SRI LANKA: Police, doctors and magistrates are complicit in a man’s torture

Dear friends, 

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) brings you case details of a farmer who, while on his way to pick up his child from school, was arbitrarily arrested, faced with fabricated charges and extensively tortured for two days by Galgamuwa police officers, some of whom were allegedly drunk. He was suspended by his arms for so long he has nerve damage, and had a bottle of petrol poured into his intestine via his anus. The incident exposes a collapsed system, in which torture goes unpunished because of deliberate negligence by its professionals. In this case a magistrate, two doctors and a variety of police officers and prison wardens are responsible, most of whom must now face legal action. The victim’s torture allegations have not been addressed, and he stands accused of stealing a water pump. His next hearing is 11 December 2009. 

CASE DETAILS: (According to the victim) 

Wanni Athapaththu Mudiyanselage Nilantha Saman Kumara, 31, is a farmer with two children. He was once in the army and he and his wife are reportedly witnesses in a case in Galgamuwa. 

According to the information that we have received, Nilantha was taking his eight-year old child to school on his bicycle on 26 October 2009 at around 7am, when he stopped to join a crowd outside a shop by the Nahettigkulama jam tree. He was told that the shop had been robbed the previous night, and on his return he paused again as an onlooker. Later that day fellow villagers asked him to join them at the shop, where police and the Grama Officer (village chief) asked a 50-strong crowd to help search the jungle for the stolen goods. Nilantha helped, before going home for lunch and back into the fields. 

The illegal arrest: While on his way to pick up his child from school, Nilantha was stopped at the shop by a Constable Wijeratne and a few other officers, who asked him to cycle with them to Galgamuwa Police Station to make a statement. But once there, he was illegally jailed. It was approximately 1.30pm, and no charges were read to him, no evidence cited and no official arrest made. This is contrary to the right to be free from arbitrary arrest, as enshrined in the Sri Lankan Constitution (more legal analysis can be found in Additional Information, below). Three other officers were reportedly with Wijeratne. 

After two hours we are told that the reserve officer took Nilantha into a room behind the Crimes Division; it seemed to be a private wing of the police residential barracks, containing five steel beds and several big wooden trunks. Here, Inspector (IP) Ataputtu, Police Constable Wijeratne and two other police constables, all dressed in civil clothing, started to illegally interrogate Nilantha without regard for police procedures. They told him that he was there in relation to the theft in the shop and the theft of a water pump, and Nilantha denied both. 

The first day of torture: Nilantha was then reportedly tortured under the direction of IP Atapattu in a manner known as a Palestinian Hanging. Torture is against the law in Sri Lanka. Nilantha’s shirt was removed and his lower arms were wrapped with cloth, his hands were forced behind his back and tied with a cloth rope which was attached to a nylon rope that hung from a ceiling beam; its other end was secured to a steel bed. Two police officers held the bed in place. Nilantha was then told to stand on one of the boxes, the rope was pulled tight and the wooden box was kicked from under his feet leaving him suspended from his hands in the air. 

IP Atapattu told Nilantha that he had better confess, and left the room, telling the officers to keep him hanging until his return; however the man continued to deny the charges. He says he was taken down about two hours later and put back in the police cell. The hanging was repeated at around 9pm on the same day, directed by Wijeratne and conducted by Ataputtu and the same few constables; Nilantha believes that they were drunk. They verbally abused him and left them hanging for around half an hour, then took him down and physically exercised his arms up and down against his will, before beating and kicking him intermittently for around three hours. At midnight he was put back into the cell and given two buns to eat. Ataputtu then told him that although the police had received information clearing him of the shop theft, he would have to admit that he stole the water pump. 

The second day of torture: On the morning of 27 October Nilantha was given another bun to eat and at midday, a packet of rice which had been brought for him by his family, though he was not allowed to see anyone. He was almost paralysed from the hangings, and he remembers that he had to eat his food from the packet on his cement bed without using his arms. Though he clearly needed medical treatment, none was offered. 

