Home / News / Urgent Appeals / SRI LANKA: Baduraliya police illegally arrest and torture a man
 

SRI LANKA: Baduraliya police illegally arrest and torture a man

July 28, 2010

 

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION – URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal Case: AHRC-UAC-111-2010



28 July 2010
------------------------------------------------------
SRI LANKA: Baduraliya police illegally arrest and torture a man

ISSUES: Illegal arrest and detention; torture
------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has learned that a man was illegally arrested in Kalutara by Baduraliya police, and tortured severely in the police barracks to force a confession. Police used the 'Dharma Chakra' technique of suspending the handcuffed man on a pole that was inserted into the crooks of his bound knees and elbows. Although charges have now been filed against him, no investigation into his allegations of torture has taken place, despite his injuries and his time in hospital.

CASE NARRATIVE:

According to information received by the victim, Seelawansha Hitihamilage Don Samantha Priyalal, 38, was arrested close to his home at around 10:45am on 29 June 2010, while in the house of an acquaintance in Gnanathissa Udakala Village, Hadigalle, Gurulubadda.

We are told that three officers from Baduraliya police station arrived in a three wheeler vehicle including police constable (PC) 29027 and a Sergeant Gunaratne, who was in plain clothes. The officers arrested Priyalal with the resident of the house, Susil Banduthilaka, and another man called Priyantha, yet reportedly did not give the reason or grounds for their arrest as legally required.

The men were taken to Baduraliya Police Station in three wheeled vehicles. PC 29027 and another officer took Priyalal to a room in the back portion of the police station, which is used by the officers for sleeping. According to the Priyalal he was then undressed, his handcuffed hands were placed between his legs and a large pole (a Mol Gaha) was used to lift him off the ground and suspend him; each end was supported by a cupboard. Priyalal reports that he was beaten while suspended, naked, for approximately 30 minutes, with the beating led by PC29027. He was told to confess to breaking into a house and stealing gold jewelry.

After he was released onto the ground for a short period officers also beat the soles of his feet with sticks. They then allegedly left him handcuffed to a bed for the rest of the night.

We are told that at around 7.30am the next day Priyalal was place in a police cell, where relatives were able to visit him. They told him that when they and a lawyer, Chandana Kuruppuarachchi, had tried to visit the previous day but the police had denied that Priyalal was in custody. Priyalal told them that he had been tortured by particular officers.

At around 10.30am his elder brother, a Buddhist monk called Hadigalle Vimalasara, joined his elder sister and wife at the station. They could see that Priyalal's legs had swollen painfully and that he found it hard to move, so at the request of Vimalasara, the Inspector of the police station, Damith Jayathilaka, allowed officers to take the victim to the Government Hospital of Baduraliya. The doctor there saw Priyalal's condition and refused to treat him, telling them that such a case should be taken to the larger hospital in Nagoda. The police put the victim back in a cell at the station, untreated, and at noon they gave him a statement to sign, but refused to explain its content.

We are told that the victim was then taken to the judicial medical office in the General Hospital of Nagoda, but that police officers requested a private meeting with the JMO beforehand. Priyalal then related his experience of torture and showed the doctor his swollen legs, but he claims that the JMO – named Hemantha – did not examine him.

At 4pm that day Priyalal was produced before a magistrate in his chambers at Mathugama, and a case number B/60104/10 was assigned. Though Priyalal pleaded not guilty to theft, he says that he was not given the chance to tell the judge about his torture. He was granted personal surety bail (Rs. 100,000). On his way home a few police officers told him to join them in their vehicle. He refused and returned home by bus.

Priyal checked in to the General Hospital of Nagoda again, and was on a ward until 2 July, causing him to miss his court appearance. He was represented there by his lawyer. A statement was recorded by hospital police and he was properly examined by a different judicial medical officer.

The victim was later told that police only admitted to having arrested him after his brother Vimalasara contacted the minister of the western provincial council, Udaya Gammanpila, who intervened. Priyalal was also informed that the complaint against him had been filed by a Saman Jayasinghe of Gurulubadda in Hadigallegama, who we are told is a relative of a policeman at Baduraliya station.

SUGGESTED ACTION:

Please write to the authorities listed below requesting an immediate investigation into the allegations of torture made by the victim, and the prosecution of those proven to be responsible under the Anti Torture Act of 1994. The officers involved must also be subjected to internal investigations for the breach of the department orders as issued by the police department.

The AHRC has also sent this case to the UN Special Rapportuer on the question of torture requesting his intervention.

