Home / News / Urgent Appeals / SRI LANKA: Alleged arbitrary arrest and torture of a 16-year-old boy by police in Eheliyagoda

SRI LANKA: Alleged arbitrary arrest and torture of a 16-year-old boy by police in Eheliyagoda

March 1, 2007

URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal

1 March 2007
------------------------------------------------------
UA-069-2007: SRI LANKA: Alleged arbitrary arrest and torture of a 16-year-old boy by police in Eheliyagoda

SRI LANKA: arbitrary arrest and detention; torture; abuse of police power; inhumane treatment of detainees; false accusation by police
------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information about an alleged arbitrary arrest and severe torture of a 16-year-old boy by police officers in Eheliyagoda, Sri Lanka. The victim, Kapu Kankanamalage Mahesh Maduranga, was severely beaten by police officers in order to force him to confess to the theft of a cassette from his neighbour, but the victim denied such involvement. Later on he was taken to Eheliyagoda police station and detained there for 8 hours being hand cuffed and not allowed to use a bathroom. Threats against the victim continued after he was released from the police station and there was an alleged attempted abduction while he was hospitalized for treatment of his injuries. The victim’s family has not reported about the attempted abduction to the police because they are afraid of receiving more threats from officers.

CASE DETAILS:

According to the information we received, the incident started when the police officer Abeygunawardena (other name not known) came to the house of Kapu Kankanamalage Mahesh Maduranga (16) to search him at around 11:00 am and 12:00 pm on 17 January 2007. The police officer, Abeygunawardena, accompanied by another officer came to the victim’s house by car and found only Mahesh's mother at home. They told the mother to tell her son to come to the Eheliyagoda police station at 4:00 pm the next day (18 January 2007), but did not explain the reason for their request.

Later on the same day at around 10:00 pm, the two police officers came to the house again searching Mahesh Maduranga with one of his neighbours, Dushmantha. The father of Mahesh Maduranga opened the door for them. As the door was opened, they came into the house and found Mahesh Maduranga who was sleeping at that time. They started to shout at him using foul language and told him to get up, otherwise they would kick him. Then they handcuffed him and took him out of the house.

In front of the house, they broke a thick branch from a tree and used it for beating Mahesh Maduranga, accusing him of stealing a cassette from Dushmantha’s car the other day and forced him to confess to the theft. The two officers did not stop beating Mahesh Maduranga despite of his and his father’s pleas. On the contrary, they hit Mahesh Maduranga’s father with a gun and pushed him aside from the site where his son has been assaulted. The officer Abeygunawardena beat the victim with the stick until it was broken and he tried to impale Mahesh’s fingers with a part of the stick. Due to this brutal violence, Mahesh has lost the use of the little finger of his left hand.

After they beat Mahesh, they brought him into Dushmantha’s three wheeler car and brought him to the which belongs to a person called Mallawarachchi. The two officers forced the victim to admit to the robbery of a cassette tape in front of this person and started to beat him with the stick again. Despite such outrageous violence, the victim kept denying the involvement in the robbery of the cassette tape and he was brought to the police station at around 11:30 pm that night.
At the police station, his hands were cuffed and he was kept under police custody there until the following morning. While he was in custody, police officers ignored his request to use the toilet for until one of them brought him to the toilet a few hours later.

On the next morning, when the father of the victim visited the police station, he saw his neighbour Dushmantha at there and asked him not let his son be beaten by police officers again. Then Dushmantha talked to one of the police officers and later on the victim was released and told to come back to the police station on designated date. The father and the victim went back to the police station on the said date and were told by the police officer Abeygunawardena that Mahesh has to pay the same amount of money for the stolen cassette since he was under suspicion of having stolen it. The victim and his father refused to pay for it and again denied the victim’s involvement in the robbery. The officer then said that the case would be brought to the court later on.

The victim had sustained severe back pains and head ache due to severe torture he received at the hands of the police officer. He was brought to the Eheliyagoda Hospital and admitted to ward 5 on 8 February 2007. He received a medical examination from the District Medial Officer due to the report that the victim’s father made at the hospital that his son’s injury was due to torture by police officers. The statement on torture was also made by the hospital police.

The victim was discharged from the hospital on February 13, however he returned to the hospital again on February 14 because his condition became worse. On February 15, the victim’s neighbour Dushmantha and another person called Sumith allegedly attempted to abduct the victim from the hospital but failed because of the intervention of the hospital staff. The victim and his father wanted to report this attempted abduction but did not because they are afraid of going to the police station.

