Home / News / Urgent Appeals / SRI LANKA: Bus driver arbitrarily charged after suffering brutal assault by the Teldeniya police
 

SRI LANKA: Bus driver arbitrarily charged after suffering brutal assault by the Teldeniya police

May 24, 2006

URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal

25 May 2006
------------------------------------------------------
UA-167-2006: SRI LANKA: Bus driver arbitrarily charged after suffering brutal assault by the Teldeniya police 

SRI LANKA: Arbitrary use of authority by police; assault; bribery; fabricated charges; collapse of rule of law
-------------------------------------------------------
Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has come to learn of an appalling case of arbitrary use of police authority against a man whom they accused to have interfered and disturbed police duties.

On 7 April 2006, at 7.20am Indika Kulasekara was driving his bus and was collecting passengers as usual. The bus was traveling towards Kandy. At about 7.40am the bus came to Digana-Madarwala junction and Indika wanted to stop the bus at the bus shelter. However there was a van stationed at the shelter, and so the bus could not be stopped in the shelter. Therefore Indika stopped the bus just prior to the stationed van and bus shelter.

Police Constable (PC) Sarath was on a motorbike and approached the scene. PC Sarath parked the motorbike behind the bus, and then went to the driver’s window. PC Sarath inquired with Indika as to why he had stopped the bus before the designated bus shelter. Indika replied that there was a van in the bus shelter and as such he could not stop the bus there. He also asked the policeman, ‘can you not see the van?’ After Indika’s response, PC Sarath shouted at Indika not to instruct him on the rules and regulations. PC Sarath then requested Indika to get down from the bus, and to come and meet him behind the bus, where the motorbike was stopped. 

After getting down from the bus, Indika followed PC Sarath’s instructions, and went behind the bus. Indika did not have his licence, but only a temporary licence of which he presented to PC Sarath. Indika did not have his proper licence because the Manikinna police station was holding his license due to another incident involving the bus’s tyres. Again, Indika explained that he could not stop in the bus shelter because of the van. PC Sarath, then scolded Indika telling him no to tell such stories. PC Sarath told Indika he would let the incident slip, if Indika gave him money considering it was the New Year season. PC Sarath continued if you want to go, you can give Rs. 500 and then you can go. Indika did not have this money, for this was the first journey of the day, and so he told PC Sarath that if it was alright he would give this money later to him. PC Sarath again asked Indika for the money, and again he replied that he did not have anything now but could give it later. PC Sarath then scolded Indika, before Indika interrupted telling PC Sarath officer not to scold him and to issue a receipt for him to pay later. PC Sarath then told Indika not to be so smart, after which he took Indika’s temporary licence, crumpled it up and threw it away. At the same time, PC Sarath started to assault Indika with a helmet, causing Indika to yell out not to hit him. PC Sarath ignored these cries, and continued to hit Indkia, and also yelled out to ‘bring the weapon’.

During this time, Indika’s father, Mr. Kulasekara had got down from the bus and was approaching the scene. Mr. Kulasekara yelled to Indika to run.  Indika then pushed the policeman and ran believing he was about to be shot. Whilst running Indika got onto a bus heading towards Kandy.  Indika got off the bus at Kengalla. After which he then got on another bus heading towards Kandy from Mahiyanganaya.  After about one kilometre the bus approached the Kengalla Junction (close to BOI project) and Indika noticed several civilians getting on the bus. These civilians then approached Indika informing him that they were police officers from Balagoola police station and that Indika was to get down from the bus. Indika proceeded to get down from the bus, after which the eight officers escorted him to a jeep parked on the right hand side of the road. 

The officers then drove Indika to Digana village. Here, Indika was told to get down from the jeep, as the Balagolla police were to hand him over to the Teldeniya police who had brought another jeep. Of the Teldeniya police, there were five police officers and one Superintendent (SP) present at the scene. As Indika was getting into the Teldeniya jeep, the SI started to hit him after which the other five officers joined in causing Indika to fall to the ground. One of the officers commented that they were not to hit him too much but were to take him to the scene of the incident. He continued that they were to keep hitting him, but were not to make any visible external damage. The jeep then took Indika to the scene of the incident, where the bus was still parked there.

At the Digana-Madarwala junction, Indika was again told to get out of the jeep. PC Sarath was still present at the scene. The other officers told PC Sarath that they had brought the man. Indika noticed that PC Sarath was holding a 2 foot pole. As Indika was getting down from the jeep, PC Sarath then proceeded to beat Indika’s legs and lower back. He then told Indika that we are the people who will take you to the Courts; you do not have the strength to fight with us. Indika eventually fell onto the road. After which PC Sarath placed his foot on Indika’s head and applied pressure, following this he kicked Indika. PC Sarath then told Indkia to get up, but Indika was unable to get up and there was blood flowing from his nose and mouth. Therefore, the officers picked Indika up and again put him into the jeep. Once inside the jeep, two officers held Indika up, whilst another officer continued to beat him in the chest region. The jeep then drove to the Teldeniya police station.

