Home / News / Urgent Appeals / SRI LANKA: Man brutally tortured by police after allegedly being implicated with false charges
 

SRI LANKA: Man brutally tortured by police after allegedly being implicated with false charges

September 26, 2006

URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION – URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal

27 September 2006
------------------------------------------------------
UA-319-2006: SRI LANKA: Man brutally tortured by police after allegedly being implicated with false charges

SRI LANKA: Torture; illegal arrest and detention; fabrication of charges; un-rule of law
------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) wishes to inform you of the severe torture of Mr. Illukumbura Mudiyanselage Mudiyanse, a 49-year-old trader, by the Thalathuoya police on 9 June 2006. Due to torture, the victim received considerable injuries over most parts of his body and suffered complete loss of hearing in his left ear. According to the victim, the Thalathuoya police falsely charged him with selling cannabis due to his complaint against a timber mill owner who has good connections with the Officer-In-Charge (OIC) of the Thalathuoya police. Despite his complaint to the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka, no serious action has yet been taken against the alleged perpetrators.

According to the victim, he got into a heated disagreement with the owner of the local "Sugath Timber Mills", who refused to pay him his due broker fee of Rs. 9000 (approx. USD 100), plus the additional cost of damages to the culvert and the road due to the transportation of timber logs. Mr. Mudiyanse lodged a formal complaint against the owner with the Thalathuoya police station on 8 June 2006, but they took no action in the matter.

At around 1:30pm on the following day (June 9), Police Sergeant Thushara visited Mr. Mudiyanse at his family home, where he then proceeded to shout at him, using extremely abusive language. That same night, at around 8:00 pm, two Thalathuoya police officers in civilian dress entered Mr. Mudiyanse's home. They stated that the Officer-In-Charge (OIC) of the Thalathuoya police station wished to get a formal statement from him, following his complaint. They then took Mr. Mudiyanse in a jeep to the police station. Upon arrival, Mr. Mudiyanse claims that he saw the timber mill owner with whom he had had a disagreement the previous day.

The OIC arrested Mr. Mudiyanse on the charges of selling ganja - an allegation which Mr. Mudiyanse ardently denies, and which was not substantiated by the local police with any conclusive evidence. According to Mr. Mudiyanse, the OIC took a green hose-pipe and proceeded to beat him over the head with it at least 20 times. He then placed a small packet wrapped in paper in Mr. Mudiyanse's hands, saying “Here is the ganja!”. Mr. Mudiyanse threw the packet onto the officer's table.

Some hours later, another police officer ordered Mr. Mudiyanse to place his fingerprints on the packet of ganja. Mr. Mudiyanse out rightly refused to do so; and was again taken to the OIC, who allegedly ordered the police officer to obtain Mr. Mudiyanse's fingerprints on heated lacquer. The police officer did as requested; severely burning Mr. Mudiyanse's fingers in the process. Mr. Mudiyanse was then detained overnight at the police station.

The following day (June 10), the Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP) made one of his routine inspection visits to the Thalathuoya police station. When he came to the detainee lock-up, Mr. Mudiyanse told him of his ordeal, and that he was completely innocent of the charges that had been brought against him. The ASP questioned the Thalathuoya OIC on this. After the ASP left, the OIC came to the lock-up and verbally abused Mr. Mudiyanse.

Mr. Mudiyanse was later examined by the Judicial Medical Officer (JMO) of the Thalathuoya Government Hospital, and the following day, was presented before the additional magistrate of Kandy, who remanded him to the Bogambara prison. Mr. Mudiyanse was subsequently released on the June 15, on bail of Rs. 1000 (approx. 10 USD).

Mr. Mudiyanse incurred injuries to his head and most other parts of his body, and burns on his left thumb, and suffered complete loss of hearing in his left ear as a result of his torture. He lodged a complaint with the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka regarding the incident with the help of a local human rights organization in June 2006 (Reg. No.:- FR/KD/T/124/06/II).

SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write to the relevant authorities listed below, expressing your grave concern and moral indignation of the completely unlawful, unwarranted and unethical behaviour of the officers of the Thalathuoya police station in the illegal arrest and detention and brutal torture of Mr. Mudiyanse.

