SRI LANKA: Fabricated charges laid against a school teacher by the Saliyawewa Police 

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) writes to inform you of the alleged fabricated charges of sexual assault laid against a school teacher by the Saliyawewa police. Ms. Pavithra Karunanayake, having worked as a volunteer teacher of English for five years at the Weerapura School in Saliyawewa, was asked to present herself before the local police station on 8 July 2005. Unaware of the reason for this request, Ms. Karunanayake nonetheless went to the station. On arrival, the Office-in-Charge, AM Gunatillake accused her of sexually abusing a young girl; a charge that Ms. Karunanayake vehemently denied. Ignoring Ms. Karunanayake’s pleas, and without a medical examination having been done on the alleged victim, the OIC instead threatened Ms. Karunanayake by stating that he would ensure her dismissal from her school and that she would be sent to prison. After taking an incorrect statement from Ms. Karunanayake, the OIC then ordered her to give 500 rupees, as compensation, to the alleged victim’s mother. He then informed Ms. Karunanayake of the date that she was to appear before court, which as was later discovered, was incorrect. The case is set to be heard in July 2006, despite no evidence having been obtained regarding the alleged charge.

Due to the serious nature of this charge and owing to Ms. Karunanayake’s reputation having already been severely and unfairly tarnished, we call on you to write to the relevant authorities seeking their intervention in this matter. Please write to those authorities listed below requesting an independent investigation to be held into the conduct of the Saliyawewa Police. If it is found that they, particularly the OIC, were negligent in their duty, then full legal and disciplinary action must be taken against them. The investigation should also include an inquiry into the sexual abuse charge itself, and if no evidence can be found to substantiate this charge, then it must be dropped immediately. If Ms. Karunanayake is cleared of this charge, then she should be reinstated in her teaching position without delay.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission
————————————————————

DETAILED INFORMATION:

Name of victim: R.M.M. Pavithra Karunanayake, 26-years-old, single; Occupation – Voluntary English Language School Teacher
Alleged perpetrators: Policemen including the OIC, of the Saliyawewa Police Station
Date of incident: 1 July 2005 and continuing to date

Case Details:

Ms. Pavithra Karunanayake began working as a voluntary teacher of English at the Weerapura School in Saliyawewa on 13 January 2000 and has successfully worked in that capacity for the past five years. Then on 8 July 2005 she received a message to visit the Saliyawewa police station in relation to a complaint that had been made against her. Hence, the victim accompanied by her mother and uncle, MG Sirisena, went to the police station.

At the station, the Officer-in-Charge (OIC), AM Gunatillake escorted the victim and her mother into a room where they met with the complainant, UD Gunawathi and her 3-year-old child. There the OIC accused the victim of sexually abusing the complainants daughter and scolded her. The victim vehemently denied the charge, but the OIC refused to listen to her and threatened her that he would ensure her dismissal from employment and send her to prison. He also threatened that he would make sure that she will never get married – a grave threat against any unmarried young village woman.  When the victim continued to plead her innocence, the OIC abused her in foul language.

A little while later, the OIC demanded that the victim’s statement be recorded. However, when she saw that he had not recorded her statement correctly, she refused to sign it – and incurred the wrath of the OIC who again abused her. Then one PC Wanninayake recorded her statement again. The police OIC also ordered the victim’s uncle to drive the complainant and child to the hospital and told the victim and her family to walk home. However, according to the uncle, the complainant did not go to hospital, but got down from the van a little distance away from the police station. Before leaving, the OIC also illegally ordered the victim to pay the complainant 500 rupees, and rendered helpless before the power of this policeman, the victim reluctantly obliged.

According to the victim, neither the police nor the complainant had subjected the child – who it is alleged had been sexually abused – to any medical examination. Instead the victim says that the complainant, Gunawathi is busying herself spreading vicious and false rumours about her within the school. Thus, the victim on July 31 complained about this character assassination to the Saliyawewa police station. However, as a consequence of the complaint the OIC ordered both the victim and the complainant to visit the police station on August 5 on which date, the OIC continued his barrage on the victim and insulted her with degrading language. He also told her to attend court on August 16, but when the victim attended court on that date, she was informed that there was no case instituted against her. She later found out that case no. 8837/05/P charging her with sexual assault had been filed for August 17 on which date the police had obtained a long date viz. in July 2006.

The victim insists that the Saliyawewa Police has maliciously and without any evidence in support, filed fabricated charges against her. This has caused serious and irreparable damage to her reputation and future prospects. Not content, the OIC has also filed a fabricated report with the North-West Education Department and as a result, she was suspended from her teaching post. Thus, unable to bear the embarrassment anymore, she complained against the Saliyawewa police station to the National Police Commission, the Inspector General of Police, the DIG-NorthWest and the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) at Puttalam. Though the Puttalam SSP, Roshan Fernando obtained a statement from the victim and her mother, to date the victim complains that she has received no respite from him or any other state agency.

The victim further states, and considering the serious nature of the allegations, it was the bounded duty of the police to investigate the matters and subject the child in question to a thorough medical examination. However, to her knowledge the police have seriously neglected their duty. Instead, the OIC is attempting to coerce her into admitting her guilt and is also harassing and intimidating her. The very fact that the police had filed a case against her but obtained a court date for July 2006 indicates the lack of evidence against her. The police then informed her of a wrong court date so she would be prevented from presenting herself in court and bringing these matters before court.

SUGGESTED ACTION:

Please send an appeal letter to the persons below and express your concern about this serious case.

 

 

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