At around 4pm, after the legal 24 hour time limit for detainment, Wijeratne took Nilantha to the same room with the same officers and hung him again for two hours, shouting at him to confess to stealing the water pump. During this time he says that another man called Ruwan Ranjith, from the same village, was brought to the room. Nilantha was taken down and into another room, where he could hear the other villager screaming and pleading, and shouting about some goods that had been buried. After some time Nilantha was taken back to his cell. 

Around 9pm IP Atapattu told Nilantha that if he gave back the stolen goods he would not have to go to court the next day (as he had been told at one point) and could go home instead. Nilantha denied stealing and recalls that Ataputtu grabbed him by the hair and dragged him into the same room, which held the same officers. He was beaten, stripped naked, and tied with his hands in front of him. Then he was subject to a torture procedure known locally as the Dharma Chakra, or the wheel of enlightenment. He was forced to squat down and wrap his hands over his knees, a metal pipe was put through the crooks of his knees and elbows, and the bar was suspended and balanced on two tables. Then with his head hanging close to the floor, Nilantha was subjected to a bottle of petrol being poured into his anus. Water was also intermittently used to relax the muscles. He says that he was in extreme pain from the intense burning both inside and outside of his body. He began to scream for them not to kill him. 

The denial of medical treatment: Once the bottle was empty, Nilantha was taken outside the room and made to shower, then dressed and locked in the cell again. Ruwan Ranjith was put into the same cell and was told by Atapattu to simply apply two bottles of sidalepa (a medicinal balm) on Nilantha’s wounds, despite the severity of his condition. At about midnight IP Atapattu brought a rice packet and ordered Ruwan Ranjith to feed Nilantha. Attaputu also gave Ruwan Ranjith what looked like leftovers from a police meal of Kottu (a kind of Indian food), despite departmental orders which hold duty officers responsible for making sure that detainees are properly fed. 

In the morning of 28 October Ruwan Ranjith was ordered to bathe and dress Nilantha, who had lost the use of his arms. Both were taken to the criminal division, where a statement was allegedly only taken from Ruwan Ranjith. Wijeratne and another officer took the two men to the Out-Patient Department (OPD) of Galgamuwa Hospital, where they were told to wait outside while the officers ensured that a female doctor, Dr. Roja, completed a Medico-Legal Examination Form (which details the medical health condition of the patient) in her office, without seeing the patients. 

Nilantha and Ruwan Ranjith were then taken to the Magistrate’s Court in Galgamuwa without being given the opportunity to contact the next of kin or arrange for legal representation. Nilantha heard the magistrate say that he was to be remanded till the 6 November, but he was denied his legal right to speak with the magistrate; he was neither addressed nor questioned. Nilantha was then taken to Wariyapola Prison where he told wardens about the torture and was able to sign a statement stating as such. 

On 29 October he was taken to Wariyapola Hospital, where one officer told the doctor of the torture. Nilantha was still unable to use his arms. The doctor reportedly accused him of lying and refused to examine him, claiming that if his story were true his hands would have dislocated. Instead she prescribed some tablets, which were allegedly the only form of medical he received for the next ten days in prison. 

The denial of legal remedy: On 6 November Nilantha was again produced at the Galgamuwa Magsitrate’s Court, where his father had managed to arrange a lawyer. However the lawyer had not been able to meet with him to find out about the torture, and it was not mentioned in court. Nilantha was released on bail, under suspicion of stealing the water pump. His next court date is 11 December 2009. 

After his release Nilantha went home and tried to heal himself with medicated cream, but seeing no improvement, he decided to return to the hospital on 9 November with his father. Dr. Roja was still working in the Out Patient Department and though Nilantha reminded her of his previous visit, and what happened, she chose not to examine him again and told him to go to the Anuradhapura Teaching Hospital for treatment. The next day he did so, was examined, and was warded for six days. He was also examined properly by a Judicial Medical Officer, and was told to consult the Specialist Neurologist at Kurunegal Hospital, due to nerve damage. His left arm is paralysed and he is still in a state of shock. 

