Home / News / Urgent Appeals / SRI LANKA: Assault and fabrication of charges against a minor by police

SRI LANKA: Assault and fabrication of charges against a minor by police

October 29, 2008

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION – URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal Case: AHRC-UAC-240-2008

29 October 2008
---------------------------------------------------------------------
SRI LANKA: Assault and fabrication of charges against a minor by police

ISSUES: Police assault; fabrication of charges; rule of law
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information that Kuruwita police assaulted a boy on the road and forcibly took him, with his brother,  into police custody and later fabricated charges against him in collaboration with a Judicial Medical Officer on 31 August 2008.

CASE DETAILS: (based on the testimony of Liyanage Buddhika Mahesh and his mother Don Theverepperuma Leelawathi)

On 31 August 2008, while Buddhika Mahesh, 17 years old, was at home, he was informed by his neighbor, Amitha, that his elder brother, Chamila Jeevantha was involved in a brawl at the Kuruwita bus stop. Chamila was returning home after a party. Upon hearing this, Buddhika went to the spot with his younger brother Isuru and managed to get his brother out of the fight. On their way home, they met their mother, Don Theverepperuma Leelawathi.

At 5:30pm while they were walking home, a jeep from the Kuruwita Police Station came and stopped them near Kuruwita Lorry Park. One officer named Sunil got out of the jeep and two traffic motorcycle police dismounted. Without warning the traffic officer broke a pole off a fence and started to assault Buddhika, making him sit on the ground while continuing to beat him. The mother begged the officer to stop the beating. She said her son had done nothing wrong but simply had gone to bring his brother home from the bus stop. Buddhika also tried to explain his innocence to the officers. However, the police would not listen. They continued the assault. A crowd gathered and was allowed to watch the scene.

Then, officer Sunil pushed Buddhika into the jeep. While the mother pleaded with them not to take her son, the officer forcibly pushed her away so that she fell down into a pool of mud on the road.  He then dragged Chamila and put him in the jeep too. There were about four officers in the jeep which had its own driver. They left without giving any reason for the arrest.

The mother followed the jeep to the Kuruwita Police Station where she was told by officer Sunil that the boys had to be tested to see if they were drunk. Chamila and Buddka were then taken to the Ratnapura General Hospital, where officer Sunil asked a hospital aid where a certain doctor was at this time. He was told that the doctor was at a private clinic in Pelmadulla. Officer Sunil then called the doctor on his mobile phone and told the other officer that the doctor would be in Palmadulla until 10pm.
 
At this point, the boys were taken to Palmadulla to a private dispensary called 'Instant Medicare', located on No 34, Main Street. They met Doctor Kamal Pattiyawattege, register No18137 in the Medical Council, the Judicial Medical Officer (JMO) of the Ratnapura General Hospital. Officer Sunil met with the doctor first and later sent the boys in individually to be examined by him.

Dr. Kamal Pattiyawattege asked Buddhika how much he had drunk and Buddhika replied that he had not drunk anything but that he had been assaulted and taken into custody when he was bringing his brother back from the bus stop. Then, the doctor wrote up his notes. The boys were taken back to the jeep and officer Sunil again met the doctor, Sunil coming out of the room carrying a piece of paper. Then, the boys were taken back to the police station and put in a cell at about 10pm.

The mother was told to bring a fresh set of clothes. While the mother was absent, the boys were taken out of the cell and forced by officer Sunil to sign under something written in a book. Buddhika asked that he be allowed to read what was written but was refused. At 11:45pm, the boys were released on bail and told to appear in the Ratnapura Magistrate's Court on September 4.
 
They appeared in court and were charged separately with being drunk and disorderly behaviour. Even though the mother paid Rs. 500/= (around USD 4.6) to the lawyer Kithsiri Arabagethara to appear in court on behalf of her two sons, the lawyer did not appear. The court asked Buddhika if he pleaded guilty or not. He was not given a chance to answer because the police officers dragged him out of the witness box in the presence of the judge. However, it was recorded that Buddhika pleaded guilty. Both boys were each fined Rs. 2,500/= (around USD 23.)