To support this appeal please click here:

------------------------------------------------------

SAMPLE LETTER:

Dear __________,

SRI LANKA: Baduraliya police illegally arrest and torture a man

Name of victim: Seelawansha Hitihamilage Don Samantha Priyalal, 38; resident of Hadigalla, Gurubedda, Kalutara
Name of alleged perpetrators: Police Constable No. 29027,
Sergeant Gunaratne and at least one other officer of Baduraliya Police Station, Kalutara Division.
Date of incident: 29 June 2010
Place of incident: Baduraliya Police Station, Kalutara Division, Western Province (South) Range.

I am writing to voice my deep concern regarding the illegal arrest and torture of a man by Baduraliya police in the station barracks. Charges have now been filed against him, yet no investigation into his allegations of torture have taken place, despite his injuries, for which he was hospitalized.
According to information received by the victim, Mr. Priyalal, 38, was arrested close to home at around 10:45am on 29 June 2010, in the house of an acquaintance in Gnanathissa Udakala Village, Hadigalle, Gurulubadda by three officers, among them PC 29027 and a Sergeant Gunaratne, who was in plain clothes. They arrested Mr. Priyalal with the resident of the house, Susil Banduthilaka and another man called Priyantha, reportedly without giving the reason for their arrest, as legally required.

I understand that at Baduraliya Police Station PC 29027 and another officer took Mr. Priyalal to a room that the officers use for sleeping, in the back portion of the police station, where he was undressed. His handcuffed hands were placed between his legs and a large pole was used to lift him off the ground and suspend him, which is known locally as the 'Dharma Chakra' torture technique; each end was supported by a cupboard. Mr. Priyalal reports that he was beaten while suspended, naked, for approximately 30 minutes, led by PC29027. He was told to confess to breaking into a house and stealing gold jewelry. When he was released onto the ground period, the officers beat the soles of his feet with sticks. They then left him handcuffed to a bed for the whole night.

I am told that the next day at around 7.30am Mr. Priyalal was place in a police cell and relatives were able to visit him. However when they had tried to visit the day before, along with a lawyer, they claim that the police had denied that he was in custody. Mr. Priyalal told them that he had been tortured by particular officers and they were able to see that Mr. Priyalal's legs had swollen painfully, and that he found it hard to move. At the request of the victim's brother, Hadigalle Vimalasara, a Buddhist monk. IP Damith Jayathilaka instructed officers to take the victim to the Government Hospital of Baduraliya. The doctor there saw Mr. Priyalal's condition and told them that such a case should be taken to the larger hospital in Nagoda, and the police put the victim back in a cell at the station, untreated. At noon they gave him a statement to sign, but refused to explain its content.

I am told that the victim was then taken to visit the judicial medical office in the General Hospital of Nagoda, but that police officers requested a private meeting with the JMO in his office beforehand. Mr. Priyalal then related his experience of torture and showed the doctor his swollen legs, but claims that the JMO – named Hemantha – did not examine him.

Mr. Priyalal was produced before a magistrate in Mathugama at 4pm that day in the magistrate's chambers, and the case number B/60104/10 was assigned. Though Mr. Priyalal pleaded not guilty, he says that he was not given the chance to tell the judge about his torture. He was granted personal surety bail (Rs. 100,000). On his way home police officers asked him to join them in their vehicle and he refused, returning home by bus.

In Baduraliya his by bus his relatives took him to meet attorney Chandana Kuruppuarachchi, who says that he was denied access to Mr. Priyalal at the police station. Mr. Priyalal then checked in to the General Hospital of Nagoda again, where he was warded until 2 July, causing him to miss his court appearance. He was represented there by his lawyer. A statement was recorded by hospital police and he was properly examined by another judicial medical officer.

The victim was later told that police only admitted to his arrest after his brother, Vimalasara contacted the minister of Western provincial council, Udaya Gammanpila, who intervened. Mr. Priyalal was also informed that the complaint against him had been filed by a Saman Jayasinghe of Gurulubadda, Hadigallegama, who we are told is related to a policeman in Baduraliya.

Please act in your official capacity to ensure the launch of an immediate investigation into the allegations of torture made by the victim, and the prosecution of those proven to be responsible under the Anti Torture Act of 1994. 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:

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

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

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

Secretary
Human Rights Commission
No. 36, Kynsey Road
Colombo 8
SRI LANKA
Tel: +94 11 2 694 925 / 673 806
Fax: +94 11 2 694 924 / 696 470
E-mail: sechrc@sltnet.lk

--------------------
Thank you.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ua@ahrchk.org)

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
AHRC-UAC-111-2010
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.