Home / News / Urgent Appeals / SRI LANKA: An injured man is beaten by police, illegally detained and denied medical treatment

SRI LANKA: An injured man is beaten by police, illegally detained and denied medical treatment

November 12, 2009

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION – URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal Case: AHRC-UAC-151-2009



12 November 2009
------------------------------------------------------
SRI LANKA: An injured man is beaten by police, illegally detained and denied medical treatment

ISSUES: Torture; impunity; illegal detention
------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has learned that an injured man was severely and randomly beaten by a police officer at Negombo Police Station and then denied medical treatment for more than 24 hours, causing possible permanent nerve damage. He now faces fabricated charges for a robbery. No legal or disciplinary action has been taken against the officers involved, one of whom is respondent in a fundamental rights charge before the Supreme Court for the alleged torture of Sugath Fernando, who was assassinated last year.

CASE DETAILS:

Tammage Sampath Perera, 28, was leaving church on 29 July, 2009 when he was stopped and badly beaten with an iron bar by a group of churchgoers. They accused him of stealing Rs 38 (US $0.33) from the church and called the police. While waiting for the police the residents decided that another young man, 15, was the culprit instead, but when the police arrived both were taken to Negombo police station.

At the station Sampath's bleeding leg was roughly bandaged, and he was left sitting on a bench with a number of the others. After about an hour we are told that an officer (who Sampath later learned was Headquarters Inspector Somasiri Liyanage ) entered the room and started to kick him and stamp on his wounded leg. The inspector allegedly told him to remove his trousers, then put a pistol in his mouth and ordered him to confess to the crime. Some of the witnesses present protested and told him that the younger boy, also in the room, had taken the money. Two officers were heard to shout at them and threaten them with the same treatment. It should be noted that Inspector Liyanage is currently a respondent in a fundamental rights petition relating to torture (please see more below).

Though no complaint had been filed against Sampath and no evidence produced, police charged him with the robbery and detained him illegally in a police cell without medical treatment. His family found out about his arrest (they were not officially told) and arrived later that evening, asking that he be allowed to go to hospital. When Sampath was admitted to Negombo hospital late the next morning while under custody, a doctor told officers that permanent nerve damage was likely, due to the delay. Sampath was operated on and stayed in hospital until 7 August, where he spent much of the time cuffed to his hospital bed, before being given bail. On 28 October he appeared in the Negombo Magistrate's Court (case number B/1373/2009) charged with robbery.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

As you can read in our past appeal UAU-057-2008, Somasiri Liyanage is a respondent in a fundamental rights case before the Supreme Court, filed by Sugath Fernando, for alleged torture. Fernando's widow is a witness in the case and suspects these respondents for her husband's murder, yet investigations into it have stalled. The case and analysis of it can be read in depth in our human rights periodical, Article 2, vol.8 no.1 (PDF).

No legal, administrative or disciplinary action has yet been taken against the officers involved in Sampath's arrest and torture even though numerous laws and procedural codes were broken, and one of the perpetrators has this alleged history of abuse. As you can read in our summary of Sri Lanka's legal position on torture, the Constitution recognises freedom against torture as a fundamental right (Article 126) and Sri Lanka has ratified the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment in 1993, though neither are used much considering the high rate of torture being reported from Sri Lankan places of detainment. Most police officers appear to enjoy full impunity.

The Asian Human Rights Commission does not consider a job transfer – a common response to torture allegations – an effective deterrent to the crime. Please find out more on our online campaign to fully criminalise torture, in Sri Lanka and throughout Asia, according to international legal standards.

Sampath has written complaints against the Negombo police, naming HQI Somasiri Liyanage, to the Inspector General of Police, the Deputy Inspector General of Police, the Special Investigations Unit, the Special Superintendent of Police in Negombo, the National Police Commission and the National Human Rights Commission. An enquiry has been started by the local SSP, and his report is pending.

SUGGESTED ACTION:

Please write to the authorities below urging a full inquiry, for guilty parties to be prosecuted and disciplined according to Sri Lankan law and policy, and for the victim to be fully compensated. For an effective investigation to be conducted, officers involved must immediately be removed from their positions.

Please be informed that the AHRC has sent a letter to the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture and to the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention.

To support this appeal please click here:

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

SAMPLE LETTER:

Dear __________,

Re: SRI LANKA: An injured man is beaten by police, illegally detained and denied medical treatment

Name of the victim: Tammage Sampath Perera, 28
Name of the alleged perpetrators: HQI Somariri Liyanage and other officers, all attached to Negombo Police Station.
Date of the incident: 29 July to 7 August, 2009
Place of the incident: Negombo Police Station, Negombo Division, Western Province (North) Range.

I am writing to voice my deepest concern regarding the alleged illegal detention, torture and denial of medical treatment of an injured man by police officers at Negombo Police Station, causing him possible permanent nerve damage according to doctors. The man faces fabricated charges for robbery, and no legal or disciplinary action has been taken against the officers involved.

According to the information I have received, Tammage Sampath Perera was badly beaten with an iron bar by a group of churchgoers who accused him of stealing Rs 38 from a church. When the police arrived the residents had decided that another young man, 15, was the culprit instead, but both were taken to Negombo police station.

At the station I am told that, in front of others, the Headquarters Inspector kicked and stamped on Mr. Perera's wounded leg, told him to remove his trousers and put a pistol in his mouth while ordering him to confess to the crime. Some of the witnesses reportedly told the officer that it was a case of mistaken arrest, but they were threatened. It should be noted that HQI Liyanage is a respondent in a fundamental rights case before the Supreme Court for the alleged torture of Sugath Fernando. Fernando was assassinated last year and his widow, a witness in the case, suspects these respondents for her husband's murder – which is no longer being investigated.

Though I am told that no complaint had been filed against Mr. Perera and no evidence produced, he was charged with the robbery and detained illegally in a cell without medical treatment. His family were not officially told of his detention. When Mr. Perera was admitted to Negombo hospital after more than 24 hours, a doctor noted that permanent nerve damage was likely, due to the delay. Mr. Perera was operated on and stayed in hospital until 7 August, where he spent much of the time cuffed to his hospital bed, before being given bail. On 28 October he appeared in the Negombo Magistrate's Court (case number B/1373/2009) charged with robbery.

The victim has made written complaints against the Negombo police, naming HQI Liyanage, to the Inspector General of Police, Deputy Inspector General of Police, the Special Investigations Unit, the Special Superintendent of Police in Negombo, the National Police Commission and the Human Rights Commission. Though an enquiry has been started by the local SSP, I have little faith that the necessary legal and disciplinary action will be taken in this case, and I urge your intervention on behalf of the victim.

As documented by the Asian Human Rights Commission, acts of police torture remain common in Sri Lanka, even though they are against the law. Sri Lanka may have ratified the Convention against Torture in 1993 but just a handful of police officers have been convicted since then due to impunity, court delays and witness intimidation. I am told that a job transfer is the most common response to torture allegations against a police officer, and I am sure you will agree that this is not a credible punishment.

I urge that a full inquiry be conducted and that guilty parties to be prosecuted and disciplined according to the full reach of Sri Lankan law and policy. The victim must be fully compensated and offered protection. For an effective investigation to be conducted, officers involved must immediately be removed from their positions. I also take this opportunity to ask that you ensure that an investigation is being conducted into the murder of Sugath Fernando.

Please note that the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture and the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention have been informed of this case.

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

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@ahrchk.org)

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
AHRC-UAC-151-2009
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.