Upon arrival at the gate of the police station, the officers told Indika to get down from the jeep. As Indika was getting down from the jeep, the officers again kicked and beat hum. Once inside the police station, three officers assaulted Indika with a pole, after which Indika was placed into a cell.  After about three hours the officers recorded some details down and asked Indika to sign the document, but Indika was never asked anything. Indika refused to sign the document, but the officers told him that if he refused to do so they would proceed to break his legs and arms. Due to fear, Indika signed the document but it was not with his proper signature. The officers then put Indika back into the cell.

After another two hours the officers took Indika to the hospital to get some medical certificates.   At the hospital, Indika received no treatment or medication and there were no examinations conducted. However, the officers left with medical documents.

Following the hospital visit, Indika was taken to the Teldeniya Magistrate Courts, after which he was then taken to the prison and admitted to the prison hospital. Indika remained at the prison hospital until the April 17. Indika tried to get bail on April 11 but it was refused. However on April 17 he was given bail and released for Rs. 2,500 with a guarantee of Rs. 200,000.

The police have given the following reasons for Indika’s arrest:
- Indika has allegedly assaulted PC Sarath
- Indika had interfered and disturbed with police duties
- Indika had ripped/teared PC Sarath’s uniform
- Indika had ripped and thrown his temporary licence

SUGGESTED ACTION:

Please write letters to the concerned government agencies listed below requesting them to iniate an impartial and immediate investigation into the allegations of both parties. If charges against Indika Kulasekara are found fabricated and there is no sufficient evidence to charge him in court, his charges must be dropped without delay. Appropriate protection and security by government agencies concerned must also be afforded to him. Those from the Balagolla police and Teldeniya police involved must be properly investigated.

Suggested letter:

Dear _________,

SRI LANKA:  Bus driver arbitrarily charged after suffering brutal assault by the Teldeniya police 

Name of victim: Indika Kulasekara (27), Bus driver
Name of alleged perpetrators: PC Sarath , Balagolla Police and TeIdeniya Police officers
Date of incident:  7 April 2006
Place of incident:  Near Digana-Madarwala bus shelter

I am writing to bring to your attention the alleged arbitrary charges against bus driver, Indika Kulasekara by Teldeniya police officer PC Sarath.

According to the information I have received, PC Sarath approached Indika’s bus in the early morning of 7 April 2006 inquiring into his reasons for stopping before a designated bus shelter. Following the instructions of PC Sarath, Indika exited the bus and produced a temporary license which he held due to another incident relating to the buses’ tyres. It is alleged that PC Sarath then demanded Rs. 500 to “let the incident slip”. As Indika did not have the money at the time, he asked if he could pay him later. PC Sarath then proceeded to destroy Indika’s temporary license and began assaulting him with his helmet. Out of fear, Indika ran to escape from PC Sarath, but was later caught by five police officers from the Balagolla Police. Indika was again beaten and was taken back to the original scene of the incident. There PC Sarath used a two foot pole to beat Indika’s legs and lower back repeatedly.

Following the incident Indika was taken to prison and admitted to the prison hospital. I have learned that Indika was released on bail on April 17.                                                                                                                                     

In light of the points I have raised above, I request that you ensure a fair and thorough investigation into the alleged conduct of the police personnel.  If it is found that the alleged perpetrators committed crimes against the victims, the charges against Indika must be dropped immediately. The Teldeniya Police must also arrange necessary medical treatment for the victim and compensate him for the ordeal he has suffered.

As I am sure you are aware such actions by the police have become regular practice in many parts of Sri Lanka. The conduct of those police officers allegedly involved in this case must be investigated and full legal action taken should the allegations be found true. Stability can only come from systems which honour accountability and I therefore urge that government officials take action to combat these behaviours.

I look forward to your urgent intervention in this matter.

Yours sincerely,
---------------------------------
PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:

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

2. Mr. Chandra Fernando
Inspector General of Police
New Secretariat
Colombo 1
SRI LANKA
Fax: +94 11 2 440440/327877
Email: chandralaw@police.lk

3. 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

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

5. 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: polcom@sltnet.lk

6. Mr. Mahinda Rajapakse
President
Socialist Democratic Republic of Sri Lanka
C/- Office of the President
Temple Trees
150, Galle Road
Colombo 3
SRI LANKA
Fax: +94 11 2472100 / +94 11 2446657 (this is contact for Secretary to President) 
Email: secretary@presidentsoffice.lk

7. Piyasena Ranasinghe
Director General
Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption
36, Malalasekera Mawatha
Colombo 07
SRI LANKA
Tel: +94 11 2 586 851
Fax: +94 11 2 595 045

8. 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

9. Ms Leila Zerrougui
Chairperson
Working Group on Arbitrary Detention
Attn: Mr Miguel de la Lama
OHCHR-UNOG
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Fax: +41 22 917 9006 (ATTENTION: WORKING GROUP ARBITRARY DETENTION)
Email: mdelalama@ohchr.org

Thank you.

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

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
UA-167-2006
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.