period the Sri Lankan government has made several promises to conductimpartial investigations and then reneged. It set up the LLRC but therecommendations of this commission made it clear to any rights respectingperson that this was merely a façade and not an honest process.International groups closely following human rights situations in Sri Lankaincluding the UN Panel of Experts, Amnesty International, Human RightsWatch and the International Crisis Group all criticised the LLRC for itslimited mandate, lack of independence and its failure to meet minimuminternational standards. However, what clearly exhibited the Rajapaksaregime’s callousness and general disinterest is how it has refused to evenaccept most of the fairly weak recommendations made by the LLRC.Pillay had remarked that Sri Lanka had a great opportunity to start aninclusive rebuilding process after the end of the world. This is exactly whatthe Indian government and many of Sri Lanka’s friends in the internationalcommunity have been stressing. But how can there be any peace without justice? Are victims and survivors supposed to just forget what happenedand move on? Should those who chose to violate almost every establishedhumanitarian norm during the war be simply given a clean chit as anendorsement of their conduct? A UN panel found credible estimates that asmany as 40,000 civilians had been killed in the final phase of the 2009 war.Can such blatant disregard and disrespect for human rights form the basisfor a new and inclusive Sri Lanka? These are exactly the reasons why India should continue working with theinternational community to press Sri Lanka for a credible and independentinvestigation, which is to the satisfaction of the international community.Being an important regional voice that still retains some influence with itssouthern neighbour, India needs to find ways of engaging with Sri Lanka toensure that a process of transitional justice is at the centre of anyreconciliation efforts.Sri Lanka and its supporters at the international stage have time and againrejected the call for an international investigation into alleged war crimesand crimes against humanity committed during the war. Blanket detractorsshould consider the fact that this call from the international civil societyonly gained prominence after the Sri Lankan authorities failed to undertakeany credible investigation in the last 4 years.India has been hesitant about asking for an international investigation butits statement at the HRC suggesting any domestic process to be to thesatisfaction of the international community reflects the growing realisationwithin the Indian establishment. India should also consider other ways toensure a credible investigative process is undertaken in Sri Lanka whichwould not be seen as impinging Sri Lanka’s sovereignty. The lead up to theCHOGM summit could be an opportune time to promote such an alternativemechanism that could help Sri Lanka meet its international commitments.