SRI LANKA: A man is shot while in the custody of the Mihintale Police

Dear friends, 

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information that a man was shot by police officers while in the custody of Mihintale Police. He was arrested on 9 June 2009 and brought to a location in the forest at Netiyagama in Mihintale by the police officers where he was shot. He was admitted to the Teaching Hospital of Anuradhapura for emergency treatment by the police officers who later filed a case against him. No credible investigation has so far been conducted into this shooting. The case illustrates the exceptional collapse of the rule of law in the country. 

CASE NARRATIVE: 

According to the information received by the Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC), Mr. Kiribandage Ratnapala of Netiyagama, Mihintale was shot by police officers attached to the Mihintale Police Station on 9 June 2009. He narrowly escaped death. He was arrested on the same day and taken to a location in the forest at Netiyagama in Mihintale by the police officers. He was shot while in police custody. Following the shooting he was admitted to the Teaching Hospital of Anuradhapura for emergency treatment by the same officers. Later the police filed a case against Ratnapala and had him remanded. 

According to the police version of the incident Ratnapala was arrested on suspicion of the death of six-year-old Warshanika Lakshani Gooneratne of Kasamaduwa in Ihalagama, Mihintale whose body was later found in a forest on the morning of 8 June. He was allegedly abducted and killed a few days earlier at Netiyagama in Mihintale, Anuradhapura. 

Police further explained that after they arrested Ratnapala they escorted him to a nearby forest where the suspect had reportedly tried to attack the policemen with a sword hidden in that location. The officers retaliated by shooting the suspect. While it is true that Ratnapala was familiar with the area the likelihood of him knowing that the police were going to take him to that particular location is virtually impossible. Therefore the obvious question remains, how did he know to conceal the sword in that spot? Perhaps he hid swords all over the forest? 

This is yet another incident of the shooting of a suspect while in police custody. It has been pointed out time and time again that the police are responsible for the safety of the suspect at all times. Police officers are supposed to be highly trained and should be well aware of how to take precautions for their safety. How then was it possible for these officers to be so lax in their duty so as to allow Ratnapala to attack them? The safety of a suspect whilst in the custody of any branch of the Sri Lankan police is a non-transferable responsibility and shootings and deaths in custody are becoming an almost daily occurrence. The officers are legally bound to report the details on all developments of the detainee while in police custody including his movements and wellbeing. 

Many identical cases have been reported in Sri Lanka within the past few months. Ironically, according to the police reports every suspect who has been shot dead while in police custody have all tried to escape. If this is indeed such a common danger why then has the Inspector General of Police not issued orders to all the officers under his command to guarantee their own safety by ensuring that the suspect is securely restrained? Another common incident is where the suspects attempt to escape while showing the police a stash of concealed weapons. Despite being surrounded and guarded by well trained and professional police officers they are able to locate a hand grenade which they then attempt to throw at the officers. 

This is a scenario which has been used so frequently by the Sri Lankan police that it is now laughable. The officers must have been aware of the danger, real or imagined that Ratnapala posed. Why then did they not supervise his movements more closely? Why he was not handcuffed securely? According to Departmental Orders any suspect being arrested must be handcuffed to prevent his escape and ensure his safety and that of the officers. 

The Officer-in-Charge (OIC) of the Mihintale Police Station is responsible to protect all the detainees under this custody. Having reached this rank this officer alone should have the experience necessary to handle the situation. It is the non-transferable duty of the police to ensure the safety of any suspect under detention. 

As is customary with this type of incident the only ‘witnesses’ are the police officers themselves and therefore no credible inquiry has taken place to ascertain the veracity of their version of the events. 

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: 

The Asian Human Rights Commission has reported innumerable cases of arbitrary arrest, detention, torture and extra judicial killings of citizens at the hands of the police which is illegal under international and local law and which have taken place at different police stations in the country over the past years. The Asian Human Rights Commission has observed that the Sri Lankan police have used torture as an instrument to terrorize innocent persons and harass the public. Further, the country’s police are implementing a policy of eliminating criminals by killing them after arresting them without producing them to the court of law. 

The Constitution of Sri Lanka has guaranteed the right freedom from torture. According to Article 11 of the Constitution ‘No person shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment’. Further, Article 13(4) “No person shall be punished with death or imprisonment except by order of a competent court, made in accordance with procedure established by law. The arrest, holding in custody, detention or other deprivation of personal liberty of a person, pending investigation or trial, shall not constitute punishment.” Further article 13 (5) guarantees the right of presumption of innocence until being proven guilty. 

Furthermore, Sri Lanka has signed and ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Nevertheless the lack of protection offered to those who are willing to take cases against abusive police officers and the state authorities, means that the law is under-used continues to be employed as a tool by the police to harass people. This not only takes a long-term toll on the victim and his or her family, but on society as a whole, by the undermining of civilian respect for the law and encouraging impunity. 

Furthermore, the Asian Human Rights Commission has continuously exposed the way the witness and the victims are getting harassed and on some occasions even killed to suppress the justice. Furthermore we have urged the State of Sri Lanka to adopt a law for the protection of witness protection. 

SUGGESTED ACTION: 
Please send a letter to the authorities listed below expressing your concern about this case and requesting an immediate investigation into the allegations attempt to extra judicially kill by the police perpetrators, and the prosecution of those proven to be responsible under the criminal law of the country. The officers involved must also be subjected to internal investigations for the breach of the department orders as issued by the police department. 

The AHRC has also written a separate letter to the Special Rapporteur on Extra-judicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions on this regard. 

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