Home / News / Urgent Appeals / SRI LANKA: Farmer brutally tortured and systematically intimidated by police
 

SRI LANKA: Farmer brutally tortured and systematically intimidated by police

October 5, 2006

URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION – URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal

6 October 2006
------------------------------------------------------
UA-332-2006: SRI LANKA: Farmer brutally tortured and systematically intimidated by police

SRI LANKA: Arbitrary arrest and torture; police corruption and brutality; intimidation; Need for witness protection; failure of rule of law
------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information regarding the arbitrary arrest, detention and subsequent brutal torture of Mr. Suddage Sirisena, a fifty-year-old rural farmer on 24 August 2006 the Kekirawa police in Anuradhapura district, Anuradhapura division, Sri Lanka; and the inexcusable coercion tactics employed by the accused officers in preventing the application of the process of due justice.

On 24 August 2006, Mr. Sirisena was forcibly taken by arresting officers to the Kekirawa Police Station, where he was brutally tortured by two senior officers; sustaining grievous bodily injuries, a fractured nose and the loss of five front teeth. He was later hospitalized at the local government hospital for a period of several days, during which time, he was also informed that his two torturers had been suspended from duty.

Then, 22 September 2006, at about 1:30pm, Police Sergeant Keerthi from the same police station visited Mr. Sirisena at his home, and told him that the Anuradhapura Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) wished to record Mr. Sirisena's formal statement. Mr. Sirisena was then told to come to the Kekirawa Police Station- the place of his torture- that very same day at around 4:00pm. 

At around 3:45pm, Mr. Sirisena together with his nephew arrived at the Kekirawa Police Station as instructed. Sergeant Keerthi was not present at that time. The police officers claimed that they knew nothing of the SSP's supposed visit to the station, and instructed Mr. Sirisena and his nephew to wait until Sergeant Keerthi's return. When Sergeant Keerthi did finally arrive, and was asked by Mr. Sirisena as to the whereabouts of the SSP, Sergeant Keerthi simply replied that he tricked Mr. Sirisena into coming to the station, so that he could arrest him. It was later revealed that Sergeant Keerthi had obtained a warrant for Mr. Sirisena's arrest from the Thambuththegama Magistrate's Court for failure to appear in court.

Mr. Sirisena was subsequently detained in the police lock-up. It is appropriate to draw the reader's attention at this point to prior charges brought against Mr. Sirisena over four years ago, for the alleged illicit felling of timber. He had been unable to appear before the court to face these charges on a number of occasions, and on 12 June 2006, was arrested by the Kekirawa police and produced before the Thambuththegama Magistrate, who fined Mr. Sirisena Rs. 1500 (USD  14). Unable to pay this amount, he was imprisoned. Later however, Mr. Sirisena's brother paid off the outstanding fine, and obtained his release from prison.

However, Mr. Sirisena claims that he cannot comprehend the reason behind his latest arrest, as his prior criminal case has been long concluded.

During his detention, Mr. Sirisena also alleged that the security guard of a local politician, and several policemen visited him in the lock-up, and urged him to "forgive" one Police Constable (PC) Jinadasa (one of his torturers, and who is currently serving his suspension). Mr. Sirisena's nephew had also received a telephone call from the same security guard, pressing him to immediately withdraw his uncle's criminal case against PC Jinadasa.

At around 1:00 pm of the next day (September 23), Mr. Sirisena was taken from the lock-up, and sat on a bench, where he was then told that he was going to be produced before the Magistrate. Mr. Sirisena's lawyers tried several times to dissuade the police from taking such an extreme measure in the absence of a clear-cut case against him. At around 1:45pm, Mr. Sirisena was produced before the Kekirawa Magistrate's Court and released on bail.

To this day, Mr. Sirisena has not been informed of the reason behind his arrest, detention and torture, but is of the strong opinion, that this was all a ruse on the part of the Kekirawa police to scare him into withdrawing his complaints against the two senior police officers who severely beat and tortured him. 


SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write to the relevant authorities listed below, expressing your grave concern and ethical denunciation of the flagrant abuse of positions of state-appointed authority in the brutal torture and systematic intimidation of Mr. S. Sirisena by officers of the Kerikawa Police Station.