To support this appeal, please click:

Sample letter:

Dear __________,

SRI LANKA: Man brutally tortured by police after allegedly being implicated with false charges

Name of victim: Mr. Illukumbura Mudiyanselage Mudiyanse; A 49-year-old trader and resident of Thalathuoya, Kandy district III, Kandy division, Sri Lanka
Alleged perpetrators:
1. Owner of the local "Sugath Timber Mills" in Thalathuoya
2. Officer-In-Charge (OIC) of the Thalathuoya police station in Kandy
3. Police Sergeant Thushara attached to the Thalathuoya police station
4. Other police officers attached to the Thalathuoya police station
Date of incident: 9 June 2006
Place of incident: Thalathuoya police station

I am writing to voice my deep concern regarding illegal arrest, fabrication of charges and subsequent torture of Mr. Illukumbura Mudiyanselage Mudiyanse, by the Thalathuoya police on 9 June 2006.

According to the information I have received, the victim lodged a complaint with the Thalathuoya police station against the owner of the local “Sugath Timber Mills” on 8 June 2006 due to some personal dispute. Instead of investigating his complaint, the following day (June 9), Police Sergeant Thushara visited the victim's house and shouted at him, using extremely abusive language. That same night, he was taken to the police station by two Thalathuoya police officers in civilian dress, who informed him that the Officer-In-Charge wished to get a formal statement from him following his complaint. No arrest warrant was produced to the victim.

However, according to the victim, when they arrived in the police station, the victim was falsely charged with selling ganja by the OIC, who brutally tortured him. The OIC allegedly placed a small packet wrapped in paper in the victim's hands, saying "Here is the ganja!"  The victim says that the timber mill owner whom he made a complaint against was present throughout this. The OIC further ordered the police officer to obtain Mr. Mudiyanse's fingerprints on heated lacquer, when he refused to place his fingerprints on the packet of ganja. Subsequently, the victim's fingers were severely burnt.

The following day (June 10), the victim told Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP) about his incident when he was making one of his routine inspection visits to the Thalathuoya police station. The ASP questioned the Thalathuoya OIC on this but did not make any attempt to release him or take action against the OIC. On June 11, the victim was produced before the additional magistrate of Kandy, who remanded him to the Bogambara prison. He was subsequently released on June 15 on bail. He complains that he suffered injuries to his head and most other parts of his body, and burns on his left thumb, and has also suffered complete loss of hearing in his left ear due to his torture.

I am deeply disturbed by this flagrant abuse of state-appointed power and authority by the Thalathuoya police in their unwarranted, unlawful and wholly unethical persecution of Mr. Mudiyanse. Illegal arrest and detention, the fabrication of criminal charges and torture is a severe crime and is in direct violation of Sri Lankan constitution and the UN Convention against Torture (CAT), to which Sri Lanka is a State party.

It is my understanding that police torture is not an exception, but rather a routine reality in Sri Lanka. This is simply unacceptable. As long as cases like Mr. Mudiyanse's continue to fall through the cracks of the already paper-thin justice system, and state officers continue to be immune to the very laws which they have been appointed to protect and enforce, there can be no rule of law in Sri Lanka.

I therefore strongly urge you to immediately inquire into this incident and take action against OIC and other officers of the Thalathuoya police station, who are responsible for the victim's illegal arrest, torture and fabrication of charges against him. They must be prosecuted under the CAT Act no. 22 of 1994. If the charges are found to have been fabricated then the Thalathuoya police must drop the charges and compensate the victim for the injuries he has had to suffer. I further urge you to suspend the alleged perpetrators from their job while the investigation is going on to ensure the security of the victim.  The Government of Sri Lanka should strictly enforce the CAT Act to prevent further torture in the future.

I look forward to your prompt and effective response in this matter.  

Yours sincerely,


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

PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTER TO:

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

6. Prof. Manfred Nowak
Special Rapporteur on the Question of Torture
OHCHR-UNOG
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Tel: +41 22 917 9230
Fax: +41 22 9179016 (general)


Thank you.

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

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
UA-319-2006
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.