Home / News / Urgent Appeals / SRI LANKA: Death in custody and evidence of torture
 

SRI LANKA: Death in custody and evidence of torture

July 10, 2002

URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION
<br>

<br>
ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAM
<br>

<br>
11 July 2002
<br>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
<br>
UA-27-2002: Death in custody and evidence of torture
<br>

<br>
SRI LANKA: Torture by the police and death in custody
<br>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
<br>

<br>
- Name of victim: Uduwa Vidanelage Susil Jayalath of Sapugaskanda, 19, male
<br>
- Date of death: 29/06/2002 (Case No. 1585/02 Gampaha M.C.)
<br>
- Death while in custody of the Sapugaskanda Police
<br>

<br>
Susil Jayalath was arrested by the Sapugaskanda police with two other people. According to the family, when the police arrested the 19-year-old, he was drinking a king coconut in an area where the police had made a raid against drug-users. According to the family, the boy did not use any drugs, and, in fact, he did not even smoke.
<br>

<br>
After the arrest, the medical report indicates that the boy was beaten with a blunt instrument. The medical report states that ¡°the lower injury is consistent with an injury sustained due to kicking and an upper injury due to a direct blow on the back with a blunt weapon, such as a wooden pole.¡±
<br>

<br>
His death, however, according to the medical report, was not caused by these injuries, but was ¡°due to head injuries which may be due to the body forcibly coming into contact with a hard, rough surface (such as a tarred road) following a backward fall with some amount of movement thereafter.¡±
<br>

<br>
The family claims that the boy was thrown out of the van in which the police were taking him. The police though claim he jumped. Prior to either being thrown from the van or jumping from it, it is evident from the medical report that the boy had been beaten.
<br>

<br>
The following factors place responsibility on the State for the boy's death: (1) It is without dispute that the boy was in police custody at the time he received the injuries on his head, which were fatal, and (2) that, prior to these injuries, the boy had been beaten while in police custody.
<br>

<br>
The magistrate, after receiving the medical report, made a statement in which she observed that this may not be a murder case as the fatal injuries are on the victim's head. However, she ordered a further inquiry as there were other injuries that were not caused by a fall.
<br>

<br>
As for the head injuries, it is premature to judge whether these were caused by being thrown or jumping from the van. This is a matter that can be determined forensically. For example, that the body fell backwards, and not forwards, may be more consistent with being thrown out of a van rather than jumping out of it. In any event, these matters can be determined after a proper and independent inquiry and after careful examination of all of the evidence. The case though has not yet undergone a criminal investigation as required by the criminal procedure law or a judicial inquiry as required under the law. In any event, once a person is in police custody, his or her protection is the duty of the police, and the State is accountable for the failure to protect the suspect.
<br>

<br>
The fact that there are injuries indicating torture make the officers responsible for torture. Under Sri Lankan law (Act No. 22 of 1994), torture is a crime punishable by a mandatory minimum sentence of seven years imprisonment.
<br>

<br>
This case has led to the largest protest by the people of the Sapugaskanda area in recent times. The police had to be removed from the area, and the military had to be deployed to bring the area under control. The protest showed a very deep-seated resentment of the people against the practices of the police.
<br>

<br>
The case requires an investigation by an impartial investigating team into the whole episode and the manner in which this boy was fatally injured. There also needs to be an inquiry and prosecution of the police officers responsible for torture, and the State must be held responsible for his death in custody.
<br>

<br>

<br>
SUGGESTED ACTION
<br>

<br>
Please write to the Sri Lankan government and urge them to inquire into this case by an impartial group.
<br>

<br>

<br>
SUGGESTED LETTER
<br>

<br>
Dear Sir,
<br>

<br>
Re: Death in Custody and Evidence of Torture in the Case of Susil Jayalath by the Sapugaskanda Police
<br>

<br>
I have recently been shocked by the death of a 19-year-old boy, Susil Jayalath, in police custody in Sapugaskanda, Sri Lanka. The medical report, I have learned, also shows physical injuries that indicate that he was tortured. The actual circumstances of his death requires an investigation by an impartial group. The protection that the State must provide for all people arrested and who are in police custody has been denied in this case. We urge you to take appropriate action to deal with all of these matters.
<br>

<br>
Thank you.
<br>

<br>

<br>
Sincerely yours,
<br>

<br>
------------------
<br>

<br>
PLEASE SEND A LETTER BY FAX OR EMAIL TO;
<br>

<br>
1. Honourable Prime Minister
<br>
Mr. Ranil Wickremasinghe
<br>
Cambridge Place
<br>
Colombo 7
<br>
SRI LANKA
<br>
Fax: 941 682-905 or 542919 (Secretary to the PM)
<br>
Email: secpm@sltnet.lk (Secretary to the PM)
<br>
SALUTATION: Hon. Prime Minister
<br>

<br>
2. Hon. Mr. K.C. Kamalasabesan
<br>
Attorney General
<br>
Attorney - General's Department
<br>
Colombo 12
<br>
SRI LANKA
<br>
Fax: +94 1 436 421
<br>
SALUTATION: Dear Attorney General
<br>

<br>
3. Hon. Mr. John Amaratunga
<br>
Minister of Interior
<br>
Ministry of Interior
<br>
Colombo
<br>
SRI LANKA
<br>
Tel: +94 1 430-860
<br>
Fax: +94 1 387-526 or 698 282
<br>
SALUTATION: Dear Minister
<br>

<br>
Also send a copy of your letter to;
<br>

<br>
1. Mr. Theo C. van Boven
<br>
Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights on the question of torture
<br>
OHCHR-UNOG
<br>
8-14 Avenue de la Paix
<br>
1211 Geneva 10,
<br>
Switzerland
<br>
Fax: +41 22 917-9016
<br>
E-mail: secrt.hchr@unog.ch
<br>
Please mark &quot;URGENT ATTENTION: MR. VAN BOVEN&quot;
<br>

<br>
2. Secretary
<br>
Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka
<br>
Kynsey Road, Borella, Colombo 8
<br>
SRL LANKA
<br>
Fax: +941 694 924
<br>
Email: sechrc@sltnet.lk
<br>

<br>

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
UA-27-2002
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.