Home / News / Urgent Appeals / UPDATE (Sri Lanka): Urgent protection needed for a key eye witness of a custodial death case

UPDATE (Sri Lanka): Urgent protection needed for a key eye witness of a custodial death case

December 9, 2006

UPDATE ON URGENT APPEAL UPDATE ON URGENT APPEAL UPDATE ON URGENT APPEAL

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Update on Urgent Appeal

9 December 2006

[RE: UA-122-2005: SRI LANKA: A 52-year-old man allegedly tortured to death by the Peliyagoda police over a trivial complaint]
-----------------------------------
UP-223-2006: SRI LANKA: Urgent protection needed for a key eye witness of a custodial death case

SRI LANKA: Death threats against the witness; urgent need for protection to the witness; extra judicial killings; torture; rule of law
-----------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) is calling for your urgent intervention to provide immediate protection to a witness of a custodial death case, who is receiving death threats in Sri Lanka. He is the key eye witness of the custodial death of Mr. Hettiarachchige Abeysiri, 52, who was tortured to death by the Peliyagoda police on 14 July 2005 (See further: UA-122-2005 and AS-82-2005). The trial began on 6 December 2006 and is on-going at the High Court of Colombo.

UPDATED INFORMATION:

Mr. Hettiarachchige Abeysiri, 52, the resident of 506/1 Delgahawatte Wanawasala, Kelaniya, was illegally arrested by the Peliyagoda police on 13 July 2005 on the very trivial ground that his neighbor accused him of being responsible for the loss of a mobile telephone. Instead of conducting a proper investigation, the Peliyagoda police brutally tortured Mr. Abeysiri to death with cricket wickets. To see our original urgent appeal on this case, please go to: UA-122-2005.

This case gained a lot of intervention from local and international human rights groups, including Mr. Philip Alston, the UN Special Rapporteur on Extra-judicial, Summary, or Arbitrary Executions (refer to Special Rapporteur's 2006 Annual Report, page 230; E/CN.4/2006/53/Add.1) .

The trial recently began on 6 December 2006 and is currently under process at Court No.4 of the High Court of Colombo (case bearing no.3076/06).  Four of the alleged perpetrators charged in this case are police officers namely; K.L.A. Chaminda Kumara, S.C.A. Dharamapriya Weerawardene, D.J.A.L.L. Dasanayake and M.A.M Assiz. They all charged with murder for attempting to get a confession through use of force and torture under the Convention against Torture ACT (Act No. 22 of 1994).

A key witness of this case is Liyanage Pradeep Asok Kumar, who witnessed the police torturing the victim while he was in custody at the Paliyagoda police station.

According to the latest information, Liyanage is now in hiding since he has received death threats as well as being informed about an assassination plot against him. He is afraid to come to court and is suffering from panic attacks. Liyanage is so scared that he stutters when talking due to the fear he has in going to court and giving evidence in the case.

The AHRC is afraid that Liyanage might face a similar fate like that of Gerard Perera who was assassinated just a few days before he was to give evidence before the court on the torture he had suffered (See further: UA-157-2004 and UP-76-2004). Gerard's case is one glaring example of the Sri Lankan government's inability to protect witness in Sri Lanka. Unfortunately, this is not an isolated incident and many other witnesses have died in similar fashion in the country.

The AHRC is also afraid that the family of the victim in this case would be denied justice and legal redress and that the alleged perpetrators would be freed without any punishment under such circumstances. According to the credible statistics, the prosecution success rate in Sri Lanka is only 4%, mainly due to witnesses avoiding court out of fear for their lives. Sri Lanka does not have a witness protection law or a witness protection programme.

SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write to the relevant authorities listed below regarding this serious matter. Please strongly urge them to immediately provide effective protection to Liyanage and ensure that he gives his statement against the four accused police officers before the court.

To support this appeal, please click:

Sample letter:

Dear ___________,

SRI LANKA: Urgent protection needed for a key eye witness of a custodial death case

Name of victim: Mr. Liyanage Pradeep Asok Kumar; resident of 63/2. Thelagapatha Road Wanavasala, Kelaniya; key eye witness of the custodial death case of Mr. Hettiarachchige Abeysiri (case bearing no.3076/06 at High Court of Colombo)
Problem concerned: Liyanage is currently in hiding since he has received death threats as well as being informed about an assassination plot against him. He is afraid to come to court and is suffering from panic attacks. Protection must be immediately provided

I would like to call for your urgent intervention in order to provide immediate protection to a witness of a custodial death case, who receives severe death threats in Sri Lanka.

Liyanage Pradeep Asok Kumar is a material witness in a case involving the custodial death of a man named Hettiarachchige Abeysiri, 52, who was tortured to death by the Peliyagoda police on 14 July 2005 after being illegally arrested on the very trivial grounds that his neighbor complained against him for the loss of a mobile receiver of a telephone. Mr. Kumar witnessed the Peliyagoda police tortured Mr. Abeysiri to death while he was in custody at the Paliyagoda Police Station.

As far as I know, this case gained a lot of intervention from local and international human rights groups, including the UN Special Rapporteur on Extra-judicial, Summary, or Arbitrary Executions (refer to Special Rapporteur's 2006 Annual Report, page 230; E/CN.4/2006/53/Add.1).

The trial of this case recently began on 6 December 2006 and is currently under process at Court No.4 of the High Court of Colombo (case bearing no.3076/06).  Four of the alleged perpetrators charged with murder in this case are four police officers namely; K.L.A. Chaminda Kumara, S.C.A. Dharamapriya Weerawardene, D.J.A.L.L. Dasanayake and M.A.M Assiz.

However, I was informed that Liyanage is now in hiding since he has received death threats as well as being informed about an assassination plot against him. He is afraid to come to court and is suffering from panic attacks.

I therefore strongly request you to provide effective protection to Liyanage immediately to ensure no repeat of the association of a torture victim Gerard Perera, who was associated around 10 days before giving a statement before the court on the torture he had suffered. Otherwise, Mr. Abeysiri's family would be denied justice and legal redress and that the alleged perpetrators would be free without any punishment.

I am also well aware that unfortunately this is not an isolated incident but many other witnesses have died in similar ways in Sri Lanka. As far as I know, the prosecution success rate in Sri Lanka is only 4%, mainly due to witnesses avoiding court out of fear for their lives. Furthermore, Sri Lanka does not have a witness protection law or a witness protection programme. I therefore request you to use your official capacity to ensure that the Government of Sri Lanka introduce a witness protection law or relevant programme and strictly enforce it without further delay. Only through these measures, the witnesses of human rights violations will come forward to give their evidence before court and the victims and their families will be able to achieve effective legal redress.

I look for your immediate intervention into this matter.

Yours truly,


------------------
  

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

4. 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

5. Mr. J Thangawelu
Deputy Inspector General- Legal range
Police Headquarters
Colombo 1
SRI LANKA
Fax: +94 11 2381 394

6. Mr. Philip Alston
Special Rapporteur on Extra-judicial, Summary, or Arbitrary Executions
Attn: Lydie Ventre
Room 3-016
c/o OHCHR-UNOG
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Tel: +41 22 917 9155
Fax: +41 22 917 9006 (ATTN: SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR EXECUTIONS)

7. 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)a

Thank you.

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

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Update
Document ID :
UP-223-2006
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.