Home / News / Urgent Appeals / SRI LANKA: Police allegedly fabricate a case involving the assault on two men
 

SRI LANKA: Police allegedly fabricate a case involving the assault on two men

November 27, 2008

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal Case: AHRC-UAC-255-2008



27 November 2008
---------------------------------------------------------------------
SRI LANKA: Police allegedly fabricate a case involving the assault on two men

ISSUES: Assault; ill-treatment; fabrication of case
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has been informed that police assaulted two men at the Kalubowila Junction on November 10. As a result of the assault, one man's spinal vertebra was damaged rendering him unable to walk or stand up straight. However, the police attempted to fabricate the case by falsely reporting it.

CASE DETAILS:

After work, Kurugamage Don Predeep went to a restaurant to have dinner with his friend Laksiri, a driver at the Kalubowila Junction at 8:30pm on November 10. While they were ordering dinner, Pradeep asked Laksiri to put a 'Reload' in his cellular phone. ('Reload' is one of the card connection systems used in Sri Lanka not requiring a monthly fee. People reload money to the phone by using a reload card.)

An officer named Manoj, of the traffic branch of the Kohuwala Police Station, without saying a word, suddenly began to beat both Pradeep and Laksiri. Within a short time, a police mobile unit and a team of emergency search and investigation police came to the junction. Five police officers including the driver of the police jeep also started beating them. They beat them using police batons, their hands and legs.

Later they were admitted to ward number 25 of the Kalubowila Hospital. It is reported that Manoj had the nickname of 'Reload' because he took bribes from drivers. He used to tell the drivers that if they wanted to be released, they must give him a reload. He thought that Pradeep and Laksiri insulted him by using the word 'Reload'.

On November 11, Manoj came to Kalubowila hospital telling them that the acting Magistrate had ordered a remand for Pradeep (Remand no. 4195) and Laksiri (Remand no. 4194) without giving them any further detailed information. Their family members had not been informed about this matter.

On November 12, Pradeep's mother and sister went to the Kohuwala Police Station to lodge a complaint. Officers of the police station made them wait for four or five hours and then did not register their complaint.

After being contacted, Inspector of Police (IP) Lakshmen said that according to the police record book, Pradeep and Laksiri were drunk and fell down on the road. Manoj called the police to investigate. The record also noted that the two were admitted to the hospital to get medicine for their wounds. The IP further admitted that he did not know much about the case except for what was in the record book.

Pradeep's brother-in-law Sarath made a complaint to the office of Senior Superintendent of Police at Mtlevenia on November 13. Pradeep's relatives also lodged a complaint with the Human Rights Commission on November 14 (Case No. HRC5741108). At this time, Pradeep was transferred to the Welikada prison hospital on November 14.

A Judicial Medical Officer from the Kalubowila Hospital gave instructions to check Pradeep’s eyes and ears and get the X-rays from the private hospital as there were no facilities at his hospital.

According to his mother, Pradeep's right ear was injured to the extent that he could not hear anything in that ear. A spinal vertebra was also damaged making him unable to stand up straight. His body is racked with pain due to the assault by the police.

The police attempted to fabricate this case by stating falsely that both Pradeep and Laksiri were fighting each other on the day they were assaulted.

SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write a letter to the government authorities listed below and ask them to investigate this case.

Please be informed that 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 this case where police assaulted two men and attempted to fabricate evidence against them

Name of victims:
1. Mr. Kurugamage Don Predeep, 38; married with four children; private bus driver; residing at No. 44/21/B, Sri Maha vihara Road, Kalubowila, Dehiwala; complainant to the Human Rights Commission (No. HRC5741108 lodged on 14 November 2008)
2. Mr. Laksiri, driver; victim 1's friend
Name of alleged perpetrator: Mr. Manoj (4158), traffic branch and five other police officers attached to the Kohuwala Police Station
Place of incident: a restaurant, Kalubowila Junction
Date of incident: 10 November 2008 at 8:30pm

I am writing to express my deep concern regarding the police assault against two men and their attempt to fabricate the case which occurred on 10 November 2008.

According to information received, while Pradeep and Laksiri were waiting for their dinner to be served at a restaurant in Kalubowila Junction, Pradeep asked Laksiri to reload money on to his mobile phone. On hearing this, Manoj (Badge no. 4158) attached to the Kohuwala Police Station allegedly started assaulting them at 8:30pm on November 10, 2008. In few minutes, five additional police officers came in a police car and joined in the assault.

I am informed that Pradeep was admitted to the Kalubowila Hospital for injuries caused by the assault. According to his mother, his right ear was so damaged that he could not hear anything in that ear besides which he is now unable to stand up straight because a spinal vertebra was also damaged.

Meanwhile, Manoj came to the hospital on November 11 and informed them that the acting Magistrate ordered them remanded without giving them any further detailed information. They were remanded. (Pradeep's remand no. 4195 and Laksiri's remand no. 4194)

I am also informed that when Pradeep's mother and sister went to the Kohuwala Police Station to lodge a complaint, officers at the station made them wait for about five hours and then did not register their complaint.

As the complaint was not registered and there was no follow-up investigation, the police have now also attempted to fabricate and falsely report this case. The police said that both Pradeep and Laksiri were fighting each other on the day they were assaulted.

In light of the above, I urge you to investigate the cause of Pradeep's injuries. Are they the result of fighting with his friend Laksiri or of the assault by Manoj and five other police officers at the restaurant? Those responsible should be properly prosecuted and punished according to the law.

I also urge that another inquiry, on the denial of accepting the complaint of Pradeep's relatives at the Kalubowila Police Station, be held in order to prevent similar cases from occurring in the future.

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 436421
E-mail: ag@attorneygeneral.gov.lk

5. 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-255-2008
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.