To support this appeal, please click:

Sample letter:

Dear __________,

SRI LANKA: Farmer brutally tortured and systematically intimidated by police

Name of victim: Mr. Suddage Sirisena; fifty-year-old farmer, married with two children
Alleged perpetrators:
1. PC Jinadasa; one of the two alleged torturers, and who was later suspended following Mr. Sirisena's formal complaint
2. Sergeant Keerthi; falsely arrested Mr. Sirisena as part of an intimidation ploy
3. Unidentified security guard of local politician
4. Officers of the Kerikawa police station
Date of incident: Tortured on 24 August 2006 and arbitrarily arrested on 22 September 2006
Place of incident: Kerikawa Police Station, Anuradhapura district, Anuradhapura division, Sri Lanka

I am writing to voice my deep concern regarding the unlawful arrest, detention and subsequent brutal torture of Mr. Suddage Sirisena, a fifty-year-old rural farmer on 24 August 2006 by officers of the Kekirawa Police Station; and also, the inexcusable coercion tactics subsequently employed by the accused officers in preventing the application of the process of due justice.

According to the information that I have received, on 24 August 2006, Mr. Sirisena was forcibly taken by arresting officers to the Kekirawa Police Station, where he was brutally tortured by two senior officers; sustaining grievous bodily injuries, a fractured nose and the loss of five front teeth. He was later hospitalized for a period of several days, during which time, he was also informed that his two torturers had been suspended from duty.

On 22 September 2006, at about 1:30pm, Mr. Sirisena was told by Police Sergeant Keerthi come to the Kekirawa Police Station by 4:00pm because the Anuradhapura Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) wished to record Mr. Sirisena's formal statement. However, when he went to the police station along with his nephew as instructed, he was arrested by Sergeant Keerthi who admitted to tricking Mr. Sirisena into coming to the station. It was later revealed that Sergeant Keerthi had obtained a warrant for Mr. Sirisena's arrest from the Thambuththegama Magistrat's Court for failure to appear in court. However, the victim claims that that he cannot comprehend the reason behind his arrest, as his prior criminal case for the alleged illicit felling of timber has been long concluded.

I was also informed that during his detention, the security guard of a local politician, and several policemen visited the victim in the lock-up, and urged him to "forgive" one PC Jinadasa, one of his torturers. Mr. Sirisena's nephew had also reportedly received a telephone call from the same security guard, ordering that he immediately withdraw his uncle's criminal case against PC Jinadasa.

At around 1:00 pm of the following day, Mr. Sirisena was produced before the Kekirawa Magistrate's Court, where he was released on bail. To this day, Mr. Sirisena has not been informed of the reason behind his arrest, detention and torture. He believes that they were all a ruse on the part of the Kekirawa police to pressuring him to withdrawing his complaints against his two torture perpetrators. 

I am utterly appalled and disgusted by the monstrous behaviour demonstrated by the accused officers of the Kerikawa police in this incident, and in particular their apparent intimidation of the victim by abusing their state-appointed power. It is my understanding that the total abuse of the law and state-appointed authority by the police has been common practice in Sri Lanka. This is simply unacceptable. As long as cases like Mr. Sirisena'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.

Therefore, I strongly urge you to adopt all necessary measures in ensuring that Mr. Sirisena's case receives the prompt and proper investigation that it deserves. Immediate inquiries should be made into this incident, and an official investigative inquiry must be held in coordination with the relevant judicial and investigating authorities in Sri Lanka in ensuring the proper course of justice, which is long overdue for Mr. Sirisena. More importantly, disciplinary and legal prosecutory action must be taken against the accused police officers, under the CAT Act of 1994. I also urge you to inquire about the alleged intimidation to Mr. Sirisena and bring those responsible to justice immediately. I further urge you to ensure the security of Mr. Sirisena and protect him from being intimidated by his torturer or other police officers during the investigation process.

By doing so, this will send a strong and clear message to law enforcement officers, as well as to the wider civil society, that the corruption of the rule of law and the violation of fundamental human rights will no longer be accepted, nor tolerated in Sri Lanka.

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-332-2006
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.