Home / News / Urgent Appeals / SRI LANKA: New technique to impede investigation into cases of torture and false charges

SRI LANKA: New technique to impede investigation into cases of torture and false charges

October 16, 2008

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION – URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal Case: AHRC-UAC-230-2008

16 October 2008
---------------------------------------------------------------------
SRI LANKA: New technique to impede investigation into cases of torture and false charges

ISSUES: Torture; arbitrary arrest and detention; threats; illegal detention; due process; child rights
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information that a father and his 14-year-old son were illegally arrested and taken to Kurunegala Police Station by officers on 11 July 2008. The officers did not produce them in court within the required statutory 24 hours. During nine days' detention, the officers tortured the son to confess the crime and fabricated charges based on the confession.

CASE DETAILS: (Based on the testimony of Jayanthi Ramyalatha wife and mother of the victims)

At about 11pm on 11 July 2008, a group of armed police officers attached to Kurunegala Police Station banged on the door of the house of B. Sumedha. When Sumedha's 14-year-old son Sanjaya opened the door, four officers entered the house. They cuffed Sumedha and searched the entire house without any warrant or notice. They dug up the entire floor with an axe for about 30 minutes and left taking Sumedha and Sanjaya to the police station.

On 12 July at 8:30am, Jayanthi, Sumedha's wife went to the police station where she saw her husband, but was not allowed to speak to him. She then asked officers to see her son. They told her to go to the first floor of the building and there she saw her son Sanjaya sitting on a bench, his face was swollen. The mother asked the boy what had happened he told her that he had been beaten by a police officer, Channa Abeyrathna, who interrogated him about a theft. Sanjaya initially denied any part in the matter but after being beaten, he confessed his involvement.

After this, Jayanthi told the officers that they were not involved in any thefts but the officer told her that Sanjaya had already confessed that he had broken into a house. When Jayanthi asked her son why he said so, he said that he was scared that the officers would continue to beat him. After that, she went downstairs to meet officer Channa, who asked Jayanthi to tell the truth about the incident. She again denied involvement in a theft. The officer then shouted and scolded her using foul language.

An officer came to her and asked whether they had pawned the stolen goods. When Jayanthi denied such an action, the officer threatened her and demanded to see her National Identity Card. The officer then took the card together with her passport.

At 8:30am on July 13, Jayanthi again went the police station to see her husband and son. On this occasion the police told her not to come again to the police station before July 18. On July 14, Sumedha's two brothers B. Sarath and B. Nihal went to the police station. Sanjaya told them that his hands were tied behind his back and that he had been hung and beaten up for two days. Jayanthi also saw the marks on his hands.

They went to the police station again on July 16 and 17. Sumedha told them that the police had said that unless he revealed the place where they had hidden the stolen jewelry, they would be killed. To avoid the continuous beatings, Sumedha told the police that he had given the jewelry to his sister's daughters. Hearing this, Sumedha's sister B. Mallika and her son-in-law Kamal went to the police station where Kamal was promptly remanded for about half an hour before being released.

On July 18, Jayanthi and B. Mallika went to the police station but were told to leave. On the same day, they went to the Human Rights Commission Branch office in Kurunegala and lodged a complaint (No. HRC 3877/2008). When they went informed staff at the police station them that they had reported this to the Human Rights Commission Branch office, an officer scolded them and threatened them to withdraw the complaint. Jayanthi subsequently made a written complaint of the incident to the Inspector General of Police.

On July 19, officers took Sanjaya to the hospital and also to the additional magistrates. Sanjaya was released on bail but Sumedha was charged with theft of the jewelry and remanded. Cases against them were filed before Kurunagala Magistrate Court (Case No. B 93474/2008 and B 93473/2008). Meanwhile, Sanjaya was admitted to Kurunegala Hospital ward No 47 on July 21. He was discharged on July 25 after receiving medical treatment for five days.

The letter for investigation made by Jayanthi was sent to Inspector General of Police (IGP) and Deputy Inspector General (DIG) and Head Quarter's Inspector (HQI). However, Director Police Legal Division replied, on behalf of the IGP, saying that Assistant Superintendant of Police (ASP)--1, Kurunagala has informed that the mother said that she did not want any further inquiries and that she had made the complaint at the request and the insistence of the officers at the HRC-Kurunagala. However, Jayanthi says that she has never made such a comment and her signature was taken to a document when she met the ASP--1 but she does not know what the documents were.

SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write to the local authorities listed below and demand urgent intervention in this case so that those responsible are prosecuted and punished according to the law

Please be informed that the AHRC has written a separate letter to the UN Special Rapporteur on the Question of Torture calling for an intervention in this matter.

To support this appeal, please click here:

SAMPLE LETTER:

Dear __________,

SRI LANKA: New technique to impede investigation into cases of torture and false charges

Details of victims: Mr. B. Sumedha, father and his 14 year-old son Sanjaya Kalhara Balage; Residents of No.530/1-Bogahahena, Heraliyawala, Kurunegala
Cases: B 93474/2008 and 93473/2008 at Kurunagala Magistrate Court
Name of alleged perpetrators: an officer named Channa Abeyrathna and other officers attached to the Kurunegala Police Station
Date of incident: 11 July 2008
Place of incident: Kurunegala Police Station, Kurunegala Dist. I, Kurunegala Division, North Western Range

I am writing to voice my deep concern regarding the case of illegal arrest and detention, torture of a father and his 14 year-old son and fabrication of charges against the son by officers attached to the Kurunegala Police Station on 11 July 2008.

According to information received, officers attached to the Kurunegala Police Station came with force without a warrant and searched the house of B. Sumedha. When they failed to find anything, they took the two into custody on July 11 where they kept B. Sumedha and his son Sanjaya for nine days without producing them before a Magistrate.

From information I have learned, that while B. Sumedha and his son Snajaya were kept in custody where his son was hung from a roof beam with a rope and beaten to confess to steal jewelry. Due to severe pain and fear of being further assaulted by officers, including an officer named Channa, the son confessed that he had stolen the jewelry even though he had not stolen.

I am informed that failing to lodge this complaint at the police station, relatives then lodged a complaint (HRC 3877/2008) with the Human Rights Commission Branch office in Kurunegala on July 18. When they informed the police at the station, officers scolded and threatened them so that they would withdraw the complaint. I am aware that this incident has also been reported to the Inspector General of Police (IGP). Meanwhile, Director Police Legal Division on behalf of the IGP replied that Assistant Superintendant of Police (ASP)--1, Kurunagala informed that the mother said that she did not want any further inquiries and she has made the complaint on the request and the insistence of the officers at HRC-Kurunagala. However, Jayanthi says she has never made such a comment and signed such a document. It seems to me that the police intentionally impede investigation by fabricating the document.

Accordingly, I urge you to investigate this case so that those responsible for illegal arrest and detention, torture and fabrication of charges are properly prosecuted and punished according to law. And that the son is no longer victimized by charges fabricated by the police. I also urge that irrespective of the truth of the theft, confessions obtained by torture should not be admissible at all as evidence before the court. I further urge you to address such attempts by the police to impede further inquiry from higher authorities in order to ensure thorough and impartial investigation into this case.

I trust that you will take proper action in this case.

Yours sincerely,

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

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

2. Mr. Hemantha Priyasanth Dep
Acting Attorney General
Attorney General's Department
Colombo 12
SRI LANKA
Fax: +94 11 2 436 421
E-mail: ag@attorneygeneral.gov.lk

3. Professor Rajiva Wijesinha
Secretary
Ministry of Disaster Management and Human Rights
2, Wijerama Mawatha
Colombo 7
SRI LANKA
Fax: +94 11 269 3284
E-mail: info@dmhr.gov.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

5. 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

6. Chairperson
National Child Protection Authority
330, Thalawathugoda Road
Madiwela
SRI LANKA
Tel: +94 112778912/13/14
Fax: +94 112778975
E-mail: ncpa@childprotection.gov.lk

7. Head of Child Protection
UNICEF Sri Lanka
P.O. Box 143, Colombo
SRI LANKA
Tel: +94 11 2 555 270 (6 lines)
Fax: +94 11 2 551 333
E-mail: colombo@unicef.org
 
Thank you.

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

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
AHRC-UAC-230-2008
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.