Home / News / Urgent Appeals / SRI LANKA: Mundalama Police enjoy impunity despite torturing and detaining a businessman in fabricated charges

SRI LANKA: Mundalama Police enjoy impunity despite torturing and detaining a businessman in fabricated charges

June 22, 2012

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION-URGENT APPEAL PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal Case: AHRC-UAC-108-2012



22 June 2012
------------------------------------------------------
SRI LANKA: Mundalama Police enjoy impunity despite torturing and detaining a businessman in fabricated charges

ISSUES: Denial of justice; torture; impunity; rule of law
------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information that Mr. K. A. Somarathna, a businessman, filed a complaint with the Senior Superintendent of Police, (SSP) when a water pump and other goods were stolen from his business construction site by a number of police officers attached to the Mundalama Police Station. Two days after he filed the complaint, he was called to the Mundalama Police Station. When he went to the station, he was taken to the back of the building and beaten severely by the OIC and another officer, Priyantha. Mr. Somarathna fell unconscious as the result of this beating and when he awoke, he found himself in a jail cell. His family was not permitted to visit him and the officers threatened the family with Mr. Somarathna’s abduction if they chose to pursue the complaint with the SSP. He was produced before the Additional Magistrate of Puttalam on a false criminal charge, and despite voicing his complaint of torture to the Magistrate, he was sent to remand prison. Mr. Somarathna has checked himself in to numerous hospitals for treatment, but he remains in great pain and is unable to take care of himself without assistance. Although he has filed a complaint with the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka and the SSP, a credible investigation has yet to be initiated. This case is yet another illustration of the exceptional collapse of the rule of law in the country.

CASE NARRATIVE:

According to information that the Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received, Mr. K.A. Somarathna (48), of Madurankuliya, Aamakuliya in the Puttalam District was severely tortured by two police officers and was placed in jail for a crime that he did not commit.

AHRC-UAC-108-2012-01.JPGMr. Somarathna is married and a businessman by profession. On 22 January 2012, a few policemen and civilians traveling by lorry took a water pump and several other goods that Mr. Somarathna had kept at his new business construction site in Sembatta, Mundalama. Since Mr. Somarathna was out of town when the theft took place, he was unable to file a complaint with the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) Puttalam against the police officers who had stolen his goods until 25 January.

On 27 January, a police officer named Priyantha of the Traffic Branch of Mundalama Police Station took Mr. Somarathna to Muddalama Police Station, reportedly to record a statement based on the complaint he had made at the SSP's office. When Mr. Somarathna entered Mundalama Police Station, Officer Priyantha took his wallet from him. He took him to the back of the police station building, where the Officer-in-Charge (OIC) was waiting. Without asking him any questions, the OIC pulled his hair and kicked him in the stomach. He was beaten severely, and his head was dashed against the station wall. Even after Mr. Somarathna fell to the floor, the abuse continued.

Mr. Somarathna fell unconscious as the result of this beating. When he regained consciousness, he found himself inside a jail cell. Despite his cries for help, he was not given food, water or medical treatment for his extensive injuries. When his relatives tried to visit, police officers refused to allow them to meet with him. His family members reported that they could see Mr. Somarathna inside the jail cell; they said that he was lying down and appeared unable to stand.

According to information that we have received, the OIC threatened Mr. Somarathna and his family; they said that if they persisted with their complaint to the SSP, Mr. Somarathna would be abducted in a white van and forcefully disappeared. At around 10am the next day, Mr. Somarathna was taken to Mundalama Government Hospital in a police jeep. He was unable to walk as the result of his extensive injuries. Since he was unable to go inside the hospital, a doctor issued a medical report without examining Mr. Somarathna.

