Home / News / Urgent Appeals / SRI LANKA: A complainant in a corruption case is at risk from threats from the police

SRI LANKA: A complainant in a corruption case is at risk from threats from the police

October 27, 2008

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION – URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal Case: AHRC-UAC-238-2008

27 October 2008
---------------------------------------------------------------------
SRI LANKA: A complainant in a corruption case is at risk from threats from the police

ISSUES: Threats; corruption; arbitrary arrest; fabrication of charges; protection; due process
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information of threats and harassment made against a man by police officers since May 2008 in Sri Lanka. He would not pay money to them. He has been repeatedly arrested and falsely charged after he refused to give them any bribes.

CASE DETAILS:

Rajagopalan Manalan was considered a successful business man in his village where he ran a profitable grocery shop. He was also noted for the sale of 'kassippu' (unlawfully manufactured liquor).

According to Rajagopalan, Mr. Kariyawasam, the Officer-in-Charge (OIC) and other officers of the Welipanna Police Station demanded money payment as bribes from him to allow him to continue his sale of illegal liquor. In addition, they also demanded that he bear the expenses of other gratuities like pumping fuel into their vehicles and providing laborers to do work on their houses.

The OIC demanded that Rajagopalan send men to work in his house at Horana. He also asked him to send 12 manual workers to work on the land at Thebuwana belonging to the former Inspector General Police (IGP) Victor Perera and to provide 3 tractor loads of turf (grass) for the land of the former IGP. Moreover, Rajagopalan had to pay all these workers their daily wages.

Rajagopalan also found out that as he fulfilled their demands, they kept increasing. He had undergone continuous harassment by the police for about 3 to 4 months before he lodged a complaint in September 2008 and decided to stop his unlawful business of the sale of illicit liquor. However, the police officers did not want to end their profitable relationship with Rajagopalan. Thus, they continued to demand bribes. Rajagopalan decided not to oblige the officers any more.

On May 5, 2008, Ragagopalan was arrested on a charge of possession of illegal liquor and produced in Mathugama Magistrate's court (Case No. 2769). He was threatened by the police that if he did not plead guilty, more charges would be imposed against him. So, he pleaded guilty and paid a fine of Rs. 30,000/= (around USD 278).

Even after this, the officers continued to harass him still demanding bribes. On July 11, Rajagopalan went to meet the OIC with his lawyer Mr. Munasinghe as a result of many messages being sent to him by the OIC to come and meet him. On seeing Rajagopalan, the OIC declared that there were several complaints against him and took him into custody without concrete explanation or concrete evidence.

Rajagopalan was released on bail that night and asked to appear in the Mathugama Magistrates court on July 15 where he was falsely charged with the possession of 35 bottles of illegal liquor (Case No. 31750). At the court hearing, he decided to plead not guilty. He was released on bail a second time.

At 7:30pm on September 7, two officers of the Welipanna Police, Disanayake and Premadasa came to Rajagopalan's house and demanded that he go to the police station since the OIC wanted to see him. Rajagopalan refused, was threatened and forcibly taken to the police station where he was detained. On the following day, he was produced before the court on charges of being in possession of 20 bottles of illegal liquor. The police were against his being released on bail insisting that there were communal clashes of two ethnics groups, Sinhalese and Tamils,due to his unlawful business. He was not afforded bail but later by submitting a motion to the Court, he pleaded guilty and paid a fine of Rs. 25,000/= (around USD 232). The court issued a binding-over order for 5 years.

On 10 and 11 September, the officers Premadasa and Dissanayake came a second time searching his house. However, when the officers came to search, they did not produce a search warrant.

On September 12, Rajagopalan made a written complaint to the Chairperson of the Human Rights Commission, National Police Commission, Inspector General of Police, Police Headquarters and the Direct General of the Bribery Commission.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

The case highlights a common scenario with regard to the illegally manufactured liquor business in Sri Lanka. It shows the extent to which some officers of the police take advantage of the situation to make personal profits, stooping to bribery and corrupt practices. And when these easy profits stop for whatever reason, they resort to arbitrary arrests, fabrication of cases and other infringements of fundamental rights.