The victim and his father are seeking a legal remedy including a thorough investigation into his case of being severely assaulted, arbitrarily arrested, detained and treated inhumanly by the two police officers from the Eheliyagoda police station for the reason of robbery which the victim did not commit.

The AHRC condemns the brutal violence and mistreatment of Mahesh Maduranga by the police officers from the Eheliyagoda police station in light of the principles of international human rights instruments and from the perspective of respecting human dignity. As the Sri Lankan government is party to the several important international human rights treaties including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) which enshrine the prohibition of torture, arbitrary arrest and detention as well as protection of citizens from such inhuman treatments in accordance with domestic procedures. Also the violent assault and violation of other rights of a victim who is under eighteen years old that is defined as a child under the CRC needs to be accused in accordance with particular concerns.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:

The family of the victim has sent a written complaint to the several authorities including the Chairman of National Police Commission, Inspector General of Police, Deputy Inspector General of Legal Division and Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) of Ratnapura district.

As far as the AHRC knows, according to the gazette of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka No. 1480/8, the National Police Commission introduced rules regarding the individual complaint against the brutal actions of police authorities including violent assaults, torture, arbitrary arrest and detention which was issued on January 17, that the police authority should complete the investigation into the reported case of police brutality against civilians especially the acts fall in violation of human rights, allegations of torture and/or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment as well as fabrications of cases within thirty days from the receipt of complaint.

This newly introduced decree enables the victims who have been violated their rights by police authorities to seek redress including special investigation into the alleged cases of human rights violations made by police officers by reporting complaint to the National Police Commission and its regional offices. The Public Complaints Investigation Division which was established by the National Police Commission will deal with the complaints against the violation of rights by the police officers ranked at whatever levels.

According to the information we have received from our reliable source, the complaint against the two police officers who tortured and arbitrarily arrested the victim have already been submitted to the National Police Commission thus the investigation into this case needs to be completed within thirty days of period which is scheduled to be by late March.


SUGGESTED ACTION:

Please write to the relevant authorities listed below calling for an immediate investigation into this case along with the prosecution of the two police officers without allowing them impunity. The AHRC also urges you to express your concern over the continuing use of torture, arbitrary arrest and illegal detention based on false accusation by the police in Sri Lanka. 

To support this appeal, please click:

Sample letter:

Dear ________,

SRI LANKA: an alleged arbitrary arrest and torture of a 16-year-old boy by police in Eheliyagoda

Name of the victim: Kapu Kankanamalage Mahesh Maduranga, 16 years old, from c/o Premarante’s shop, Patangala, Panawala, Eheliyagoda
Alleged perpetrators: Police officer Abeyagunawardena (other name not known) and the other officer (unidentified)
Place of incident: at the house of the victim in Patangala, Panawaka, Eheliyagoda
Date of incident: 17 January 2007

I am writing to you to express my grave concern over the alleged torture, arbitrary arrest, detention and inhumane treatment during detention of a 16-year-old child Kapu Kankanamalage Mahesh Maduranga by two police officers from the Eheliyagoda police station on 17 January 2007.

I was informed that the two police officers, one of whom is Abeygunawardena and the other is unidentified, came to the house of Mahesh Maduranga to search for him between 11:00am and 12:00pm on January 17 when he was out of the house. The two officers left message to Mahesh’s mother that her son should come to the police station at 4:00 pm on the next day (January 18) without providing reasons or an official search warrant and so on.

Later on the same day at around 10:00 pm, the two police officers came to the house again searching Mahesh Maduranga with one of his neighbours, Dushmantha. The father of Mahesh Maduranga opened the door for them. As the door was opened, they came into the house and found Mahesh Maduranga who was sleeping at that time. They started to shout at him using foul language and told him to get up, otherwise they would kick him. Then they handcuffed him and took him out of the house.

In front of the house, they broke a thick branch from a tree and used it for beating Mahesh Maduranga, accusing him of stealing a cassette from Dushmantha’s car the other day and forced him to confess to the theft. The two officers did not stop beating Mahesh Maduranga despite of his and his father’s pleas. On the contrary, they hit Mahesh Maduranga’s father with a gun and pushed him aside from the site where his son has been assaulted. The officer Abeygunawardena beat the victim with the stick until it was broken and he tried to impale Mahesh’s fingers with a part of the stick. Due to this brutal violence, Mahesh has lost the use of the little finger of his left hand.

