This is not new. Not unique to Sri Lanka. But a threat to the whole world. It will be a big problem to Mahinda Rajapakse than former Prabakaran scenario.

Lanka Truth has reported the Police have rceived information that 18 extremist armed groups are active basing its activities in Kanthankudi area in Batticaloa. A senior police officer said the Police have received information regarding the names of these groups and weapons they possess. According to Police sources the groups have 400 T-56 rifles, between 40 to 50 AK- 47 rifles, 50 pistols, 30 SLR weapons, 30 x 3.03 weapons and 300 hand grenades. It is expected to investigate whether arms left by Karuna’s faction when they had to abandon their camps after they split from the LTTE had fallen ino the hands of these extremist groups. The LTTE carried out attacks on camps esablished by Karuna’s faction and many of these camps had to be abandoned in a hurry leaving behind weapons and other paraphenalia.

 DIG Edison Gunatilleke, in charge of the Eastern Province, has announced an amenesty period for the extremist Muslim groups to hand over weapons in their possession until 2nd of next month. he Police have rceived information that 18 extremist armed groups are active basing its activities in Kanthankudi area in Batticaloa. A senior police officer said the Police have received information regarding the names of these groups and weapons they possess. According to Police sources the groups have 400 T-56 rifles, between 40 to 50 AK- 47 rifles, 50 pistols, 30 SLR weapons, 30 x 3.03 weapons and 300 hand grenades. It is expected to investigate whether arms left by Karuna’s faction when they had to abandon their camps after they split from the LTTE had fallen ino the hands of these extremist groups. The LTTE carried out attacks on camps esablished by Karuna’s faction and many of these camps had to be abandoned in a hurry leaving behind weapons and other paraphenalia. DIG Edison Gunatilleke, in charge of the Eastern Province, has announced an amenesty period for the extremist Muslim groups to hand over weapons in their possession until 2nd of next month.

A Statement by the Asian Human Rights Commission 

The International Day in Support of Victims of Torture is recognised annually on the 26^th June. It is a day devoted to the promotion of the idea of a torture-free world. It is also a day on which the previous achievements in any particular country to eliminate torture can be evaluated. From that point of view for Sri Lanka the practice of torture, instead of being reduced has only increased.

Some may argue that the increase may have been due to the intensification of the conflict between the LTTE and the government and that, therefore, the end of the conflict and the victory by the government should now result in the reduction of torture. However, such a belief is naïve because the greater degree of torture practiced in Sri Lanka was not directly related to the conflict. The main cause of the widely spread practice of torture is the appalling policing system that exists in the country. Torture was and remains practiced in areas outside those that were the conflict zones, the safer zones of the south. On the other hand the end of the conflict, instead of easing the situation seems to be giving rise to more authoritarianism where freedom is equated with treachery.

The means of reducing torture is to investigate complaints of torture. However, there is a long established practice now where investigations are deliberately sabotaged. The main agents of this sabotage are the police themselves and the Attorney General’s Department which plays the role of the prosecutor. One case, which became famous in the 1990s, illustrates this issue. A well known film actor, author, journalist and a personality popular among the elite by the name of Richard de Soysa was abducted from his house and several days later his body was washed up on a beach. The speculation is that after the arrest and torture his body was dumped from a helicopter into the sea in the hope that it would never be recovered.

The news of the killing was one of the most shocking events that influenced politics at the time. Local and international media coverage was extensive and fingers were pointed at the security forces, which was at the time engaged in wiping out the insurgency by the JVP, a southern rebel group. According to government commissions that inquired into the disappearances the official figure of forced disappearances was over 30,000.

Even despite of enormous pressure the government of the day persisted in covering up de Soysa’s murder. On the first anniversary of his death, a political party named the Liberal Party (which virtually no longer exists), took up de Soysa’s case. A whole volume of the Liberal Review was devoted to this assassination. Among the documents produced in that volume was a long letter written by the party to the government, which analysed the manner in which the inquiry had been sabotaged. This letter blames the police and the Attorney General’s Department for the failure of the investigation. The Liberal Party called for the appointment of a commission to inquire into the murder. The reasons it gave are very revealing, “It is the significant possibility of the complicity of elements of the police in this crime and the apparent unwillingness of the Attorney General and his department to act impartially in this case which prompts us to suggest the appointment of a commission of inquiry.”

