|
|
Sri Lanka
1486. By letter dated 2 September 2002, the Special Rapporteur advised the Government that he had received information according to which there was an apparent rise in reports of torture and other forms of ill-treatment involving personnel of the Special Task Force (STF) deployed in the North and East of Sri Lanka, as well as in reports of torture allegedly committed by the Special Investigation Branch of the police in Amparai district. A high number of rape cases had allegedly been reported recently. It was reported that most of the cases have occurred in the context of the armed conflict between the security forces and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). It was believed that the authorities may have failed to bring to justice those members of the security forces suspected of being responsible. As of mid-June 2001 seven indictments had reportedly been presented to the High Courts with regards to the alleged perpetration of torture and the Prosecution of Torture Perpetrators (PTP) Unit in the Attorney General's department has in addition processed investigative material in another six cases. However, despite these initiatives, it was reported that so far no one has been found guilty by a court of law in relation to charges of torture, or for rape in custody although some prosecutions have been brought in cases where the victim of rape was also murdered. Furthermore, no policy of compensation was said to have been worked out, and insofar as compensation has been granted it is said to be very insignificant. Furthermore, the Special Rapporteur had received a considerable number of alleged cases of torture having been carried out as part of routine criminal investigations as opposed to in areas characterized by civil strife, conflict or security operations. The practice of torture was said to be considerably more extensive and intensive in the latter areas.
1487. By letter dated 2 September 2002, the Special Rapporteur advised the Government that he had received information on the following cases. By letters dated 7 and 29 November 2002 respectively, the Government transmitted interim responses regarding a number of them.
1488. Mahendranathan Shankar was reportedly arrested in Kandarmadam on 4 July 2001 by army personnel from the Urelu army camp. It was reported that he was undressed and blindfolded and that his hands were tied behind his back. It was also reported that he was pushed against a door, as a result of which his lip was injured. He was also allegedly assaulted with sticks and wires and burnt with cigarette butts. It was believed that he was handed over to the police at Kankesanthurai on 9 July 2001, where he was believed to have been assaulted by two police officers. A case filed before the Supreme Court in August 2001 was reportedly still pending at the time of writing.
1489. The Government responded that the Special Investigations Unit of the Police Department (SIU) had initiated an investigation on 10 October 2002. SIU made several attempts to trace the whereabouts of the alleged victim in order to record his statement. The Government indicated that the outcomes of its efforts will be provided to the Special Rapporteur.
1490. Krishnasamy Thiviyan, a former secretary of the Jaffna University Students Union, was reportedly taken into custody by the army on 2 July 2001. He was allegedly ill- treated by army personnel at the time of his arrest. His hands were reportedly tied behind his back and he was blindfolded with his shirt. He was reportedly beaten with the butt of a gun and kicked. He was taken to the Urelu army camp where it was alleged that soldiers undressed him, pulled his pubic hair, beat him with sticks and kicked him in the face. As a result, he was said to have sustained an injury to his mouth. He was reportedly assaulted in a similar way on the following day. He was allegedly seen with marks of injuries on his cheek and lower lip. He was also said to be suffering from back pain as a result of the illtreatment. A fundamental rights petition was reportedly submitted on 9 August 2001. When the petition was taken up for inquiry by the Supreme Court on 22 August, the court was reported to have ordered that Krishnasamy Thiviyan be examined by a Judicial Medical Officer (JMO) and that the report of the examination be submitted to the court. The following hearing was believed to have been scheduled for 30 October 2001.
1491. Alagaiah Murugathas, a man from Vinayagapuram, Thirukovil, Amparai district, was reportedly arrested by the STF on 30 June 2001. The latter reportedly pulled a plastic shopping bag over his head which had been filled with petrol, put chilli powder into his eyes and beat him with wicket poles all over his body. Eight STF personnel reportedly stood on his chest. After he was handed over to the Special Investigation Branch of the police at Amparai town, he was allegedly beaten with a wooden pole all over his body by a police constable. Alagaiah Murugathas was reportedly seen with marks of severe injuries allegedly due to the treatment he had been subjected to on his back and thigh and red marks in his eyes, suspected of having been caused by the petrol and/or the chilli powder.
