Home / News / Urgent Appeals / SRI LANKA: Ganemulla police illegally arrested, detained, tortured and filed fabricated charges against a civilian
 

SRI LANKA: Ganemulla police illegally arrested, detained, tortured and filed fabricated charges against a civilian

September 8, 2010

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION-URGENT APPEAL PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal Case: AHRC-UAC-131-2010

 

8 September 2010
------------------------------------------------------
SRI LANKA: Ganemulla police illegally arrested, detained, tortured and filed fabricated charges against a civilian

ISSUES: Illegal arrest; arbitrary detention; torture; impunity; rule of law; witness protection.
------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information that police officers attached to the Ganemulla Police Station have illegally arrested, detained and tortured a civilian. Later the police filed fabricated charges against him. After the victim sought justice by filling a fundamental rights application he was further threaten.

CASE NARRATIVE:

Balapu Waduge Lakshman Mendis (39) of No: 315/H, Horagalle, Ganemulla is married and a father of two children. He works as a driver at the Abans Organisation Ltd, a private company in the area. On 25 April 2010 his wife and children attended a New Year celebration held in the 'Perera Pura', the village in which they live. Later Lakshman also went to the place where the celebration was held by a three-wheeler which he drives. The three-wheeler belongs to the member of the Local Governance Institution of the area. He parked his three-wheeler on the side of the road and went into the inside where the events were taking place.

A short while later he returned to the three-wheeler to go back to his home. He observed four people sitting inside in a casual manner, smoking cigarettes and laying on the seat with their legs up. He requested them to get down as he wanted to leave. Then one of the four youths told him that he was the son of a high ranking police officer. They asked him, do you know who you are speaking to? This is the son of the Officer-in-Charge (OIC).

Later they got down and left. Lakshman took the three-wheeler and moved on. He stopped near a house of his friends. When he was there three of the youths arrived on a motorcycle. They threatened Lakshman with foul language and when they finally left he thought that the matter was finished.

At around 7.30 in the evening, Lakshman returned to the same place to see a musical show organized for the New Year celebrations.

A short while later a police Jeep of the Ganemulla Police Station arrived. The OIC who was in a black jacket and a black hat was in the Jeep and repeatedly demanded, who is Lakshman?

Then Lakshman went to the OIC, he thought that he had come to inquire into the earlier incident. Without warning the OIC hit him on the chest asking "Are you the man?" Lakshman fell to the ground and when he was trying to get up, the OIC assaulted him with a torch he was holding. He also kicked Lakshman who fell down again.

While Lakshman was being assaulting in this way the villagers started came to the place. Lakshman got up slowly and was able to enter the adjoining land, which belongs to Mr. Chaminda. However, the OIC was not satisfied and followed him, asking repeatedly "Where is the bugger?" Then he assaulted some other people who were there having soft drinks and who witnessed Lakshman being assaulting.

Then the son of the OIC who was in the Jeep came to the scene and pointed out Lakshman to his father (the OIC). The OIC caught Lakshman and used a helmet in his hand to strike him about the head. The police officers who had been sitting in the Jeep then came to the scene and surrounded Lakshman. They assaulted him by kicking him and punching him. They also stuck him with their firearms. As a result of the assault Lakshman fell to the ground again. They then dragged Lakshman to the jeep. As they did so the son of the OIC trampled and continued to assault him as he lay on the floor of the Jeep.

They brought Lakshman to the Ganemulla Police Station and on his arrival Sub Inspector (SI) Jayasinghe punched him several times.

Lakshman suffered severe pain all over his body and the marks of injuries were clearly evident. The officers took him to the Base Hospital of Gampaha where the doctors admitted him for further treatment considering the severity of his condition.

Later Lakshman came to learn that the OIC of the Ganemulla Police filed a fabricated case against him on for obstructing the official duties of police officer; grievous hurt to a higher ranking police officer; violent behavior in public while drunk under case No. B/1278/2010, in the Magistrate court of Gampaha. Later he was discharged on 29 April 2010 and transferred to the prison hospital at the Remand Prison of Mahara. The doctors who examined him at the Base Hospital of Gampaha reported his medical condition but there was no evidence in their report that the victim was inebriated.

On 4 May 2010, Lakshman was produced before the Magistrate court of Gampaha. He was represented by an Attorney-at-Law in the court with the assistance of a civil rights organization where he was able to submit the affidavit of his wife which testified to veracity of the facts regarding the incident. Following the submissions the Magistrate enlarged him on bail.

