SRI LANKA: Rattota Police refuse to conduct investigation into a child’s abduction

Dear friends, 

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information that a 15 year old school going girl was abducted by the driver of a three wheel but later rescued by passers-by. The culprit managed to escape but the rescuers took the three wheeler to the Rattota Police Station where they were also able to describe the person to the officers. However, the officers have not taken any action to be arrest the suspect and bring him before the court. The case is yet another illustration of the exceptional collapse of the rule of law in the country. 

CASE NARRATIVE: 

We have received information of the abduction of Ms. T. Nishanthini, of Vana Rani Road, Rattota. Nishanthini is a 15-year-old school girl studying in Grade 9 at the Rattota Hindu Maha Vidyalaya. Her father is a laborer working in Dambulla. Her mother is a housewife and has recently returned from Saudi Arabia. Nishanthini has to walk 2 km everyday to the school and usually she accompanies her younger sister. 

On the 27 September 2010 Nishanthini did not go to the school due to a headache; however she went for the afternoon private English class that was held at 2pm. When she reached the class the teacher informed her that as he had to go to Kandy so the class will not be held on that day. Hence Nishanthini went to the public library in Rattota to return a book. Then she started to walking back home. 

Around 2.30pm while she was on her way home, suddenly a three wheeler stopped beside her and the driver offered her a lift saying that he was also going in the direction of her house and invited her to get in. Nishanthini got into the three wheeler and the driver started in the direction of her house but then suddenly turned the vehicle in another direction. Nishanthini was afraid and tried to get down from the moving vehicle. Then the driver stopped the three wheeler in secluded spot. 

Nishanthini was terrified and was not able to do anything due to her fright. The driver forced her to get down and when she refused, she was dragged out. 

A person by the name of Thiyagarajah saw the three wheeler driver dragging Nishanthini out and using his mobile called the police and shouted to his friends who were nearby. His friends arrived quickly and caught the suspect to prevent his escape. Unfortunately he was later able to abscond. 
Thiyagarajah and his friends accompanied Nishanthini to the Rattota Police Station in the same three wheeler. They then handed over the three wheeler to the custody of the police. The police officer who was on duty at that time questioned Nishanthini and recorded her statement. The people who intervened and rescued her gave further information to identify the culprit. The officers admitted that they knew the identity of the suspect. 

A few hours later a police officer informed Nishanthini’s mother incorrectly that as she had willingly got into the three wheeler that there had not been an abduction and that they cannot proceed with the investigation of the complaint. However they were asked to go to the police station on the following day. 

Then Nishanthini’s mother and her uncle went to the police station with her in compliance of the request of the police officers. They brought the three wheeler driver into the station and asked her to identify the person. Then the officers asked the suspect for his version of the events and he told the officers that the crime was not committed not by him but by his brother ‘Sumith’. 

The actions taken by the police to ask Nishanthini to identify the suspect at the police station was not in conformity with any accepted procedure. This should have been done when the suspect was produced in the Magistrate’s Court. 

The police officers without any further inquiries concluded the investigations. The accused was then released along with the three wheeler which was with the police custody. The obvious discrepancy in this was that the police at no time investigated ‘Sumith’ and also, if indeed, it was Sumith’s three wheeler, why did they release it to the accused? Following the release the officers asked Nishanthini and her relatives to go home. 

Nishanthini categorically stated that she was lied to by the suspect who forcefully abduct her. She stated that the suspect is criminally liable for that crime. She further stated that she clearly submit credible evidence with many direct witness who saw the incident. It is therefore evident that the police have intentionally ignored the investigation. 

Further she stated that she understood that police officers on duty wanted to protect the suspect from proceeding in courts against him. She believes that police intentionally suppressed the whole process of the criminal justice system. She also stressed that officers wanted to fulfill the whims and fancies of the suspected persons in this cases for unknown reasons. 

She strongly states that inaction of an official duty by a police officer should be prosecuted in court. It also constitutes a situation of the violation of fundamental rights guaranteed to her by the Constitution of the country. 

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: 

The Asian Human Rights Commission has reported innumerable cases of that shows the intentional inaction in criminal investigation by the Sri Lankan police which are illegal under international and local law which have taken place at different Police Station in the country over the past few years. 

Article 12 (1) of the Constitution of Sri Lanka has guaranteed the right to equality for all persons as stated that ‘all persons are equal before the law and are entitled to the equal protection of the law’. Further Article 13 (1) has stated 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’. 

The Asian Human Rights Commission have observed that in two occasions prior to this incident same police station initially ignore the criminal investigation into two cases. In the case of Sivaraj Mohanambal, a girl who was from the same school of Nishanthini was raped (UA 320/ 2007) and in the case of Murugiah Priya also from the same school was abducted (UA 048/2009). 

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 undermining of civilian respect for the law and encouraging impunity. 

International Convention on Right of the Child (ICRC) 
The State of Sri Lanka signed the International Convention on Rights of the Child (ICRC) on 26 Jan 1990 and ratified it on 12 Jul 1991. Further Sri Lanka amended its criminal law of the country several times to complete its pledges to the ICRC committee. The State of Sri Lanka is obliged to the UN to protect and guarantee the rights of the child to all Sri Lankan children. 

National Child Protection Authority (NCPA) 
The State of Sri Lanka established a NCPA that has special powers to investigate the incidents of child abuse other than department of Police. This institution having a mandate on its own intervention to make any such investigation to child related cases. 

According to the National Child Protection Authority Act No. 50 of 1998 the NCPA was established. The major purpose of the NCPA was formulating a national policy on the prevention of child abuse and the protection and treatment of children who are victims of such abuse; for the co-ordination and monitoring of action against all forms of child abuse; and for matters connected therewith or incidental there to. 

Further in December 1996 the President of Sri Lanka has appointed a task force on child protection as well. 

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 of ignoring the criminal investigation into the case of abduction, 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. Further, please also request the NPC and the IGP to have a special investigation into the malpractices of the police officers for abusing the state officers’ powers illegally in favor of private parties. 

The AHRC has also written a separate letter to the Chairperson of the Committee on the Rights of the Child of United Nations on this regard. 

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