1492. The Government responded that the SIU had initiated an investigation on 10 October 2002.
1493. Ponnappapillai Sivanesan, a man originally from Chulipuram, Jaffna district, but living as a displaced person at Ilanthaimoddai, Nanaddan, Mannar district, was allegedly assaulted in his home and taken into custody by the STF to the Ilanthamoddai STF camp on 25 June 2001. His wife and three children were allegedly also assaulted by them at the time of his arrest. It was reported that he had been released in the afternoon of 26 June 2001 with a severe warning not to go to any hospital for treatment. He was reportedly admitted at the Mannar hospital, before being transferred to Vavuniya hospital.
1494. The Government responded that the SIU had initiated an investigation on 10 October 2002.
1495. Sivalingam Satheeskumar, a man from Thirukovil, Amparai district, was reportedly taken into custody by the STF on 16 May 2001 and held at the Thirukovil STF Camp. Soon after taking him into custody, STF officers reportedly pulled a shopping bag soaked in petrol over his face and assaulted him at the same time. They also reportedly put water and then chilli powder into his eyes. He was also allegedly suspended between two tables and assaulted with wicket poles while hanging between them. More than two months after having been subjected to this treatment, he reportedly continued to have marks of the beatings on his back and on his thigh.
1496. The Government responded that the SIU had initiated an investigation on 10 October 2002.
1497. Thangarasa Sathan, a man from Marambaikulam Vavuniya, was reportedly taken into custody by the Counter Subversive Unit (CSU) of police on 5 March 2001. It was believed that he was taken into custody for possession of a hand grenade. An attorney-at-law allegedly asked the court to institute a prosecution against the officials responsible for alleged ill-treatment.
1498. The Government responded that the SIU had initiated an investigation on 10 October 2002.
1499. R. Vigneswaran, a man from Chunnakam, was reportedly taken into custody at Urelu army camp on 8 February 2001. It was alleged that as a result of the treatment he was subjected to at the camp, he reportedly vomited blood. Soldiers reportedly are said to have warned him not to complain about his treatment while in detention and also not to obtain treatment from a hospital. 1500. The Government responded that the SIU had initiated an investigation on 10 October 2002.
1501. L. P. Maithreepala Senadira, from Pansalgodella, Galamuna, was reportedly taken into custody by the Polonnaruwa tourist police on 7 January 2001. It was reported that he was tied to a pillar, his clothes were removed and he was beaten with a pipe and sticks by a Sub-Inspector, as a result of which, his sexual organs were reportedly severely injured. He was allegedly taken to the Polonnaruwa Hospital by the sub-inspector himself. It is alleged that the injuries to his sexual organs required six stitches, and his back showed signs of severe beatings.
1502. The Government responded that the statement of the alleged victim had been recorded by the SIU. The case was settled by the National Human Rights Commission and compensation was paid by the accused officers.
1503. Nadarajah Thiruchelvam, a journalist of Point Pedro working in Jaffna for the daily newspapers Valampuri and Thinakaran, was reportedly taken into custody on 2 January 2001, and held handcuffed for 12 days in solitary confinement by the Terrorism Investigation Division (TID) of the police in Colombo. It was reported that he was taken into custody by the police in Wellawatte while on a visit to the capital with his family. It was alleged that he was assaulted with pipes and severely beaten.
1504. The Government responded that an investigation initiated on 7 March 2002 by the Police was still continuing.
1505. Sarojinidevi Thavarajah, a woman originally from Thiddy, Kankesanthurai, Jaffna district but living as a displaced person in Colombo, was reportedly taken into custody by members of the TID and detained at their offices along Chaitiya Road, Colombo 1 on 25 September 2000. The next day, she was reportedly taken to the TID offices situated in the police headquarters and interrogated about giving shelter to a person suspected of being an LTTE member. She was allegedly beaten with a piece of wood and with belts. She was believed to have collapsed but was reportedly still beaten. It was also alleged that her hair were pulled and that she was refused water. Similarly, on 27 September 2000, she was reportedly taken from Chaitiya Road to the TID office in the police headquarters. She was allegedly handcuffed and beaten. She was allegedly taken to the Colombo General Hospital on 28 September 2000. On the way to the hospital, she was allegedly threatened not to reveal how she had been treated. It was reported that as told a doctor what had happened, the TID officers refused to give her water and made her stand as a punishment for the rest of the day. On 8 November 2000, she reportedly had to be admitted to hospital again and this time she was examined by another doctor. Again, she was believed to have explained to him how she had been treated. According to the medical report, there were scars of seven injuries on her body which may have been caused by torture while held by the TID. It was reported that she was not allowed any visitors until 19 October 2000 and that she first saw a lawyer on 4 January 2001.