A few days later, the police produced Mr. Somarathna before the Additional Magistrate of Puttalam on the charge that he illegally acquired water for personal use from the public water supply. Mr. Somarathna vehemently denied this accusation. When he was standing before the Magistrate, Mr. Somarathna explained that he had been subjected to physical abuse by the police. Despite this, the Magistrate sent Mr. Somarathna to remand prison for 14 days. Mr. Somarathna told the prison guards at the remand prison that he had been beaten and was in great physical pain. His injuries were examined, and the prison guards admitted him to the prison hospital. While he received treatment at the prison hospital, Mr. Somarathna bled while urinating. After completing his 14-day sentence, Mr. Somarathna was held in remand for another 7 days, and finally released on bail.

On 16 February, Mr. Somarathna was admitted to Puttalam Base Hospital for further treatment. Despite his deteriorating condition and the fact that he had not given consent, he was discharged on 18 February. Mr. Somarathna believes that he was discharged by the hospital authorities under the instruction of the police officers. Since he was still experiencing pain, he checked himself in to Ragama Teaching Hospital and underwent treatment. He is still experiencing pain from his extensive injuries, and is unable to take care of himself without assistance. Mr. Somarathna’s family maintain that since Mr. Somarathna was in good health before these incidents, his deplorable health is the direct result of the abuse he experienced at the hands of the police.

Mr. Somarathna filed a complaint with the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka (HRCSL). However, neither the SSP nor the HRC have initiated a credible investigation into the violation of his rights. Mr. Somarathna believes that his rights enshrined in the Constitution of Sri Lanka have been violated and he seeks an impartial investigation to bring the perpetrators of this crime to justice.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:

The Asian Human Rights Commission has reported innumerable cases of the torture of innocent people by the Sri Lankan police. These acts, which have taken place at different police stations across the country, are illegal under local and international law.

The State of Sri Lanka signed and ratified the CAT on 3 January 1994. Following state obligations, the Parliament of Sri Lanka adopted Act No. 22 of 1994, which made torture a crime that is punishable for a minimum seven years and not less than ten years on being proven guilty. The Attorney General of Sri Lanka is supposed to file indictments in cases where credible evidence is found of people being tortured by state officers.

SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please send a letter to the authorities listed below expressing your concern about this case and requesting an immediate investigation into the allegations of torturing an old person and stealing the money by the police perpetrators, and the prosecution of those proven to be responsible under the criminal law of the country for misusing powers of a state. The officers involved must also be subjected to internal investigations for the breach of the department orders as issued by the police department. Further, please also request the NPC and the IGP to have a special investigation into the malpractices of the police officers for abusing the state officers' powers.

Please note that the AHRC has also written a separate letter to the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment on this regard.

To support this appeal please click here:

SAMPLE LETTER:

Dear ________,

SRI LANKA: Mundalama Police enjoy impunity despite torturing and detaining a businessman in fabricated charges

Name of the victim: K.A. Somarathna (48), of Madurankuliya, Aamakuliya in the Puttalam District
Alleged perpetrator:
1. OIC Alawaththe
2. Police officer Priyantha of Traffic Branch, both attached to the Mundalama Police Station
Date of incident: 27 January 2012
Place of incident: Mundalama Police Division in the Puttalam District

I am writing to express my serious concern over the case of Mr. K.A. Somarathna (48), of Madurankuliya, Aamakuliya in the Puttalam District who was severely tortured by two police officers and was placed in jail for a crime that he did not commit.

Mr. Somarathna is married and a businessman by profession. On 22 January 2012, a few policemen and civilians traveling by lorry took a water pump and several other goods that Mr. Somarathna had kept at his new business construction site in Sembatta, Mundalama. Since Mr. Somarathna was out of town when the theft took place, he was unable to file a complaint with the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) Puttalam against the police officers who had stolen his goods until 25 January.

On 27 January, a police officer named Priyantha of the Traffic Branch of Mundalama Police Station took Mr. Somarathna to Muddalama Police Station, reportedly to record a statement based on the complaint he had made at the SSP's office. When Mr. Somarathna entered Mundalama Police Station, Officer Priyantha took his wallet from him. He took him to the back of the police station building, where the Officer-in-Charge (OIC) was waiting. Without asking him any questions, the OIC pulled his hair and kicked him in the stomach. He was beaten severely, and his head was dashed against the station wall. Even after Mr. Somarathna fell to the floor, the abuse continued.