On September 11, Buddhika sent a written complaint to the Chairperson of the Human Rights Commission, National Police Commission, Inspector General of Police, Senior Superintendent of Police Ratnapura and Secretary of the Bar Association and Medical Council.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

Besides torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, another area of concern in Sri Lanka is fabrication of charges against an arrested or detained person. This is a common practice of the police. It has been widely used by the police to justify the initial arrest and/or continued detention of a person, including preventing release on bail or securing a conviction. The cases of Aravinda (please refer to AHRC-UAC-172-2008) and Naidos (please refer to AHRC-STM-210-2008, AHRC-STM-209-2008) are recent examples clearly demonstrating this practice.

The case of Sarath Kumara shows that fabrication of charges had been used in which senior police officers, involved in ill-treatment, played a leading role in lodging a false medical report against him (Please also see AHRC-UAC-211-2008).

The cases of Buddhika and Madushani Subasinghe surface two significant matters of concern: that a minor was not exempt from false charges trumped up by the police and that their parents and legal representatives were never present during the aggressive investigative process (AHRC-UAC-226-2008).

SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write letters to the authorities listed below urging them to investigate this case.

The AHRC has also written a separate letter to the UN Special Rapporteur on the Question of Torture calling for intervention in this case.

To support this appeal, please click here:

SAMPLE LETTER:

Dear __________,

SRI LANKA: Please investigate assault and false charges against a minor by police

Name of victim: Liyanage Buddhika Mahesh, 17 years; residing at 326 C, Kamburawa Road, Kuruwita
Name of alleged perpetrators: Officer Sunil and others of the Kuruwita Police Station, Ratnapura Dist III, Ratnapura Division, Sabaragamuwa Range
Name of JMO involved: Dr. Kamal Pattiyawattege, registered in the Medical Council, No. 18137
Date of incident: 31 August 2008
Place of incident: assaulted near Kuruwita Lorry Park

I am writing to voice my deep concern regarding the assault and false charges laid against a minor by police attached to the Kuruwita Police Station on August 31, 2008.

According to the information received, at 5:30pm on August 31, Chamila and Buddhika were on their way home with their mother when they were stopped near Kuruwita Lorry Park by police officers.  Officer Sunil came in a jeep together with traffic police on a motorcycle from Kuruwita Police Station. They severely assaulted Buddhika and forcibly took both of them away claiming they needed an alcohol test. They then pushed the mother who fell down in a pool of mud on the road.

From information I have received, officer Sunil brought them to Ratnapura General Hospital. Here he located Dr. Kamal Pattiyawattege, JMO. He was an attending at the private dispensary  'Instant Medicare' located at No. 34, Main Street. The officer took them to the private dispensary where he received a document from the doctor after he had examined them. I am informed that Buddhika claimed he did not drink and was assaulted by the police.

I am also informed that after officer Sunil took them to the police station, he forced them to sign a document which was not explained to them and which they were not allowed to read. All these procedures took place without the presence of their legal guardians. The two boys appeared before the Ratnapura Magistrate's Court on September 4 where Buddhika was forcibly taken out of the witness box by officer Sunil before he could plead not guilty and while the case was in progress before the judge. They were finally charged separately with being drunk and misbehaving in public. They were found guilty and given fines of Rs 2,500/= each.
 
Therefore, I urge you to investigate all the police officers, including officer Sunil, who severely assaulted Buddhika so that those responsible are properly prosecuted and punished according to the law. I also urge you to investigate the fabricated medical report submitted by Dr. Kamil Pattiyawattege, the JMO, who produced false evidence against Buddhika which led to his guilty verdict. False charges such as these made by a medical professional should be strictly addressed.

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. Senior Superintendent of Police Ratnapura,
Office of the Senior Superintendent of Police
Ratnapura
SRI LANKA

5. 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

6. Secretary
Medical Council
No.31 Noris Canal Road
Colombo 10
SRI LANKA
Tel: +94 11 2691848
Fax: +94 11 2674787
E-mail: slmc@lankabellnet.com

7. Professor Rajiva Wijesinha
Secretary
Ministry of Disaster Management and Human Rights
2, Wijerama Mawatha
Colombo 7
SRI LANKA
Fax: +94 11 268 1982

Thank you.

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

 

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
AHRC-UAC-240-2008
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.