1506. The Government responded that an investigation had initiated on 28 October 2002. The statement of the victim was recorded on 11 November 2002. The following day, the complaint was voluntarily withdrawn by the victim, who expressed that she did not want to pursue the case.
1507. Nadaraja Rasalingam, a man from Manat Senai, Kalmunai, was reportedly taken into custody by personnel of Amparai CSU on 18 September 2000. It was reported that during the time of detention and investigation at the CSU, Nadaraja Rasalingam was injured in his left eye by a police constable. Boiling water was allegedly poured into his mouth on one occasion. A polythene bag, soaked in petrol, was allegedly put over his head covering his face and he was beaten by the police constable with bamboo sticks.
1508. The Government responded that the SIU had initiated an investigation on 10 October 2002.
1509. Muniyandi Selvarasa, a man from Markandu Veethi, Kalmuna i, was reportedly taken into custody by the Amparai CSU on 18 September 2000. It was alleged that he was handcuffed and that his hands were placed on a table and his fingers were beaten with a pole. He was beaten and boiling water was forcibly poured into his mouth. A police constable allegedly urinated into his mouth. It was also reported that his fingers were broken and that he experienced problems speaking.
1510. The Government responded that the SIU had initiated an investigation on 10 October 2002.
1511. Anthonipillai Reginold, a man from Sammanthurai, Amparai district, was reportedly taken into custody by the Amparai CSU of police on 18 September 2000. A police constable reportedly inserted a ball point pen into his ear, forced a mixture of chili powder and salt into his mouth and made him chew it. The detainee was also reportedly forced to drink sewage water from a nearby drain. He was allegedly beaten with a handle of an axe and burnt with ignited cigarettes. He was reportedly handcuffed and beaten with a guava pole on his back and all over his body and trampled on. A fundamental rights case has reportedly been filed in the Supreme Court.
1512. The Government responded that the SIU had initiated an investigation on 10 October 2002.
1513. Maruthiah Yogaraja, a man from Narayanan Veethi, Periya Neelavanai, Kalmunai, Amparai district, was reportedly taken into custody by the Periya Neelavanai police on 14 September 2000. Police officers reportedly handed him over to the Kalmunai police station, without giving any reason for his arrest, and the next day transferred him to the Amparai CSU. It was alleged that boiling water was poured into his mouth, that he was forced to eat cow dung, and was beaten with a bamboo stick and wire and forced to eat the vomit of another detainee. Several months after, he was reportedly seen with marks of injuries on his body. Anthonipillai Reginold was reportedly held in the same cell as Maruthiah Yogaraja.
1514. The Government responded that the SIU had initiated an investigation on 10 October 2002.
1515. Murugesapillai Santhanarasa was reportedly deported from Norway on 14 April 2000. From 9 to 13 August 2000, he was allegedly detained in Negombo police station, where it was reported that he was handcuffed and that his head was covered with a plastic bag. He was reportedly hit with a pole while being questioned about his connections with the LTTE, during the time he stayed in Norway. He was reportedly released on 21 August 2000 after he was produced before the Negombo magistrate.
1516. The Government responded that following the attempts of the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) to trace the whereabouts of the alleged victim, the investigation initiated on 9 October 2002 was continuing.
1517. Jayakanthan was reportedly among seven Tamil young men taken into custody on 9 and 10 August 2000 by the Kirilapone police in Colombo after a search operation in the Grand Pass area. He was allegedly beaten while his head had been covered with a plastic bag filled with chili pepper. He was reportedly released from the detention after two weeks. As a result of the ill- treatment, he allegedly sustained an injury to his leg.
1518. The Government responded that an investigation had been conducted in November 2002. In a statement of the alleged victim recorded on 13 November 2002, the latter withdrew his complaint.