Furthermore, the four people who witnessed the assault gave affidavits confirming the incident. Lakshman then made several complaints to the relevant state authorities on 8 may 2010 asking for prompt, independent, impartial and effective investigation into the violations of his rights and the crimes committed against him by the OIC and the other police officers attached to the police station of Ganemulla. To-date, he has not received a single response to any of his complaints. He then took the course of filing an application at the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka on the basis that his fundamental rights (FR) guaranteed by the Constitution of Sri Lanka have been violated by the police officers, including the OIC of the police station of Ganemulla. The FR was filed on 2 June 2010 under case No. SCFR/ 341/2010.

Lakshman has revealed that after the filing this FR he and his family members have been intimidated and threatened by the police officers.

On 7 August, the application was supported in the Supreme Court and considering the credibility of the case the Supreme Court granted the leave to proceed with the application and ordered the relevant police officer, Inspector General of Police and the Attorney General to file their objections within two weeks. While the case was heard the counsel appearing for Lakshman drew the attention of the Judgers to the threat made to the petitioner and the State Counsel was directed to advise the relevant police officers to refrain from threatening the witness. The next hearing in the Supreme Court has been fixed for 6 December 2010.

The judges failed to apprehend that much can happen in the way of intimidation and open threats, if not actual violence to the victim and members of his family in the time leading up to the next hearing.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:

The Asian Human Rights Commission has reported innumerable cases of arbitrarily arrest, detentions, torturing the innocent when they are at the hands of the police and filling enormous amounts of fabricated charges against innocents by the Sri Lankan police which are illegal under international and local law and which have taken place at different police stations in the country over the past few years. The Asian Human Rights Commission has observed that Sri Lankan police have used the filling of fabricated chargers against innocent persons as an illegal instrument to harass the public.

The Constitution of Sri Lanka has guaranteed the right freedom from torture. According to Article 11 of the Constitution 'No person shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment'. Article 12 (1) of the Constitution of Sri Lanka has guaranteed the right to equality for all persons as stated that 'all persons are equal before the law and are entitled to the equal protection of the law'. Further Article 13 (1) has stated that 'No person shall be arrested except according to procedure established by law. Any person arrested shall be informed of the reason for his arrest'.

Furthermore, Sri Lanka has signed and ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Nevertheless the lack of protection offered to those who are willing to take cases against abusive police officers and the state authorities, means that the law is under-used continues to be employed as a tool by the police to harass people. This not only takes a long-term toll on the victim and his or her family, but on society as a whole, by the undermining of civilian respect for the law and encouraging impunity.

The Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT) was signed by the State of Sri Lanka and ratified on 3 January 1994. Following state obligations Sri Lanka adopted Act No. 22 of 1994 the law adopted by the Sri Lankan parliament making torture a crime that can be punishable for 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 the case where credible evidence is found on the torturing of people by state officers.

Furthermore, the Asian Human Rights Commission has continuously exposed the way the witness and the victims are getting harassed and on some occasions even killed to suppress the justice. Furthermore we have urged the State of Sri Lanka to adopt a law for the protection of witness protection.

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 illegal arrest, arbitrary detention, torturing, filling fabricated charges and finally threatening the witness 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 officers and for mis-prosecution. The officers involved must also be subjected to internal investigations for the breach of the department orders as issued by the police department.

Please note that the Asian Human Rights Commission has already written separate letters to the Special Rapporteur on the Question of Torture of United Nations on this regard.

To support this appeal, please click here:

SAMPLE LETTER:

Dear ________,

SRI LANKA: Ganemulla Police illegally arrested, detained and tortured and filed fabricated charges against an innocent civilian

Name of the Victims:
Balapu Waduge Lakshman Mendis of No: 315/H, Horagalle, Ganemulla.

Alleged Perpetrators:
1. Officer -in- Charge, Police Station, Ganemulla
2. S. I. Jayasinha and 8 other police officers attached to the same police station
3. The son of the Officer-in-Charge of the Ganemulla Police Station

Date of Incident: 25 April 2010
Places of Incident: Ganemulla Police Station in the Gampaha ASP division in Western Province.

I am writing to voice my concern regarding the arbitrary arrest, detention and torture by the officers attached of the Ganemulla Police Station in the Western province Sri Lanka. According to the information that I have received Balapu Waduge Lakshman Mendis (39) of No: 315/H, Horagalle, Ganemulla is married and a father of two children. He works as a driver at the Abans Organisation Ltd, a private company in the area.

On 25 April 2010 Lakshman went a New Year's celebration traveling by a three-wheeler which belongs to the member of the Local Governance Institution of the area.

