Sri Lanka dilemma - Telegraph The Commonwealth is one of the world's great institutions, embracing 54 member countries comprising more than a third of humanity. Sadly, an unseemly row is brewing over the choice of Sri Lanka as host of the organisation's next biennial summit. Worse, this controversy could embroil the Queen, who attends every such occasion in her capacity as head of the Commonwealth. Choosing Sri Lanka might have seemed a laudable gesture towards a country that emerged from civil war in 2009. But this decision was still a mistake. President Mahinda Rajapaksa can fairly claim to have brought peace, but he did so in a manner comparable to Rome's pacification of Carthage: Sri Lanka's conflict ended in a welter of bloodshed when government forces cornered the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Elam on a tiny patch of territory, and pounded them mercilessly, regardless of the presence of thousands of civilians. Mr Rajapaksa, a ruthless and authoritarian leader, proceeded to rewrite the constitution to enhance his own power, making his brother defence minister and using violence and intimidation against critics. In January, Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake was illegally forced from office as the president sought to stamp his authority on the judiciary. Switching the venue of the summit is not feasible, because that would require unanimity among Commonwealth members. Officially, our Government says that no decision has yet been taken on whether to attend. In reality, the absence of Britain or the Queen from a Commonwealth gathering is unthinkable. The best course would be for Sri Lanka to show its worthiness to host the meeting by demonstrating its adherence to the Commonwealth's values. Restoring the chief justice would be a good start.