1519. Selvarajah Thamilchelvan, a man from Pattarakalli Koviladi, Thavadi South, Kokuvil, Jaffna district, was reportedly arrested on 22 June 2000 by officers of the TID while he was staying at his brother’s house in Wattala, Colombo, in order to travel abroad. It was alleged that while being held in detention at the TID office, the officers hit his ears with both hands on either side, after which his left ear started bleeding. They allegedly grabbed him by the back of his head and slammed his face onto the tabletop. They also reportedly took a paperweight and hit him on his head with it, causing injuries. The TID officers reportedly tied his legs, hung him upside down and beat him with wicket poles and wires. They reportedly covered his head with a bag soaked in petrol. Finally, it was reported that the TID officers also squeezed his penis with a pair of pliers and burnt him with cigarette butts on his hands. In May 2001, he was reportedly seen with marks of injuries sustained as a result, including on his back. It was reported that there were also marks of injuries still visible on his chest, forehead, thighs, buttocks, both upper arms and wrists. The marks of injuries caused by burning cigarette butts were also still visible on both his hands. He was said to have filed a fundamental rights petition in the Supreme Court in May 2001.A JMO who allegedly examined him on 20 March 2001 reportedly observed several scares.
1520. The Government responded that the SIU had initiated an investigation on 10 October 2002.
1521. Subramaniam Kannan, a man from Vavuniya, was reportedly taken into custody, on 20 June 2000, and was held during 42 days in the 211 Brigade Army camp in Vavuniya. He was reported to have been handed over to the army on 26 June 2000. It was alleged that during his detention he was beaten with batons and subjected to electric shocks, before he was allegedly over to the CSU of the police. At the CSU, his head was reportedly covered with a plastic bag that had been filled with petrol. It was believed that he was repeatedly beaten and that barbed wire was inserted into his rectum.
1522. The Government responded that the CID had initiated an investigation on 3 June 2002, upon advice of the Attorney General. A statement of the victim was recorded on 1 August 2002. A medical examination conducted on 24 August 2002 confirmed that the alleged victim had been assaulted. The Government also informed that investigations were continuing.
1523. Thushan Silva, and his brother Ranga Silva as well as one of their friends, Nimal Silva Gunaratne , a person allegedly suspected of murder, from Panadura, Ratnapura district, were reportedly taken to Panadurai police station custody on 22 May 2000, and kept in custody for one week. It was believed that the son of the Inspector General of Police and his fellow officers from the Panadura police station severely beat them and that Nimal Silva Gunaratne lost the sight in one eye as a result. A fundamental rights application was reportedly filed in the Supreme Court by the latter.
1524. The Government responded that an investigation initiated on 11 October 2002 was still continuing. The statements of the alleged victims were recorded and a report of a JMO was needed.
1525. Nagaraja Vamanaeswaran, a student from Muttur, was reportedly taken into custody in the Trincomalee Police Headquarters and Uppuveli police station, and admitted twice to Trincomalee base hospital for medical treatment for the injuries inflicted on him.
1526. The Government responded that the SIU had initiated an investigation on 10 October 2002.
1527. A man known as "old father" was allegedly arrested by STF of Thirukovil, on 3 May 2000. It was alleged that his buttocks were severely beaten with a dried bull's penis and he was also beaten with a pole all over his body. He was then reportedly handed over to the Amparai CSU, where the policemen removed his shirt and banian (men's underwear), and tied his hands with it, pushed him down and then beat him with a pole on his soles as a result of which he had difficulties in walking and lost his sight.
1528. Sivaguru Ravaneethan, a Tamil from Sinnakulam Vavuniya was reportedly taken into custody by a person dressed in army uniform and two others dressed in civilian clothes and sent to the JOSSOP army camp on 26 April 2000. It was alleged that the soldiers removed his clothes, tied his hands and feet and beaten him for several hours with their boots, pipes and an iron rod. It was reported that he was released the following day after being forced to sign a letter that he had not been taken into custody or assaulted by the army.
1529. The Government responded that the SIU had initiated an investigation on 10 October 2002.
1530. Mohamed Farik Sanoos, a man living in Colombo, was reportedly taken into custody on 26 April 2000 by officers of the CID. He was reportedly beaten, handcuffed, forced to sit on the floor and dragged along by his tie in front of his family and neighbours before being taken to the 4th Floor of Police Headquarters. A fundamental rights petition filed was pending in the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka.
1531. The Government responded that an investigation initiated on 11 October 2002 revealed that the alleged victim left the country.
