Dear friends
The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received updated information from the Advocacy Forum, a human rights organisation based in Nepal, concerning the case of Mr. Umesh Lama. The AHRC had reported on 21 April, that after being arrested and tortured while in custody, Umesh is undergoing treatment for his injuries (See further AHRC-UAC-078-2008). The Advocacy Forum now reports that the victim and his family are being continuously harassed by the police to withdraw the complaint.
UPDATED INFORMATION:
The Advocacy Forum informs that Umesh’s two sisters, Ms. Lalumaya Jimba Bal and Ms. Samjhana Lama, met the Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) Mr. Kanchan Thapa at the Metropolitan Police Range Office on 27 April 2008. Bal and Lama went to the Police Range Office following repeated instructions from the police to meet the superior officer.
At the Range Office the DSP reportedly threatened the two sisters “[n]ow, do not go to the media and any other human rights organisations anymore to inform the development of the case. We will provide you the expenses that you have spent for his (Umesh’s) medical treatment. We will give you 100,000 Nepali Rupees (USD 1,600) for this purpose. We will also withdraw all the charges against him. But first you have to say to the media and to other people that local people beat Umesh when he was trying to escape from the police at the time of arrest and the police did not torture him. If you would not say so, we will implicate him with other serious charges and send him directly to jail from the hospital. He will then have to spend six to seven years in jail.”
The AHRC wishes to bring to your attention that the charges for which Umesh was arrested on 1 April 2008 and tortured, were for alleged robbery and abduction. These charges are denied by Umesh. Prior to this visit on April 24, Umesh’s family members, including his wife, visited Hanumandhoka Metropolitan Police Range in Kathmandu district and had submitted an application seeking financial support from the police to cover Umesh’s medical treatment coast. The DSP, who is also in charge of a police committee investigating the alleged case of torture, received the application but merely said that he would discuss this matter with the family later.
On the same day evening, the DSP visited Bir Hospital where Umesh has been hospitalised since April 9 and receiving medical treatment, and offered 10,000 Nepali Rupees (USD 160) for immediate medical support. However, Umesh’s family refused to accept it and told the DSP that this amount was far less than the actual cost of the medical treatment that they had to pay to the hospital. According to Umesh’s wife, the family had already spent about 100,000 Nepali Rupees (USD 1,600) to the hospital and is facing a financial crisis in order to cover further medical treatment.
On April 25 some unidentified policemen from Hanumandhoka Metropolitan Police Range went to Bir Hospital and told Umesh’s family that if they were willing to accept, they would bring 50,000 or 60,000 Nepali Rupees (USD 790 or USD 950) from Hanumandhoka Metropolitan Police Range to cover the cost of medical treatment of Umesh. However, those policemen went back when the family told them that they would give an answer later.
After the police left the hospital, the DSP called Umesh’s family and asked them to come to Hanumandhoka Metropolitan Police Range. However, the family did not go. On the next day the DSP again made a phone call to Umesh’s family and asked them to come to Hanumandhoka Metropolitan Police Range to discuss the victim’s case. The family again decided not to go. At around 9am the next day, one inspector from the Hanumandhoka Metropolitan Police Range called to Umesh’s family and again requested them to come to the Metropolitan Police Range. He said that DSP wanted to talk with them. It is only then the family finally decided to go to meet the officer. It was during this meeting the officer threatened the family that unless they withdraw the case Umesh will be implicated in other cases, which would result in Umesh’s detention for six to seven years in custody.
Umesh’s family is afraid of the DSP’s comment and is worried about Umesh’s security. At around 4pm on 27 April, they contacted the Advocacy Forum and informed the organisation about the police threats. Soon the lawyers working with Advocacy Forum reached Bir Hospital and met Umesh’s two sisters. They informed the lawyers that police repeatedly pressured them to compromise Umesh’s torture case.
At this time, Police Inspector Mr. Laxman Giri and two other policemen and a Public Prosecutor Mr. Surendra Thapa came to see Umesh at Bir Hospital in order to take a statement from him regarding the torture incident. When the police asked Umesh to sign the statement, he asked the police to read it first and then he would sign in it. The police then read the statement, which the lawyers from the Advocacy Forum also heard. Umesh then signed the statement.