The AHRC has issued urgent appeals in cases of corruption where the police abused their position to extract bribes from people by torture and fabrication of charges (Please refer to AHRC-UAC-214-2008, AHRC-UAC-015-2008, UAC-302-2007). Lack of investigation is another area of concern (UAC-313-2007).

Please also refer our previous statement regarding several allegations against the former IGP (AHRC-STM-267-2008).

SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write to the authorities listed below urging them to take necessary action to stop threats and harassment by the police. Please also urge them to investigate the allegation of corruption so that those responsible are prosecuted and punished according to the law.

Please be informed that the AHRC has also written separate letters to the UN Special Rapporteur on the Question of Torture calling for intervention in this case.

To supprort this appeal, please click here:

SAMPLE LETTER:

Dear __________,

SRI LANKA: A complainant in a  corruption case is at risk of threats from the police

Name of victim: Mr. Rajagopalan Manalan (36) married with 2 children resident of Rajawathuyaya, Miriswatte, Welipanne
Name of alleged perpetrators: Mr. Kariyawasam, the Officer-in-Charge (OIC) and police officers Premadasa and Dissanayake attached to Welipenna Police Station, Kalutara Dist II, Kalutara Division, Western Province (South) Range
Date of incident: Since May 2008

I am writing to voice my deep concern regarding a case where a complainant in a corruption case has been at risk of threats by the police since May 2008 and the absence of action either to investigate or to provide protection for the complainant.

According to information received, Rajagopalan Manalan is known as a successful businessman in the area and is also involved in sales of 'kassippu', illegal liquor. For this reason, Mr. Kariyawasam, the Officer-in-Charge (OIC) has demanded money payment as bribes from him and asked him to pay fuel fees for his vehicle and money for workers to work on his house at Horana. The OIC has also asked him to pay money for 12 manual workers to work on the land in Thebuwana belonging to the former Inspector General of Police (IGP) Victor Perera and provide 3 tractor loads of grass for the land of the former IGP.

I am aware that due to hardship, Rajagopalan stopped his sale of illegal liquor. The police however, still kept demanding bribes which he refused to pay. He was arrested and charged for possession of illegal liquor twice on May 5, (Case No. 2769) and on July 15 (Case NO. 31750) respectively and was released on bail.

I am also informed that on September 7, two officers, Disanayake and Premadasa from the police station came to his house and forcibly took him to the police station. He was detained, charged again for possession of illegal liquor and released after paying a fine. The officers came again on September 10 and 11 and searched his house without a warrant. This kind of harassment has continued since May 2008 until now even after he stopped his illegal activity and refused to pay bribes to the officers. Finally Rajagopalan sent a written complaint to various authorities but to date, no action has been taken.

Accordingly, I urge you to investigate the threat and harassment by the officers attached to Welipanna Police Station which has continued since May 2008 so that those responsible are properly prosecuted and punished according to the law. I also urge you to drop the charges for possession of illegal liquor which were filed after Rajagopalan stopped his sales and investigate these false charges against him. I further call upon you to investigate the case of corruption where the OIC and other officers from the Welipanna Police Station were involved so that due disciplinary and legal action can be taken.

I take this opportunity to remind the government of Sri Lanka of the need of witness protection. This has to be a prerequisite in cases of corruption and human rights abuses. These people fear filing a complaint due to death threats and further harassment by the authorities. Corruption which is deeply ingrained in society will never be rooted out unless there is effective protection for those complainants like Rajagopalan.

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. 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

3. 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

4. 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 

5. Bribery Commissioner
Commission to Investigate Allegation of Bribery or Corruption (CIABOC)
No 36 Malalasekera Mawatha
Colombo 07
SRI LANKA
Tel: +94 11 2559923 or 2596360
Fax: +94 11 2596014 
E-mail: ciaboc@eureka.lk or sccy@sltnet.lk

Thank you.

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

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
AHRC-UAC-238-2008
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.