1532. Ratnam Mahendram, a man from Saraswathy, Matha Vaithiyakulam, Vavuniya was reportedly taken into custody by army personnel of Kadiyiruppu Junction Army camp on 23 April 2000. He was allegedly forced to remove his clothes, blindfolded and his hands and legs were tied. Following this, he was allegedly beaten for about half an hour with pipes while being asked about his connections with LTTE. It was believed that he was released on 24 April 2000. 1533. The Government responded that the SIU had initiated an investigation on 10 October 2002.
1534. Kathiravelu Jagathas, a man from Thonikal Vavuniya, was reportedly taken into custody for one week in Sanasa Army camp, on 14 April 2000. He was allegedly assaulted for three hours with a wicket stump and hung on a beam. It was believed that he was not given any form of medical treatment for his injuries. He was reportedly released two weeks after his arrest and threatened by the army personnel not to tell anyone about the ill-treatment.
1535. The Government responded that the SIU had initiated an investigation on 10 October 2002.
1536. Navaratnam Sureshkaran, a man from Koddady, was reportedly taken into custody and ill- treated for seven days in Achchelu Army camp on allegations of connections with LTTE on 1 March 2000. He was reportedly undressed down to his shorts, and his legs were tied to the bench with a rope. His hands were allegedly folded under the bench and handcuffed, and a big club was pressed on his chest by two soldiers on both sides. After removing handcuffs, pins were reportedly inserted under his finger nails. Soldiers were said to have scratched his nipples with their finger nails. It is alleged that he was subjected to similar treatment for seven consecutive days.
1537. The Government responded that the SIU had initiated an investigation on 10 October 2002.
1538. Balachandralal Piratheepan, a man from Thirunelvely, Jaffna district, was reportedly taken into custody at the Urelu army Camp on 25 February 2000. It was reported that he had been beaten repeatedly for four days while being interrogated about his alleged connection with the LTTE. Two of his toe nails were allegedly pulled out with tweezers and his hair was reportedly pulled out. 1539. The Government responded that the SIU had initiated an investigation on 10 October 2002.
1540. Sinnathurai Vijayaruban, a man from Urumpirai East, was reportedly taken into custody by the soldiers of the Urelu Army camp repeatedly from 22 to 25 February 2000. He was allegedly beaten with a bat-shaped reaper plank and kicked with boots. His hair was said to have been pulled out with tweezers, and the soldiers reportedly pinched his nipples while beating him with s- lon pipes (a pipe used for plumbing made of hard plastic). It was also believed that he had been beaten with a bunch of keys tied to a long string. It was further reported that he was made to bend over and soldiers tied a polythene shopping bag over his face and tied it tightly around his neck, bringing him close to suffocation. During the day, he was reportedly kept blindfolded and his left hand handcuffed.
1541. The Government responded that the SIU had initiated an investigation on 10 October 2002.
1542. Selvarasa Nandakumar, a man from Kokuvil, Jaffna district, was reportedly taken into custody when he went to report at Urelu army camp on 2 March 2000 as requested by five soldiers who had come to his home earlier that day. He was allegedly put in a dark room for three consecutive days, beaten with bars and hammers. The soldiers allegedly inserted a ball point pen between his fingers, after keeping all fingers tight and rolled it. It was alleged that he had been released on 6 March 2000.
1543. The Government responded that the SIU had initiated an investigation on 10 October 2002.
1544. Markandu Srivasakam, a man from Valveddithurai in Jaffna, was reportedly taken into custody at Kotahena police station, Colombo, after his deportation from the Netherlands at the beginning of February 2000. He was reportedly arrested by some men dressed in civilian clothes, supposedly CID officers. He was allegedly beaten with batons and riffle butts for four days with a view to making him admit that he had relations with the LTTE. He was reportedly released after four days in custody.
1545. The Government responded that the SIU had initiated an investigation on 10 October 2002.
1546. Rasaiah Baleswaran, a man from Point Pedro, was reportedly taken into custody by Kandy police and allegedly beaten on 29 January 2000. According to the information received, he was beaten with PVC pipes and broomsticks. As a result, three of his teeth were reportedly broken, and he also suffered serious injuries to his face, elbow and knees. After being held in custody for 17 days, he was reportedly released on 5 February 2000 without having been produced in court. Following the release, he was believed to have received medical treatment at Kandy General Hospital.