When he returned to the three-wheeler to go home he found four people sitting inside in a casual manner, smoking cigarettes and laying on the seat with their legs up. He requested them to get down as he wanted to leave. Then one of the four youths told him that he was the son of a high ranking police officer. They asked him, do you know who you are speaking to? This is the son of the Officer-in-Charge (OIC). They threatened Lakshman with foul language and when they finally left he thought that the matter was finished.

At around 7.30 in the evening, Lakshman returned to the same place to see a musical show organized for the New Year celebrations. A short while later a police Jeep of the Ganemulla Police Station arrived. The OIC who was in a black jacket and a black hat was in the Jeep and repeatedly demanded, who is Lakshman?

Lakshman went to the OIC, he thought that he had come to inquire into the earlier incident. Without warning the OIC hit him on the chest asking "Are you the man?" Lakshman fell to the ground and when he was trying to get up, the OIC assaulted him with a torch he was holding. He also kicked Lakshman who fell down again.

While Lakshman was being assaulting in this way the villagers started came to the place. Lakshman got up slowly and was able to enter the adjoining land, which belong to Mr. Chaminda. However, the OIC was not satisfied and followed him, asking repeatedly "Where is the bugger?" Then he assaulted some other people who were there having soft drinks and who witnessed Lakshman being assaulting.

Then the son of the OIC who was in the Jeep came to the scene and pointed out Lakshman to his father (the OIC). The OIC caught Lakshman and used a helmet in his hand to strike him about the head. The police officers who had been sitting in the Jeep then came to the scene and surrounded Lakshman. They assaulted him by kicking him and punching him. They also stuck him with their firearms. As a result of the assault Lakshman fell to the ground again. They then dragged Lakshman to the jeep. As they did so the son of the OIC trampled and continued to assault him as he lay on the floor of the Jeep.

They brought Lakshman to the Ganemulla Police Station and on his arrival Sub Inspector (SI) Jayasinghe punched him several times.

Lakshman suffered severe pain all over his body and the marks of injuries were clearly evident. The officers took him to the Base Hospital of Gampaha where the doctors admitted him for further treatment considering the severity of his condition.

Later, Lakshman came to learn that the OIC of the Ganemulla Police filed a fabricated case against him on for obstructing the official duties of police officer; grievous hurt to a higher ranking police officer; violent behavior in public while drunk under case No. B/1278/2010, in the Magistrate court of Gampaha. Later he was discharged on 29 April 2010 and transferred to the prison hospital at the Remand Prison of Mahara. The doctors who examined him at the Base Hospital of Gampaha reported his medical condition but there was no evidence in their report that the victim was inebriated.

On 4 May 2010, Lakshman was produced before the Magistrate court of Gampaha. He was represented by an Attorney-at-Law in the court with the assistance of a civil rights organization where he was able to submit the affidavit of his wife which testified to veracity of the facts regarding the incident. Following the submissions the Magistrate enlarged him on bail.

Furthermore, the four people who witnessed the assault gave affidavits confirming the incident. Lakshman then made several complaints to the relevant state authorities on 8 may 2010 asking for prompt, independent, impartial and effective investigation into the violations of his rights and the crimes committed against him by the OIC and the other police officers attached to the police station of Ganemulla. To-date, he has not received a single response to any of his complaints. He then took the course of filing an application at the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka on the basis that his fundamental rights (FR) guaranteed by the Constitution of Sri Lanka have been violated by the police officers, including the OIC of the police station of Ganemulla. The FR was filed on 2 June 2010 under case No. SCFR/ 341/2010.

Lakshman has revealed that after he filing this FR he and his family members have been intimidated and threatened by the police officers.

On 7 August, the application was supported in the Supreme Court and considering the credibility of the case the Supreme Court granted the leave to proceed with the application and ordered the relevant police officer, Inspector General of Police and the Attorney General to file their objections within two weeks. While the case was heard the counsel appearing for Lakshman drew the attention of the Judgers to the threat made to the petitioner and the State Counsel was directed to advise the relevant police officers to refrain from threatening the witness. The next hearing in the Supreme Court has been fixed for 6 December 2010.

The honourable judges failed to apprehend that much can happen in the way of intimidation and open threats, if not actual violence to the victim and members of his family in the time leading up to the next hearing.

I request your urgent intervention to ensure that the authorities listed below instigate an immediate investigation into the allegations of illegal arrest, detention, torture, filling fabricated charges and threatening the witness 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 officers and for wrongful prosecution. 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. Mahinda Balasuriya
Inspector General of Police
New Secretariat
Colombo 1
SRI LANKA
Fax: +94 11 2 440440 / 327877
E-mail: igp@police.lk

2. Mr. Mohan Peiris
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
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@ahrc.asia)

 

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
AHRC-UAC-131-2010
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.