platform to highlight systemic violations, including unlawful killings, abductions, and police brutality during the suppression of protests . These are textbook cases of "gross human rights violations" that fall within the Council's mandate. Similarly, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) has repeatedly raised concerns at the Council about the abuse of prosecutorial powers to target political opponents and human rights defenders—a systemic issue of executive overreach, not a single detention .
Conversely, Belarus has publicly accused the Human Rights Council of politicization and "instrumentalizing human rights for political purposes" . This critique—while controversial—reflects a broader concern that countries misuse the Council to target rivals, rather than address genuine rights abuses. The SLPP's move risks falling precisely into this politicization trap, diluting the Council's credibility .
A Pattern of Grievances, Not a Procedural Fit
The SLPP's argument may reference unresolved cases linked to the Rajapaksa family, including the murder of rugby player Wasim Thajudeen and alleged witness intimidation . However, the Human Rights Council does not act as a court of appeal for individual criminal cases, nor does it routinely intervene in domestic detention matters where proper legal procedures are being followed. The ICJ has emphasized that the Council's focus should be on the abuse of prosecution services by governments to repress dissent—a situation that is distinct from a politically connected figure being held to account for alleged corruption .
To use Geneva to challenge a corruption detention is to politicize a mechanism designed to protect genuine victims of state violence, not to provide political theatre for a powerful family facing the law.