1547. The Government responded that the SIU had initiated an investigation on 10 October 2002. SIU made several attempts to trace the whereabouts of the alleged victim in order to record his statement. The Government also indicated that the outcomes of its efforts will be provided to the Special Rapporteur. 1548. Periyathamby Kuhananthan, from Thavalai Iyattalai, Varani, Jaffna district, was taken into custody by army personnel on 22 January 2000, and subsequently sent to the Chuddipuram army camp. It was reported that soldiers pulled his ears and beard with their hands and with pliers. During the night, a trunk of a palm tree was allegedly put on his legs and the soldiers stood on it. At the same time one of the soldiers reportedly throttled his neck. 1549. The Government responded that the SIU had initiated an investigation on 10 October 2002.
1550. Stephens Pius Romulus was reportedly taken into custody by CID officers, on 20 January 2000. He was said to have been held there for four days. He was allegedly beaten with a bat and given electric shocks with a view to making him admit that he had relations with the LTTE. It was reported that he was later admitted to the General Hospital in Colombo.
1551. The Government responded that an investigation initiated on 11 October 2002 revealed that the alleged victim left the country. The Government further indicated that the investigation is continuing.
1552. Kadiravel Kamalarasan, from Grandpas area, was reportedly taken into custody at the Grandpass police station on 6 January 2000. He was reportedly suspended upside down, a shopping bag filled with chili powder was put over his head and rubbed into his sexual organs. It was said that he was made to lie on a table and water was poured into his nostrils so that he almost suffocated. They reportedly put his hands on a table, put a nail on one of his fingers, and hit the nail. He was also allegedly beaten on the soles of his feet with a rod. The Committee to Inquire into Undue Arrest and Harassment (CIUAH) was said to have investigated the case. He was reportedly presented to a JMO who allegedly found that his injuries were consistent with his allegations.
1553. The Government responded that an investigation initiated on 11 October 2002 was still continuing and that the Police were looking for the whereabouts of the alleged victim.
1554. B. Manivannan and his brother Babu were allegedly taken into custody at Trincomalee prison in January 2000. It was reported that he had been beaten and left unconscious, naked and bleeding. It was reported that he had urinated over his whole body. Babu was also allegedly severely beaten by the police in Trinco prison.
1555. Balasubramaniam Subaharan was reportedly arrested on 3 December 1999 at a security checkpoint by members of the Tamil Eelam Liberation Organization (TELO), an armed Tamil group said to be working alongs ide security personnel. He was reportedly taken to the TELO camp near the army camp in Vavunathivu, Batticaloa district, and handed over the following day to the Counter Subversive Unit of the police in Batticaloa town. At the time of arrest, he was working for the Department of Youth Service and he was also the organizer of the People's Alliance party in the area. He was alleged that during his detention at the TELO camp he had been beaten with a wooden pole and a chain, immersed in water and held upside down with both his legs tied together. The detainee also claimed that the neck of a bottle was inserted into his anus and that he was subjected to electric shocks. As a result of the ill-treatment, he reportedly suffered from chest pain, had difficulty passing urine, painful bowel movements and impaired vision and hearing. In July 2000, he was awarded 100,000 Rupees as compensation by the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka who found his allegations of torture to be a violation of his fundamental rights. Members of TELO had reportedly been arrested in connection with his ill- treatment. It was however not known if any charges had been brought against them or what action, if any, had been taken against the army personnel alongside whom the TELO members were deployed.
1556. The Government responded that the CID had initiated an investigation on 14 February 2001. The report of the CID investigation was sent to the Department of the General Attorney on 28 May 2002.
1557. Rajaratnam Thevaratnam, a man from Pandiruppu, Kalmunai, Amparai district, was reportedly arrested by STF personnel on 11 October 1999 in Kalmunai. According to a fundamental rights petition allegedly filed by him before the Supreme Court on 31 October 2000, he was assaulted with poles and sticks and was hung up by his hands and a shopping bag soaked in petrol was put over his face. It was reported that upon being transferred to the STF Camp in nearby Karaithivu later that day, he had been assaulted in a similar way with wicket poles. The STF personnel reportedly applied chilli to his genitals and administered electric shocks. He also alleged that, after being transferred into the custody of the Counter-Subversive Unit of the police in Amparai town on 13 October 1999, he was severely assaulted with S- lon pipes. He was reportedly later transferred into the custody of the TID in Colombo, where he was allegedly whipped with wire and slapped on both ears. He was reportedly suffering from hearing difficulties and has marks of torture on his hands, legs and several places on his back.