As of now, the police have not made any payments to cover the hospital expenses. Umesh and his family are afraid that the police will further implicate Umesh in other criminal cases or threaten the family and pressurise them to withdraw the complaint.
The medical documents obtained by the Advocacy Forum show that the victim has suffered serious injuries from the torture meted out against him. The Advocacy Forum is in possession of copies of most of the documents concerning Umesh’s treatment. In one such document, that shows the date of admission of Umesh at the National Academy of Medical Sciences, the doctor who attended Umesh has mentioned that the patient’s history is that of ‘physical assault’ on 1 April 2008. Additionally a medical record dated April 9 also shows that Umesh had a history of fever for the past seven days. These documents among other medical certificates prove that Umesh was in police custody from 1 April 2008. This contradicts the police story where the police claim that Umesh was arrested on 6 April.
In this context the AHRC also wishes to inform you that the committee formed to investigate the torture incident is not impartial, since the DSP who threatened Umesh’s sisters, (Mr. Kanchan Thapa), is the head of this committee. In the earlier Appeal issued by the AHRC, the AHRC has expressed doubts about the impartiality of this committee.
SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please urgently write to the concerned authorities listed below and express your deep concern about this serious case.
The AHRC has also separately reported this case to the UN Special Rapporteur on the Question of Torture.
To support this case, please click here: SEND APPEAL LETTER
SAMPLE LETTER
Dear _________,
NEPAL: Please provide immediate protection to Umesh Lama, a victim of police torture
Name of victim: Mr. Umesh Lama, aged 28, agent of one recruitment consultant office by profession, the permanent resident of ward no. 1, Parvanipur Village Development Committee (VDC), Sarlahi District, Nepal; is temporarily residing at new Baneshwor in Kathmandu district
Alleged perpetrators:
1. Police inspector Sudhir Raj Shahi
2. Police sub inspector Sanjaya Timilsina
3. Assistant sub inspector Raju and 2 other policemen attached to the Hanumandhoka Police Range, Kathmandu, Nepal
4. Deputy Superintendent of Police Mr. Kanchan Thapa stationed at the Metropolitan Police Range Office, Katmandu, Nepal
Date of incident: Allegedly arrested and severely tortured on 1 April 2008 and is in police custody to date
Place of torture: Hanumandhoka Police Range, Kathmandu district, Nepal
Current place being detained: Bir Hospital in Kathmandu in police custody
I am distressed to learn about the illegal pressures and tactics used by the police officers attached to Hanumandhoka Police Range upon the victim Mr. Umesh Lama and his family for complaining against police torture. I am informed that the victim Umesh (who was arrested from his house on 1 April 2008) is currently undergoing treatment at Bir Hospital, Katmandu.
I am informed that the Deputy Superintendent of Police Mr. Kanchan Thapa stationed at Metropolitan Police Range Office, Katmandu Nepal had summoned the victim’s sisters to his office on 27 April 2008 and has reportedly threatened the family by saying the following:
“Now, do not go to the media and any other human rights organisations anymore to inform the development of the case. We will provide you the expenses that you have spent for his (Umesh’s) medical treatment. We will give you 100,000 Nepali Rupees (about USD 1,600) for this purpose. We will also withdraw all the charges against him. But first you have to say to the media and to other people that local people beat Umesh when he was trying to escape from the police at the time of arrest and the police did not torture him. If you would not say so, we will implicate him with other serious charges and send him directly to jail from the hospital. He will then have to spend six to seven years in jail.”
I am informed that the victim or his family has yet to receive any financial assistance from the government, or through the police for treating the victim. I am also informed that the victim’s family is poor and is finding it difficult to find enough money for the treatment of the victim. I am aware that the victim has suffered serious injuries from the torture. I am also informed that the victim and his family is afraid that the police will implicate him in further criminal charges to pressure the victim to withdraw the torture complaint that he has made against the perpetrators.