On 17 November we are told that one of the alleged torturers, Constable Wijeratne, visited the victim’s home to find out what steps he was planning to take. On 19 November Nilantha submitted a written complaint to the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka, the Inspector General of Police, National Police Commission and the Attorney General. However he remains scared of harassment or further harm from the perpetrators. 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: 

By documenting hundreds of cases for more than twenty years, the Asian Human Rights Commission has clearly established that torture by police in custody remains an accepted Sri Lankan law enforcement tactic, despite legal provisions and the country’s ratification of international conventions. The issue has been reexamined and explained in our latest publication, The Phantom Limb: Failing Judicial Systems, Torture and Human Rights Work in Sri Lanka, published with the Rehabilitation and Research Centre for Torture Victims, based in Denmark. 

The AHRC has long connected the use of torture to the lack of independence of the police, from the military and from politics, and to a lack of training, as shown in a particularly brutal case this year. In UAC-090-2009 a man was tortured for hours in a forest and later in police barracks to force him to confess to a theft he had no connection to. ‘We had to assault him to find out the truth. There is no other way’ the Office in Charge reportedly told the victim’s son upon his release. 

However the greatest obstacle to eliminating the use of torture in Sri Lanka is the lack of prosecutions relating to it, despite its clear contravention of laws and procedural codes. As noted in the Phantom Limb and other AHRC material, the country’s failing judicial systems are most to blame, and torture is simply not punished. In Nilanthra’s case numerous people were complicit in his torture because they were confident of their impunity, from the doctors and hospital staff who refused to treat him or report the crime, to the prison warden, the magistrates and the administrative staff in the police station who failed to intervene. 

There are plenty of legal and civil responses that must now be enacted. Sri Lankan citizens are protected against torture and arbitrary arrest in sections 11, 12 and 13 of their constitution. Sri Lanka became party to the United Nations Convention against Torture and Cruel and Inhuman Treatment in 1994, which obliges it to seriously punish perpetrators with at least seven years imprisonment or a minimum penalty of Rs 10,000. (Custodial violence and denying an injured person medical treatment are both considered forms of torture). 

Under the Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment adopted by General Assembly resolution 43/173 in 1988, Principle 24 enshrines the right of detained persons to a prompt and proper medical examination and any resulting necessary care, as does Ceylon police Departmental Order No. A. 20, including section 5 (g). This order also establishes the responsibility of officers to provide adequate food to detainees. 

Furthermore, 13.2 of the Constitution notes that: ‘No person shall be arrested except according to procedure established by law. Any person arrested shall be informed of the reason for his arrest’. Subsection three protects a detainee’s right to be heard by an attorney at law at a fair trial by a competent court. The Code of Criminal Procedure Act, section 37 notes that arrested persons are not to be detained for more than twenty four hours. 

Finally, by utterly neglecting her duty to examine and treat Nilantha, Dr Roja may be criminally liable for torture, and must face disciplinary charges for grave misconduct plus civil charges under the establishment code (Thorts Action of Common Law). 

The fact that none of the disciplinary and legal action above has been taken, just as it was not taken on behalf of so many other past victims like Rankoth Pedige Wikrama Nimalsiri, Chaminda Sampath Kumara Wickramapathirana or Ramanayakage Nishantha Perera, means that it will continue to be used unchallenged in the country. The story of torture in Sri Lanka is one in which common judgment and accountability have entirely dissolved. 

Find more on this on our website campaign to fully criminalise torture — http://notorture.ahrchk.net/profile/srilanka/ — or in our latest volume of the periodical, Article 2, ‘ Vol. 08 – No. 04 Dec 2009 — An essay on abysmal lawlessness & the zero status of Sri Lankans’ (PDF). 

SUGGESTED ACTION: 

Please write to the authorities listed below, demanding for due legal and disciplinary action to be taken against the police, medical and judicial staff responsible for the torture of Mr. Kumara. 

The AHRC has sent a letter to the UN Special Rapporteur on the question of torture, urging his intervention in this case. 

To support this case, please click here: SEND APPEAL LETTER