1558. The Government responded that the SIU had initiated an investigation on 10 October 2002. SIU made several attempts to trace the whereabouts of the alleged victim in order to record his statement. The Government indicated that the outcomes of its efforts will be provided to the Special Rapporteur.
1559. Ratnam Sivakumar, a student from Karanthan South, Jaffna district, was reportedly taken into custody ill-treated at the Urelu Army camp. He was reportedly severely beaten on the buttocks, leading to bleeding from his anus. After the ICRC delegation left the prison the next day, he was reportedly beaten again with a club and on his soles. Two days later, he was allegedly taken to the Anti Terrorist Unit Detention Centre at Kankesanthurai.
1560. The Government responded that the SIU had initiated an investigation on 10 October 2002.
1561. Four young fishermen from Duwa, Negombo were reportedly taken into custody on 27 April 2001 and severely assaulted while being taken to the Negombo police station. Police reportedly claimed that they were being arrested on suspicion of causing damage to a water supply pipeline. The police themselves reportedly took the assaulted fishermen to the hospital. Medical reports were obtained. One of the fishermen was said to have suffered an injury on his arm.
1562. The Government responded that an investigation had been conducted in October and November 2002. The statements of the four complainants were recorded. Minor injuries were reported. The Government further indicated that disciplinary actions will be taken by the Police Department.
1563. Kumaravel Perinbanathan, a resident of Pesalai, Mannar district, was reportedly arrested on 25 June 2001 from his home by police and navy personnel. He was reportedly placed in their jeep and taken to the Pesalai Police Post, where he was allegedly assaulted, before being taken to another police post in Unit 5, Pesalai. There, his hands were reportedly tied and he was allegedly hung from a beam, and assaulted with an s-lon pipe and a wooden wicket. He was reportedly later brought back to the Pesalai Welfare Centre, he was allegedly beaten again in the presence of several witnesses.
1564. The Government responded that the SIU had initiated an investigation on 10 October 2002.
1565. Periyakarupan Tharshaman, a man from Palamunai, Mannar district, was reportedly taken into custody at the Unit 5 Police Post on 23 June 2001, after he had allegedly been abducted by LTTE members. It was reported that in the police station his hands were tied together and a bag filled with petrol and chilli powder was put over his head covering his entire face. Chilli powder was reportedly thrown into his mouth and applied to his gunshot wound. He was similarly ill-treated on 24 June 2001, before being taken to Mannar Police Station and to Mannar Hospital.
1566. The Government responded that the SIU had initiated an investigation on 10 October 2002.
1567. Kanthappan Sarojini, a woman from Kurumanveli, Kaluwanchikudy, was reportedly taken into custody on 10 January 2000 by the personnel attached to the CSU of the Amparai Police. Her uncle and another person, who were at her home on a visit, were said to have also been arrested and taken to Amparai CSU. On 20 February 2000 she was allegedly taken to Damana police station. On 20 July 2000, she was reportedly produced before Magistrate in Amparai, who had ordered her remand, and then sent to Badulla Prison. While in detention at Amparai CSU, she was said to have had been hung upside down, whipped with a wire, kicked with boots, and beaten with sticks and pipes. She was treated at the Amparai Government Hospital. The magistrate in Amparai reportedly ordered the JMO in Badulla on 12 September 2000 to examine her and submit the medical report to the court.
1568. The Government responded that the CID had initiated an investigation on 7 February 2002 was continuing. A medical examination conducted by a JMO on 17 December 2000 confirmed that the alleged victim had been assaulted. The statement of the alleged victim was recorded on 19 November 2002.
1569. Girissa (Gresha) De Silva was reportedly taken to the police barrack at Ahangama on 22 March 2002, where his clothes were removed by force and his hands tied behind the back. He was reportedly suspended from the beams, and beaten with wooden poles and S-Lon pipes by the officer in charge, two sergeant inspectors, and one sergeant and others in civilian clothing. He was furthermore reportedly suspended by his fingers, and denied water. As a result, he was allegedly unable to use his hands which felt numb. He was reportedly released and hospitalized from 23 March to 11 April 2002. He was said to have lost the use of both hands. He reportedly lodged a complaint with the police station at Galle. A representative from the Deputy Inspector General was said to have recorded a statement from him while he was in hospital.
