Home / News / Urgent Appeals / SRI LANKA: Police severely tortured five men and subsequently filed fabricated charges against them
 

SRI LANKA: Police severely tortured five men and subsequently filed fabricated charges against them

January 3, 2006

URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION-URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal

03 January 2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------
UA-002-2006: SRI LANKA: Police severely tortured five men and subsequently filed fabricated charges against them

SRI LANKA: Torture; Illegal Arrest; Fabricated charges; Rule of law
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information of yet another case of illegal arrest, detention, brutal torture and the subsequent filing of fabricated charges against the victims on 28 February 2005. The arrest of victims S. D. Kodituwakku, who is a hotel owner, and his employees, A. B. Abeywardena, A. Ruwantissa and W. Shantha, was allegedly orchestrated by the Officer-in-Charge (O.I.C.) of the Dickwella police station in an effort to take over Kodituwakku’s hotel business in favour of the local politician.

The four men were charged with illegal possession of firearms, which is a non-bailable offense in Sri Lanka. At the time of Kodituwakku and his employees’ detention, Kodituwakku’s younger brother, Sujeewa, was arrested, detained and severely tortured by some policemen attached to the Tissamaharama police station. After the incident, the Judicial Medical Officer (JMO) submitted a report regarding the victims’ case. A formal complaint was also filed at the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC). The complaints, however, have not shown show any progress.

We call upon your intervention to ensure that an impartial and independent investigation into this case takes place. The charges against the five men in court must be dropped. If the allegations against the policemen involved are true, appropriate charges must be filed against them.

Finally, please urge the NHRC to resolve the victim’s complaint the earliest time possible. Appropriate compensation must likewise be afforded to them. They must also be placed under a government-sponsored rehabilitation programme for trauma treatment. The government must comply with these requirements as stipulated in the Convention against Torture Act of Sri Lanka.


Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DETAILED INFORMATION:

Name of the victims: S. D. Kodituwakku, A. B. Abeywardena, A. Ruwantissa, W. Shantha and Sujeewa Kodituwakku
Alleged perpetrators: The Officer-in-Charge (O.I.C.) of the Dickwella police station and several policemen attached to the Tissamaharama police station
Date of incident: 28 February 2005 and several subsequent dates

Case details:

On 28 February 2005, the victims, namely S. D. Kodituwakku, owner of a hotel named ‘Tissa Village Hotel’ in Tissamaharama and his employees A. B. Abeywardena, A. Ruwantissa, W. Shantha were arrested by the OIC of Dickwella police station. The OIC is reportedly a relative of a politician whom S.D. Kodituwakku had a dispute with. It is alleged that the charges against S. D. Kodituwakku and his employees were fabricated by the OIC in an effort to take over Kodituwakku’s hotel business in favour of the local politician.

While in police custody, the four men were allegedly severely assaulted. The hotel was also looted. The Judicial Medical Officer (JMO) had already submitted a report regarding the injuries suffered by the victims. An inquiry with regard to this incident and allegations of fabricated charges is pending before the Human Rights Commission.

The four victims accused the OIC of Dickwella police station of allegedly colluding with the brother of a politician to fabricate charges against them. It is said that the filing of illegal possession of firearms against the victims, which is a non-bailable offense, is intended to hold them in prolonged detention. The four men were released after the Court of Appeal granted them bail on December 22. 

While the four men were in jail, the younger brother of S. D. Kodituwakku, named Sujeewa Kodituwakku was also arrested, tortured and threatened to be killed. It is reported that the policemen had thrown petrol on Sujeewa’s face. The younger Kodituwakku is a student at the Peradeniya University. Sujeewa Kodituwakku filed a fundamental rights application against the eight police officers including the Officer-in-Charge (OIC) in Tissamaharama police station.

Additional comments:

The Asian Human Rights Commission has constantly raised the issue of the fabrication of charges by the Sri Lankan police as a very common practice.  The AHRC continues to receive extensive information from many parts of the country of this continued and widespread practice.  Even some judicial officers confirm that often individuals are released after a trial in absence of sufficient evidence to charge them.  There are various reasons why Sri Lankan police tend to fabricate charges against innocent individuals. As in this case, the motive is to assist a local politician in some illegal transaction. There are also attempts to detain persons on fabricated charges for sexual purposes.  The recent case of Lalantha Fernando who was allegedly murdered by officers of Koswatte police station is an example of this case. (Please see our previous appeal on this case: UA-191-2005).