In essence the Liberal Party expressed the loss of confidence in the police and the AG’s Department to conduct a murder inquiry as required by law. The Liberal Party’s letter was written in February 1991. From then until now, nothing has happened to improve confidence in either the police or the AG’s Department about their roles to ensure independent and impartial inquiries into human rights abuses, which include the widespread practice of torture. As the Liberal Party pointed out then, the complicity of the police and the AG’s Department in preventing proper inquiries into such serious crimes remains the greatest obstacle to the administration of justice.

In the period since 1991 not only has the police and the AG’s Departments remained complicit in sabotaging justice but also the various commissions that have been appointed by several governments. For now there is no agency to trust when it comes to investigations into serious crimes and abuses of human rights.

Today the position of the police is very much worse than the late 90s. It is today an institution which is acknowledged by everyone, including high ranking police officers who have made public statements expressing bewilderment about the situation. Today even a person who is an accused in a murder trial can continue to work as a police officer. An accused in the murder case of Gerard Perera, a police sub Inspector, Suresh Gunaratne, is continuing to work as an investigator at the Gampaha Police Station. Many others accused of serious crimes are not even subjected to investigations. One of the known pastimes at many police stations is to intimidate witnesses who make complaints against the police officers.

The politicians find that this kind of policing system is useful to them. It is easy to attack political opponents when the patronage of the police is assured. The police seek political patronage and politicians seek police patronage.

What is very much more shocking is the way the AG’s Department is undermining its role regarding the prevention of torture. There were some positive developments in the early part of this century when a large number of torture indictments were filed against police officers by the department. From around 2006 this policy changed significantly. The discouragement of filing indictments took the form of either not filing them at all or advising the police not to file charges under the torture act but under the penal code for offenses such as simple hurt, which is a trivial offense. Even in cases where there are fundamental errors in the judgement of law and application of facts, the AG’s Department has refused to file appeals or revisions despite of appeals being made on behalf of aggrieved victims. The tacit policy today is not to eliminate torture but to protect persons who perpetrate it.

The Supreme Court of Sri Lanka even in very recent cases have pointed out the negligence of the authorities to enforce discipline within the police and take meaningful action for the protection of the people.

Despite of the end of the conflict there is hardly any hope for the improvement of criminal justice in Sri Lanka; the government shows no political will in this regard. However, if the government had the political will, reforming the Sri Lankan police could be achieved within a short time. What is needed is the proper exercise of command responsibility.

This is also the situation of the AG’s Department. It is true that these departments also need resources to improve personnel and other materials. Allocation of funds for justice can bring far greater stability to the country than the allocation of funds to the military. However, in all likelihood, while the allocation of funds to the military will increase there will be no significant improvement in the allocation of funds for institutions that deal with the administration of justice.

In all likelihood Sri Lanka will remain a torture land, through and through in the coming year too.

# # #

About AHRC: The Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional non-governmental organisation monitoring and lobbying human rights issues in Asia. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in 1984.

The Sri Lankan government has provoked concern among press freedom groups with its decision to reestablish a powerful council with the authority to jail journalists. Lakshman Yapa Abeywardena, the Sri Lankan media minister, confirmed the government was in the process of reactivating the press council, which ceased operation in 2002. During its tenure, the council had been criticised as an anti-democratic tool to suppress criticism of the government.

Today’s move comes after increasing pressure on any reporters who were seen as critical of the Sri Lankan government in the closing months of the war against the Tamil Tigers and the methods used to root out the last of the rebels from their stronghold.

Sri Lanka publicly warned foreign media and aid agencies that they faced being expelled from the country if their reporting of the closing stages of the war was deemed sympathetic to the Tamil insurgents, who were making a last stand in the north-east of the state.

Reporters have come under fire in incidents in the Sri Lankan capital, Colombo, with a number of high-profile journalists assassinated in recent months.

According to Amnesty International, at least 14 journalists and staff at news organisations have been killed by suspected government paramilitaries and rebels since the beginning of 2006.

A joint statement was sent to Sri Lankan president Mahinda Rajapaksa earlier this week from eight media rights groups protesting about the restoration of the press council.

“A media culture cannot be based on slapping charges against journalists, fining them or sending them to jail,” the groups said in the statement.

The Associated Press, in Colombo, reported activist Dharmasiri Lankapeli as saying that re-establishment of the council would give the Sri Lankan government the legal framework to control the media as it had authority to hear allegations of defamation, inaccurate reporting and the ability to fine or jail journalists.

However, Lakshman said the government was prepared to discuss any changes to the council suggested by rights groups.

He also indicated that re-establishment of the council was for rather more prosaic reasons that suppressing press freedoms – a parliamentary committee investigating waste found that salaries were still being paid to officials and office space was still being rented, so the government had reactivated the body.

