Home / News / Urgent Appeals / SRI LANKA: Brutal torture of a 27-year-old man by the Pamunugama Police
 

SRI LANKA: Brutal torture of a 27-year-old man by the Pamunugama Police

January 5, 2006

URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal

05 January 2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------
UA-007-2006: SRI LANKA: Brutal torture of a 27-year-old man by the Pamunugama Police

SRI LANKA: Torture; Illegal arrest and detention; Failure to provide medical assistance; Rule of law
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) writes to inform you that a 27-year-old man, Navinna Arachchige Manjula Prasad, was brutally tortured by policemen attached to the Pamunugama Police Station on 18 December 2005. Prasad was on his way home when the policemen stopped him and took him to the police station for questioning regarding the looting of copper wires. There the policemen brutally tortured Prasad while he was being investigated.

On December 19, the police forced Prasad to sign a statement they prepared without having him read its content. He was taken to a rural hospital in Pamunugama where he was partially treated for his injuries. The Magistrate Court in Wattala remanded him despite an appeal made by his lawyer, Mr Amitha Ariyaratne, that it was a case of police torture. Prasad was taken to the Mahara Remand prison where he was remanded. He was not given any adequate treatment inside the prison.  On December 27, he was released and subsequently sought treatment at the Ragama Hospital.

Your urgent intervention is required to have the victim’s allegation of irregularities in the arrest, filing of charges and brutal torture perpetrated by the policemen investigated thoroughly as stipulated in the Convention against Torture Act (CAT) No. 22 of 1994 of Sri Lanka. The policemen involved must be suspended from their duty once the investigation commences. Charges against the victim in court must be dropped if it is found that the evidence against him was obtained by way of torture.

Finally, please urge the concerned government agencies in Sri Lanka to reimburse the victim of his medical expenses. An inquiry should also be conducted into who must be held responsible from the police and prison officials for their failure to have the victim treated while in their custody. Such failure and inaction must be dealt with accordingly. Additionally, the victim must be placed in a rehabilitation programme for adequate medical and trauma treatment.


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

DETAILED INFORMATION:

Name of the victim: Navinna Arachchige Manjula Prasad (27), a baker living at 476/30, Sagarsirigama, Epamulla, Pamunugama.
Alleged perpetrators: Four police officers attached to the Pamunugama Police Station in the Assistant Superintendent of the Police (ASP) Division of Negombo
Date of the incident: 18 December 2005

Case details:

On 18 December 2005, at 4:30pm Navinna Arachchige Manjula Prasad was riding a bicycle on his way home from Bopitiya when two policemen wearing plain clothes stopped him near the Leo Stadium. He was told that they wanted him to go with them to the police station for questioning regarding the looting of copper wires. At the same time, another policeman arrived onboard a three wheeler and went with them to the police station.

Upon arrival at the police station, the policemen started questioning Prasad about the looting which took place at a near by company where several Indian employees work. When Prasad denied any knowledge of the looting, he was taken to a room where the police removed his shirt and used it to tie his hands and legs together. He was suspended in between a half-size wall and a chair after an iron bar was inserted in between his hands and legs. While in this position, the policemen pushed Prasad and started beating him all over his body with a rubber pipe. When he continued to deny what he was being accused of, the police began assaulting him mercilessly wooden pole. The torture lasted for one and a half hours.

Later he was untied and ordered to walk nine times around a table while jumping, a physical activity which was very difficult for the victim to perform given the immense pain he was in. After that, the police threatened to torture him further later that night and placed him in a detention cell. At around 7pm, Prasad’s mother arrived at the police station. She met the Officer-in-Charge (OIC) of the police station before being allowed to see her son.

The following day, December 19, at 9:30pm a police officer forced Prasad to sign a statement they prepared without having him informed or allowing him to read its content. He was taken to a rural hospital in Pamunugama. At the hospital, his relatives informed the hospital staff that Prasad had been severely tortured but they were ignored. They only attended to the victim’s wounds.

After that Prasad was taken to the Magistrate Courts in Wattala. The Magistrate remanded him despite an appeal by his lawyer, Mr Amitha Ariyaratne that his client was severely tortured. The Magistrate instead issued orders to the police to have Prasad checked by medical personnel and required that a medical certificate be produced at the following hearing. He was taken to the Mahara Remand prison until he was released on December 27. While in prison custody, he was not afforded any medication attention despite having him confined at the prison’s hospital.
 
The same day after his release, Prasad went to the Ragama Hospital for treatment as his back was swollen and his fingers numb. He was confined in Ward 5. While at the hospital, the policemen assigned at the hospital recorded the victim’s statement regarding the incident. The Judicial Medical Officer (JMO) likewise examined him. On December 28, the police officers then came back and asked him to sign a document they prepared. The police, however, did not properly inform Prasad of its content or have him read it. He was sent home in the evening of that day.


SUGGESTED LETTER:

Please send letters to the addresses listed below and raise your concern regarding Prasad’s case. An independent and impartial inquiry must take place in this case without delay. The policemen involved must be charged in accordance with the Convention against Torture Act (CAT) No. 22 of 1994.

Suggested letter

Dear __________,

Re: SRI LANKA: Brutal torture of a 27-year-old man by the Pamunugama Police

Name of the victim: Navinna Arachchige Manjula Prasad (27), a baker living at 476/30, Sagarsirigama, Epamulla, Pamunugama.
Alleged perpetrators: Four police officers attached to the Pamunugama Police Station in the Assistant Superintendent of the Police (ASP) Division of Negombo
Date of the incident: 18 December 2005

I am writing to draw your attention to the case of Navinna Arachchige Manjula Prasad (27) who was allegedly tortured by policemen attached to the Pamunugama Police Station on 18 December 2005. It is reported that Prasad was on his way home when the policemen stopped him and subsequently invited him for questioning at their police station regarding the looting of copper wires.

While being investigated, Prasad’s hands were tied below his legs. An iron bar was inserted in between his legs and hands and was suspended in between a half-size wall and a chair. While in that position, the police repeatedly beat him all over his body with a rubber pipe. The police later used a wooden pole when he continued to deny what it was he was being accused of.

On December 19, the police forced him to sign a statement they prepared without having him read its content. He was taken to a rural hospital in Pamunugama where he was treated for his injuries. The Magistrate Court in Wattala remanded him despite an appeal made by his lawyer, Mr Amitha Ariyaratne, that it was a case of police torture.

I am aware this is yet another incident of torture occurring daily in Sri Lanka.  The callousness with which law enforcement officers engage in torture is shocking.  What is equally shocking is the authorities’ failure to take steps to effectively eliminate this practice. 

Even the attitude of the Magistrates, as shown by this case, is far from what is expected by officers committed to defend the Constitution which prohibits torture.  Both the United Nations Human Rights Committee and the Committee against Torture have issued several recommendations to the Sri Lankan government to implement for the purpose of the elimination of torture.  Some of these recommendations are to ensure prompt and independent inquiries, immediate action to arrest and to prosecute officers who commit such offenses and to take disciplinary action against such persons immediately.  None of these recommendations have been properly implemented despite declarations by the government to adhere to UN covenants and conventions.

I thoroughly condemn the attitude of the authorities on this matter and I ask for a thorough inquiry into this matter and serious action be taken against the alleged perpetrators in terms of Sri Lanka law and international obligations. Any action taken regarding this case must be in accordance with the Convention against Torture Act (CAT) of 1994.

I trust that you will take immediate 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-007-2006
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.