Furthermore, in some cases they are pure acts of revenge, such as the re-arrest of torture victims once they file complaints against the police. For these and other reasons innocent persons are often incarcerated and tortured for a long time.  As a result of the delays in adjudication of cases in courts, a person is forced to suffer prolonged detention even though the case is fabricated.

SUGGESTED ACTION:

Please send letters to the addresses listed below and raise your concern regarding the case of the five victims. The charges against them in court must be dropped. An impartial investigation into irregularities of arrest, detention and severe torture by the police must take place without delay.

Suggested letter:

Dear _______,

Re: SRI LANKA: Police severely tortured five men and subsequently filed fabricated charges against them

Name of the victims: S. D. Kodituwakku, A. B. Abeywardena, A. Ruwantissa, W. Shantha and Sujeewa Kodituwakku
Alleged perpetrators: The Officer-in-Charge (O.I.C.) of the Dickwella police station and several policemen attached to the Tissamaharama police station
Date of incident: 28 February 2005 and several subsequent dates

I am writing to draw your attention to the case of S. D. Kodituwakku, A. B. Abeywardena, A. Ruwantissa and W. Shantha who were arrested by the Officer-in-Charge (O.I.C) of the Dickwella police station and were subsequently charged with fabricated case on 28 February 2005. It is reported that the four men were allegedly severely tortured while in police custody.

I have also learned that S. D. Kodituwakku’s younger brother, Sujeewa, was also illegally arrested, detained and severely tortured while Kodituwakku was being detained. The policemen attached to the Tissamaharama police station allegedly threw petrol on Sujeewa’s face. According to the information I received, the fabricated charges against the victims are allegedly orchestrated by the OIC of Dickwella police station in an effort to take over Kodituwakku’s hotel business in favour of the policeman’s relative, who is a local politician.

This incident of fabricating charges is a common practice in Sri Lanka. Even some judicial officers confirm that often individuals are released after trial due to insufficient evidence to warrant their detention. In this case, the policemen involved obviously arbitrarily used their power in favour of a local politician.

In most cases, a number of innocent individuals have been forced to suffer prolonged incarceration as a result of fabricated charges.  Additionally, the delays in adjudication of court cases have added to this problem. I am deeply concerned that this has not been adequately addressed by the Sri Lankan government.

I urge your immediate intervention to ensure that an impartial and immediate investigation is conducted in this case. The charges against the men in court must be dropped without delay. The policemen involved must be investigated in connection with the victims’ allegation in the irregularities of arrest, detention and torture. If allegations are found to be true, charges must be filed against them.

Finally, the Human Rights Commission (HRC) must resolve in the soonest possible time the complaint filed by the victims against the policemen involved, and take appropriate action thereof. I urge the concerned government agencies in Sri Lanka to take immediate steps to afford the victims with compensation as stipulated in the Convention against Torture (CAT) Act of Sri Lanka. Additionally, the victims must also be placed under a rehabilitation programme for trauma treatment.

I trust that you will take action on this case.

Yours sincerely


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

PLEASE SEND LETTERS TO:

1. Mr. Chandra Fernando
Inspector General of Police (IGP)
New Secretariat
Colombo 1
SRI LANKA
Fax: +94 11 2 440440/327877

2. Mr. K. C. Kamalasabesan
Attorney General
Attorney General's Department
Colombo 12
SRI LANKA
Fax: +94 11 2 436 421

3. National Police Commission
3rd Floor, Rotunda Towers,
109 Galle Road
Colombo 03
SRI LANKA
Tel: +94 11 2 395310
Fax: +94 11 2 395867
Fax HOME: +94 11 2 674148
E-mail: polcom@sltnet.lk

4. Dr. Radhika Coomaraswamy
Chairperson Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka
No. 36, Kynsey Road
Colombo 8
SRI LANKA
Tel: +94 11 2 694925 / 673806
Fax: +94 11 2 694924 / 696470
E-mail: sechrc@sltnet.lk

5. Mr. J Thangawelu
DIG Legal
Police Headquarters
Colombo 1
SRI LANKA
Fax: 94 11 2381 394
Email: legaldiv@police.lk

6. Mr. Mahinda Rajapakse
President of Sri Lanka
Cambridge Place
Colombo 7
SRI LANKA
Fax: +94 11 2 682905 / 575454
E-mail: secpm@sltnet.lk or bradmanw@slt.lk

7. Prof. Manfred Nowak
Special Rapporteur on the Question of Torture
Attn: Mr. Safir Syed
C/o OHCHR-UNOG
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Tel: +41 22 917 9230
Fax: +41 22 917 9016 (general)
E-mail: ssyed@ohchr.org


Thank you.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
UA-002-2006
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.