Sri Lanka Truth

Former Veerakesari journalist Krishni Ifham was abducted when she had left home to go to work around 9.00  a.m. on Wednesday by an unidentified gang in Kurunduwatte Mawatha, Averiwatte, Wattala. They have used a white van for the abduction. Police say she had been released the same evening in Kandy.

Sri Lanka assured India today that its aid for the displaced Tamil civilians in the island nation was very much needed and stranded vessel MV Captain Ali, now in Indian seas would soon be allowed entry into Lankan waters.

Daily Mirror

A Statement by the Asian Human Rights Commission

 Amarakoon Dissanayake Sarath Kumara went to the Supreme Court to complain that he was assaulted by several police officers, and was also abused by them. He was then forcibly taken to a police station where he was falsely charged and produced before a Magistrate’s Court. Due to the attack he was seriously injured and had to be hospitalised, following his ordeal he has suffered headaches and pain for a considerable time. Like many who complain about torture he went before the Supreme Court and filed a petition for fundamental rights. In his petitioner he complained that article 11 of the Constitution, which prohibits torture, had been violated by the police officers who attached him. The Supreme Court, having considered the case granted leave to proceed.

It was at the stage of filing answers by the respondent police officers that Sarath Kumara faced a surprise. For a long time now the Attorney General of Sri Lanka has not appeared for any state officers who are respondents in fundamental rights applications which include violations of the prohibition against torture. However, in Sarath Kumara’s case a senior state council appeared before the Supreme Court and stated that the Attorney General will appear for the alleged perpetrators of torture in this case.

Why was Sarath Kumara, who claimed to be a torture victim and a victim of human rights abuse treated differently by the highest legal office in Sri Lanka? The Attorney General’s office offered no explanation to Sarath Kumara as to why he was being treated differently.

This has given rise to the speculation that the Attorney General’s Department seems to be changing its policy of not taking the side of alleged perpetrators of human rights abuses, as against the citizens who complain of torture and other violations. If this is the case then the Attorney General’s Department should have made a clear statement of the change of its policy because this is a matter of serious importance to the public.

The Attorney General in Sri Lanka is also the chief prosecuting officer relating to all crimes, including the crime of torture, which is recognised as an offence punishable by a minimum of seven years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of RS 10,000/=. For example if the respondents cited by Sarath Kumara were to be prosecuted for torture it is the same Attorney General’s Department that has to prosecute the same police officers that now it has undertaken to defend in the Supreme Court. Therefore, clearly there is a conflict of interests that can jeopardise Sarath Kumara’s chance of seeking justice for his claim of torture.

The duty to investigate the complaint of torture by Sarath Kumara is with the police and often special police units are assigned to investigate such complaints. Once the police officers investigate a complaint they go with their file to the Attorney General’s Department. However, the Attorney General’s Department has already made up its mind to defend these alleged perpetrators. Therefore the police officers who investigate the crime cannot expect an impartial assessment of their case from the same department. It may well happen that once the police investigators know that the Attorney General has already undertaken to represent the alleged perpetrators, they may be discouraged from investigating the matter altogether.

Sri Lanka has one of the worst policing systems in the world. The allegations of corruption and that of the use of torture are so frequent that the crisis of the system has been admitted by the highest officers of the police themselves. Former Attorney Generals have also publicly stated the crisis facing the policing system. The Supreme Court, over and over again, has pointed out the failure of the high ranking officers to take effective measures to prevent torture and other abuses of human rights by the police. The parliament with rare unanimity agreed when passing the 17th Amendment that Sri Lanka’s police is politicised, meaning that it is working under politicians and not within the framework of the rule of law.

Under these circumstances the Attorney General’s Department’s decision to make representation on behalf of alleged torture perpetrators will contribute to the worsening of the already bad situation of policing in Sri Lanka. It is to be presumed that when a decision is taken by the highest legal office in the country it must have seriously considered the implications of its actions on the entire rule of law system and on the lives of the people. The decision taken by the Attorney General’s Department in this case is one that will frustrate the objectives of the constitution which has allowed citizens to come before the highest court to complain about human rights violations.

When the ordinary citizen comes with such complaints against errant officers and the state itself comes with all force to defend the alleged perpetrators, the credibility of the whole exercise is at stake. The public should subject this decision of the Attorney General’s Department to public debate and attempt to deal with the threat forced by this decision to the protection of their rights.

# # #

About AHRC: The Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional non-governmental organisation monitoring and lobbying human rights issues in Asia. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in 1984.