After they beat Mahesh, they brought him into Dushmantha’s three wheeler car and brought him to the which belongs to a person called Mallawarachchi. The two officers forced the victim to admit to the robbery of a cassette tape in front of this person and started to beat him with the stick again. Despite such outrageous violence, the victim kept denying the involvement in the robbery of the cassette tape and he was brought to the police station at around 11:30 pm that night.
At the police station, his hands were cuffed and he was kept under police custody there until the following morning. While he was in custody, police officers ignored his request to use the toilet for until one of them brought him to the toilet a few hours later.

On the next morning, when the father of the victim visited the police station, he saw his neighbour Dushmantha at there and asked him not let his son be beaten by police officers again. Then Dushmantha talked to one of the police officers and later on the victim was released and told to come back to the police station on designated date. The father and the victim went back to the police station on the said date and were told by the police officer Abeygunawardena that Mahesh has to pay the same amount of money for the stolen cassette since he was under suspicion of having stolen it. The victim and his father refused to pay for it and again denied the victim’s involvement in the robbery. The officer then said that the case would be brought to the court later on.

The victim had sustained severe back pains and head ache due to severe torture he received at the hands of the police officer. He was brought to the Eheliyagoda Hospital and admitted to ward 5 on 8 February 2007. He received a medical examination from the District Medial Officer due to the report that the victim’s father made at the hospital that his son’s injury was due to torture by police officers. The statement on torture was also made by the hospital police.

The victim was discharged from the hospital on February 13, however he returned to the hospital again on February 14 because his condition became worse. On February 15, the victim’s neighbour Dushmantha and another person called Sumith allegedly attempted to abduct the victim from the hospital but failed because of the intervention of the hospital staff. The victim and his father wanted to report this attempted abduction but did not because they are afraid of going to the police station.

The victim and his father are seeking a legal remedy including a thorough investigation into his case of being severely assaulted, arbitrarily arrested, detained and treated inhumanly by the two police officers from the Eheliyagoda police station for the reason of robbery which the victim did not commit.

To my regret, I must strongly condemn that brutal violence and mistreatment of Mahesh Maduranga made by the police officers from the Eheliyagoda police station in light of the principles of international human rights instruments and from the perspective of human dignity.
As the Sri Lankan government is party to the several important international human rights treaties including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), the government should have taken any methods to prevent the exercise of torture, arbitrary arrest and detention by police authority as well as protection of citizens from such inhuman treatments in accordance with domestic procedures. Also the violent assault and violation of other rights of a victim who is under eighteen years old that is defined as a child under the CRC needs to be accused in accordance with particular concerns.

I also request the National Police Commission (NPC) of Sri Lanka to investigate this case. As far as I know, the NPC established an investigation mechanism for the allegation of unconstitutional acts of the police officers including human rights violation of ordinary citizens under the gazette of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka No. 1480/8. According to this rules, the police authority should complete the investigation into the reported case of police brutality against civilians within 30 days from the receipt of complaint. I was informed that the complaint against the two police officers who tortured and arbitrarily arrested the victim have already been submitted to the NPC thus the investigation into this case needs to be completed within 30 days of period which is scheduled to be by late March.

I also would like to urge you to take necessary steps in order to make sure the investigation into the alleged perpetrators will be completed thoroughly without being impartial interruptions within designated period. Also I urge you to ensure that the appropriate remedies to the victim and his family would be provided.

I look forward your sincere repose to this important matter.

Yours sincerely,


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

PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTER TO:

1. Mr. Victor Perera
Inspector General of Police
New Secretariat
Colombo 1
SRI LANKA
Fax: +94 11 2 440440/327877
E-mail: igp@police.lk

2. Mr. K. C. Kamalasabesan
Attorney General
Attorney General's Department
Colombo 12
SRI LANKA
Fax: +94 11 2 436421
Email: attorney@sri.lanka.net

3. Mr. Neville Piyadigama
Chairperson
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

4. Secretary
Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka
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

5. Regional Office
National Police Commission
Seethawaka Industrial Park Road
off Kudagama Road
Avissawella
SRI LANKA
Tel: +94 777 106198

6. Prof. Manfred Nowak
Special Rapporteur on the Question of Torture
Attn: Safir Syed
c/o OHCHR-UNOG
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Tel: +41 22 917 9230
Fax: +41 22 917 9016 (ATTN: SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR TORTURE)


Thank you.

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

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
UA-069-2007
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.