(This statement is an urgent call for intervention to save the who is pursuing complaints against the police at the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka and the High Court of Negombo and who had a successful case before the United Nations HRC regarding the delay to investigate and to try the case. The earlier instance of the assassination of Gerald Perera under similar circumstance of the pursuit of a complaint highlights the urgency in the need for intervention)
The Asian Human Rights Commission after careful verification of the facts is satisfied that there is an imminent danger to the life of Lalith Rajapakse, a torture victim who had been having a fundamental rights application before the Supreme Court and is the chief witness in a torture case under Act No. 22 of 1994 against a sub inspector of police from the Kandana police station filed by the Attorney General’s Department. At around midnight on the 25th May 2008 three persons arrived in a three wheeler near Lalith’s house and split into three directions; one coming from the middle of the property and the other two from around the house; two of whom carried pistols. Lalith having seen their arrival as he has been continuously harassed due to his torture complaints was afraid that some harm may befall him and escaped and was able to circumvent the problem.
The following day he made inquiries and the neighbours complained of the theft of a bicycle by unknown persons. Lalith with his wife went to a family occasion to get wedding photographs and then he was informed by his family that the neighbour’s house was making a complaint against him.
Due to the previous experience Lalith immediately contacted a lawyer who helped in his case and also some persons including a catholic priest who was fully aware of the continuous harassment he had from the police.
Lalith thereafter made a complaint to the Human Rights Commission about this incident and learned that the officer in charge of the Kandana police station and several other officers are trying to create the impression that he is a notorious criminal and that the lawyers and hr organisations should not have anything to do with a person like him and that the police know what to do with him.
This labelling of Lalith having a criminal record is completely false and the earlier attempt by the police to file three fabricated charges to circumvent the complaint against torture failed as there were no complaints against him at all and the magistrate’s court of Wattala acquitted him of the charges. At the Negombo High Court during the trial the officer who arrested him prior to the torture admitted that there was no complaint of any sort made by anybody against him.
The labelling of people as notorious criminals is part of the blackmailing that takes place in the cases of what are frequently known now in Sri Lanka as self defence killings the frequently reported story in such cases is that the police went to inquire into the case of a notorious criminal and that he tried to escape and thereafter for self defence the police officers shot him dead.
The late night visit of three persons to Lalith’s house with two of them with pistols and the subsequent story of the Officer-in-Charge of the Kandana police station that Lalith is a notorious criminal adds up to a plot that evidently is quite well know to the Kandana police and the words of the OIC of the station, “we know what to do with him”, is a clear signal of such a plan
At the same time as Lalith Rajapaske, Gerald Perera made a complaint of torture by the Wattala police. When he was summoned to the High Court to give evidence against the police officers who tortured him he was assassinated. Obviously anyone who seriously pursues a torture complaint seemed to be fated to be dealt with in this manner. Lalith Rajapakse made him complaint in 2002. For over five years he remained outside his village in Kandana staying in Kandy to avoid harassment by the Kandana police. He recently returned with his wife to look after his grandfather who is paralysed. The present crisis has happened after this return.
The Asian Human Rights Commission has complained to the UN Rapporteur against torture and the Sri Lankan authorities about this incident and urges protection for Lalith and a thorough inquiry into the late night visit of three persons on the 25th may 2008 and the subsequent threats by officers of the Kandana police.
An extract from Lalith’s affidavit about the incident:
That on the 25th May, 2008 at around 1:p.m. as my wife wanted to go the toilet I came out with her as the toilet is situated outside the house and after that returned her to the house; thereafter just in front of my house on a massa (a raised floor) I sat and smoked and after from the well that was near the toilet I washed my face as it was a warm day. At that moment I saw a three wheeler coming on the road towards my house and I saw three persons getting down and coming towards our house, one person came from the middle of the property of my house and from the two by-ways on two sides of the house two other persons were coming to my house and since it was a day where there was very clear moonlight I saw these things clearly. When I saw that I thought that they may be coming to do some harm to me (as a previous torture victim I have been having several cases in the Supreme Court, the High Court of Negombo and the magistrate’s court of Wattala against several police officer and therefore I always lived in the fear that I may come to some harm due to this), I went from to the back of my house and through the wela (the field), I ran a little and then went to a newly built house for my protection and from upper terrace of that house I laid flat and watched the persons who came to my house; I saw two of these persons had pistols in their hands and after seeing that I was deeply afraid that they had come to harm me. Then I came out of that house and went through the field where there is sugarcane plant cultivation and passed the church of Welikuruduwatte towards the house of a friend Suranga. From there with a mobile telephone of the brother in law of Suranga I made a telephone call to the mobile telephone at our house and talked to my wife and asked her whether anybody knocked at the door or asked for me and I was told that there was no such person knocking at the door. Later I learned that my wife had tried to call Fr. Nandana who gave me protection at the time I had the torture case against the police and to one Lucille Mary Ann Abekoon, who was also aware of my case.
Then at about 6:a.m. I came form my friend’s house to my house and on the way met my wife returning from the house of my aunt and then we returned to our house. Then at around 7 – 7:30 the lady of our neighbouring house came and talked to my grandmother and I did not hear what she told my grandmother, and then this lady came and talked to me and my wife and said that a play cycle of the children belonging to them had been taken away by someone. The person who did that has removed a flower pot from the wall of their house and there are two slippers near the house which she said belonged to Lahiru Namatha and therefore she suspects that he had taken the play cycle; if they had the play cycle back by 12 noon there will not be any problem or if the place where they cycle is, is revealed to her she cold go and collect it, that she had no suspicion of any sort against me about this matter and that if we get to know who has done this to inform her about it. I categorically said that I do not know anything about this matter. Later I with my newly married wife went to take a wedding photograph as it had been arranged earlier and my wife’s mother came from Kandy to a house in Kaliniya which belonged to one of my aunts and I with my wife went to joint her there.
As we were passing the house of our neighbour the father and mother of that house came out and talked to us and showed us that flower pot that has been taken down form the wall and kept on the wall and two slippers which were near their house. They told us that they heard that the flower pot was put on the floor and throwing of the bicycle outside the wall of the house, however, they did not get up and look at it. Somebody who may have come to our house may have taken this cycle as thieves to not come from outside just to take a cycle, if anybody has taken the cycle to tell such persons to return it and that they will take prints from the two slippers and find out who the thief was. I informed these two persons that I am leaving with my wife to get a wedding photograph and that my wife’s mother has come from Kandy for that purpose to join us at Kaliniya and then the father and mother of the neighbouring house asked us to attend to go ahead for our work and further that they do not in any way suspect me as having taken the cycle by any means. Later I arrived at my aunt’s house and we took our wedding photograph. Later my other aunt telephone to me and said the people of the neighbouring house had come and taken my cycle and that they are suspecting me about the theft from their house.