Mr. Somarathna fell unconscious as the result of this beating. When he regained consciousness, he found himself inside a jail cell. Despite his cries for help, he was not given food, water or medical treatment for his extensive injuries. When his relatives tried to visit, police officers refused to allow them to meet with him. His family members reported that they could see Mr. Somarathna inside the jail cell; they said that he was lying down and appeared unable to stand.

According to information that we have received, the OIC threatened Mr. Somarathna and his family; they said that if they persisted with their complaint to the SSP, Mr. Somarathna would be abducted in a white van and forcefully disappeared. At around 10am the next day, Mr. Somarathna was taken to Mundalama Government Hospital in a police jeep. He was unable to walk as the result of his extensive injuries. Since he was unable to go inside the hospital, a doctor issued a medical report without examining Mr. Somarathna.

A few days later, the police produced Mr. Somarathna before the Additional Magistrate of Puttalam on the charge that he illegally acquired water for personal use from the public water supply. Mr. Somarathna vehemently denied this accusation. When he was standing before the Magistrate, Mr. Somarathna explained that he had been subjected to physical abuse by the police. Despite this, the Magistrate sent Mr. Somarathna to remand prison for 14 days. Mr. Somarathna told the prison guards at the remand prison that he had been beaten and was in great physical pain. His injuries were examined, and the prison guards admitted him to the prison hospital. While he received treatment at the prison hospital, Mr. Somarathna bled while urinating. After completing his 14-day sentence, Mr. Somarathna was held in remand for another 7 days, and finally released on bail.

On 16 February, Mr. Somarathna was admitted to Puttalam Base Hospital for further treatment. Despite his deteriorating condition and the fact that he had not given consent, he was discharged on 18 February. Mr. Somarathna believes that he was discharged by the hospital authorities under the instruction of the police officers. Since he was still experiencing pain, he checked himself in to Ragama Teaching Hospital and underwent treatment. He is still experiencing pain from his extensive injuries, and is unable to take care of himself without assistance. Mr. Somarathna’s family maintain that since Mr. Somarathna was in good health before these incidents, his deplorable health is the direct result of the abuse he experienced at the hands of the police.

Mr. Somarathna filed a complaint with the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka (HRCSL). However, neither the SSP nor the HRC have initiated a credible investigation into the violation of his rights. Mr. Somarathna believes that his rights enshrined in the Constitution of Sri Lanka have been violated and he seeks an impartial investigation to bring the perpetrators of this crime to justice.

I further request your urgent intervention to ensure that the authorities listed below instigate an immediate investigation into torturing a old person and stealing the money by the police perpetrators, and the prosecution of those proven to be responsible under the criminal law of the country. The officers involved must also be subjected to internal investigations for the breach of the department orders as issued by the police department.

Yours sincerely,

---------------------
PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:

1. Mr. N K Illangakoon
Inspector General of Police
New Secretariat
Colombo 1
SRI LANKA
Fax: +94 11 2 440440 / 327877
E-mail: igp@police.lk

2. Ms. Eva Wanasundara
Attorney General
Attorney General's Department
Colombo 12
SRI LANKA
Fax: +94 11 2 436421
E-mail: ag@attorneygeneral.gov.lk

3. Secretary
National Police Commission
3rd Floor, Rotunda Towers
109 Galle Road
Colombo 03
SRI LANKA
Tel: +94 11 2 395310
Fax: +94 11 2 395867
E-mail: npcgen@sltnet.lk or polcom@sltnet.lk

4. Secretary
Sri Lanka Human Rights Commission
No. 108
Barnes Place
Colombo 07
SRI LANKA
Tel: +9411 2694925, +9411 2685980, +9411 2685981
Fax: +9411 2694924 (General) +94112696470 (Chairman)
E-mail: sechrc@sltnet.lk


Thank you.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ua@ahrc.asia)

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
AHRC-UAC-108-2012
Countries :
Issues :
Document Actions
Share |
Subscribe to our Mailing List
Follow AHRC
Extended Introduction: Urgent Appeals, theory and practice

A need for dialogue

Many people across Asia are frustrated by the widespread lack of respect for human rights in their countries.  Some may be unhappy about the limitations on the freedom of expression or restrictions on privacy, while some are affected by police brutality and military killings.  Many others are frustrated with the absence of rights on labour issues, the environment, gender and the like. 