I am also informed that the statement of the victim was recorded by the police in the presence of a Public Prosecutor, Mr. Surendra Thapa at Bir Hospital on 27 April 2008.
Although Nepal is a state party to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), its legal system does not provide effective redress to torture victims. The Torture Compensation Act neither criminalizes torture nor obligates the government to take action against a perpetrator of torture. The Act only recognizes claims filed by torture victims within 35 days of the alleged act of torture, or within 35 days of the victim’s release from detention, and the burden of proof is upon the complainant (the victim), who, due to the nature of the torture is often incapable of satisfying it.
Nepal has no other specific law that defines torture as a crime. The only recourse is to the “assault” section of the Civil Code of Nepal, where physical assault is defined as a crime. Furthermore, the Civil Code does not make any provision for the psychological effects of torture. More importantly, even this ‘assault’ section of the Civil Code does not make any specific provision for assault which has taken place whilst the victim is in custody, (i.e. with State involvement). Consequently, very few lawyers use this clause in court and torture victims are deprived of their rights to seek effective legal remedies. Torture is also defined very narrowly in Nepal, and torture by state officers outside custody seems to be totally exempt.
Considering the widespread practice of torture in Nepal, the Committee against Torture made its recommendations (CAT/C/NPL/CO/2, 13 April 2007) to “adopt domestic legislation which ensures that acts of torture, including the acts of attempt, complicity and participation, are criminal offences punishable in a manner proportionate to the gravity of the crimes committed, and consider steps to amend the Compensation Relating to Torture Act of 1996 to bring it into compliance with all the elements of the definition of torture provided in the Convention.” I strongly urge the Government of Nepal to respect and fulfill the Committee’s recommendations without further delay.
I therefore request you to take all necessary steps to ensure that the victim and his family receive all necessary protection to ensure that they are not threatened and harassed any further. I also request that you to ensure the victim receives the best possible medical treatment without any further delay and that the expenses for the same are covered by the government of Nepal.
The Deputy Superintendent of Police now threatens Umesh and his family notwithstanding the fact that he leads the committee established to enquire about Umesh’s torture. In this regard, I finally call upon you to take every step to ensure that thorough and impartial investigation is conducted in order to demonstrate that the justice system in the country functions effectively and those responsible for torture are brought to the justice.
Yours sincerely,
————————–
PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:
1. Mr. Krishna Sitaula
Home Minister
Ministry of Home Affairs
Singha Darbar, Kathmandu
NEPAL
Fax: +977 1 4211232
2. Mr. Yagya Murti Banjade
Attorney General
Office of Attorney General
Ramshahpath
Kathmandu
NEPAL
Fax: +977 1 4262582
E-mail: attorney@mos.com.np
3. Mr. Kedar Nath Upadhaya
Chairperson
National Human Rights Commission
Pulchowck, Lalitpur
NEPAL
Fax: +977 1 55 47973
E-mail: complaints@nhrcnepal.org or nhrc@nhrcnepal.org
4. Mr. Puspakamal Dahal (Prachanda)
Chairperson
CPN- Maoist Party
Kathmandu, Nepal
Tel: + 977 1 4784045
E-mail: maobadi_soochanaburo@yahoo.com
5. Mr. Krishna Bahadur Mahara
Minister for Information and Communication
Singh Durbar, Kathmandu
Nepal
Tel: + 977 1 4228333
Fax: + 977 1 4266400
E-mail: moichmg@ntc.net.np
6. Mr. Om Bikram Rana
Inspector General of Police
Police Head Quarters, Naxal
Kathmandu
NEPAL
Fax: +977 1 4415593
E-mail: info@nepalpolice.gov.np or ranaob@nepalpolice.gov.np
7. SSP Mr. Binod Singh
Police HR Cell
Human Rights Cell
Nepal Police
Kathmandu
NEPAL
Fax: +977 1 4415593
E-mail: hrcell@nepalpolice.gov.np
Thank you.
Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ua@ahrchk.org)