Yet the expression of this frustration tends to stay firmly in the private sphere.  People complain among friends and family and within their social circles, but often on a low profile basis. This kind of public discourse is not usually an effective measure of the situation in a country because it is so hard to monitor. 

Though the media may cover the issues in a broad manner they rarely broadcast the private fears and anxieties of the average person.  And along with censorship – a common blight in Asia – there is also often a conscious attempt in the media to reflect a positive or at least sober mood at home, where expressions of domestic malcontent are discouraged as unfashionably unpatriotic. Talking about issues like torture is rarely encouraged in the public realm.

There may also be unwritten, possibly unconscious social taboos that stop the public reflection of private grievances.  Where authoritarian control is tight, sophisticated strategies are put into play by equally sophisticated media practices to keep complaints out of the public space, sometimes very subtly.  In other places an inner consensus is influenced by the privileged section of a society, which can control social expression of those less fortunate.  Moral and ethical qualms can also be an obstacle.

In this way, causes for complaint go unaddressed, un-discussed and unresolved and oppression in its many forms, self perpetuates.  For any action to arise out of private frustration, people need ways to get these issues into the public sphere.

Changing society

In the past bridging this gap was a formidable task; it relied on channels of public expression that required money and were therefore controlled by investors.  Printing presses were expensive, which blocked the gate to expression to anyone without money.  Except in times of revolution the media in Asia has tended to serve the well-off and sideline or misrepresent the poor.

Still, thanks to the IT revolution it is now possible to communicate with large audiences at little cost.  In this situation there is a real avenue for taking issues from private to public, regardless of the class or caste of the individual.

Practical action

The AHRC Urgent Appeals system was created to give a voice to those affected by human rights violations, and by doing so, to create a network of support and open avenues for action.  If X’s freedom of expression is denied, if Y is tortured by someone in power or if Z finds his or her labour rights abused, the incident can be swiftly and effectively broadcast and dealt with. The resulting solidarity can lead to action, resolution and change. And as more people understand their rights and follow suit, as the human rights consciousness grows, change happens faster. The Internet has become one of the human rights community’s most powerful tools.   

At the core of the Urgent Appeals Program is the recording of human rights violations at a grass roots level with objectivity, sympathy and competence. Our information is firstly gathered on the ground, close to the victim of the violation, and is then broadcast by a team of advocates, who can apply decades of experience in the field and a working knowledge of the international human rights arena. The flow of information – due to domestic restrictions – often goes from the source and out to the international community via our program, which then builds a pressure for action that steadily makes its way back to the source through his or her own government.   However these cases in bulk create a narrative – and this is most important aspect of our program. As noted by Sri Lankan human rights lawyer and director of the Asian Human Rights Commission, Basil Fernando:

"The urgent appeal introduces narrative as the driving force for social change. This idea was well expressed in the film Amistad, regarding the issue of slavery. The old man in the film, former president and lawyer, states that to resolve this historical problem it is very essential to know the narrative of the people. It was on this basis that a court case is conducted later. The AHRC establishes the narrative of human rights violations through the urgent appeals. If the narrative is right, the organisation will be doing all right."

Patterns start to emerge as violations are documented across the continent, allowing us to take a more authoritative, systemic response, and to pinpoint the systems within each country that are breaking down. This way we are able to discover and explain why and how violations take place, and how they can most effectively be addressed. On this path, larger audiences have opened up to us and become involved: international NGOs and think tanks, national human rights commissions and United Nations bodies.  The program and its coordinators have become a well-used tool for the international media and for human rights education programs. All this helps pave the way for radical reforms to improve, protect and to promote human rights in the region.