1570. The Government responded that the SIU had concluded an investigation on 22 October 2002 and forwarded its findings to the Department of the Attorney General. The investigation revealed that on 23 March 2002 a JMO confirmed that Girissa de Silva had been subjected to ill-treatment.
1571. Waragodamudalige Gerald Mervin Perera was said to have been on a life support system in hospital as a result the treatment he was allegedly subjected to at the Wattala Police Station on 3 June 2002 in the presence of his wife. He was reportedly brutally assaulted by the officers attached to this police station. It was alleged that his hands were tied behind his back, that he was blindfolded, hung on a beam and brutally beaten for about one hour. He was said to have been released on the 4 June 2002 and subsequently taken to Yakkala Wickramarachchi Ayurvedic Hospital and later transferred to Navaloka Hospital in Colombo. While in the hospital, he reportedly made a statement to an officer from Grandpass Police Station, Colombo, about the treatment in detention. His state of health worsened by 15 June 2002, and doctors were said to have advised his family that his situation was critical and life-threatening. Fears were expressed that the life support system may be removed due to excessive costs. None of the perpetrators had reportedly been arrested.
1572. The Government responded that a medico- legal report issued on 18 June 2002 indicated that he had been assaulted. An investigation initiated by the CID on 2 July 2002 was still continuing. On 7 October 2002, the statement of three suspects was recorded.
1573. Nimal Silva Gunaratne was reportedly detained for 101 days from 19 June 2000 in an illegal detention centre, where he was reportedly ill- treated leading to the loss of the use of one eye. He reportedly filed a fundamental rights petition but his family was said to have been put under pressure to withdraw the case. Although the injuries were allegedly very severe, the Attorney-General did reportedly not file case for torture against the alleged perpetrators. 1574. The Government responded that the investigation initiated by the CID on 2 July 2002 was still continuing. A medical examination conducted by a JMO on 10 November 2000 confirmed that he had been assaulted. The statement of the alleged victim was recorded on 22 July 2002.
1575. Kodithuwakkuarrachige A. Samarasinghe was allegedly severely beaten and had liqueur poured through his nose ill-treated during his detention at Badurueliya Police Station, Kalutara District, from 11 to 14 November 2001. As a result of this treatment, he was said to have suffered from a mental illness and to have been taken to the mental hospital in Mulleriyawa, where he was not admitted, and to the General Hospital Kalutara (Nagoda), where he was hospitalized until 22 November 2001. On 3 December 2001, he was allegedly produced before a JMO in Colombo, who reportedly referred him back to hospital. Complaints had reportedly been filed at the National Human Rights Commission. No steps had reportedly been taken by the Attorney General’s Department to file criminal charges against the suspected perpetrators.
1576. The Government responded an investigation initiated on 9 October 2002 was still continuing. The statement of the alleged victim was recorded on 22 October 2002 and a JMO was requested to send a report on 13 November 2002.
1577. Hewage Ranjini Rupika, a three-month-pregnant woman from Girikola, Agalawatte, was reportedly hit with wooden poles and kicked in the stomach illtreated by the officer in charge of the Matugama Police and subsequently taken to the police station on 11 September 2001. It was reported that although she began to bleed she was denied medical assistance. She was reportedly released on 15 September 2001. As a result of the alleged ill-treatment and bleeding, she reportedly lost the baby.
1578. The Government responded an investigation initiated on 14 October 2002 was still continuing. The statement of the alleged victim was recorded on 2 October 2002 and a JMO was requested to send a report on 13 November 2002. Statements of the accused officers were to be recorded.
1579. H. Fonseka, from Modara, Moratuwa, was reportedly arrested by Panadura police officers on 4 June 2002, and thrown twice into the Panadura River by a police officer. Some people reportedly intervened and saved him. He was said to have been unconscious when he was saved. A medical report dated 6 June 2002 from Panadura Base Hospital allegedly reported several injuries due to drowning. A complaint had reportedly been made regarding attempted murder but no action had so far been taken. The case was reportedly brought before the National Human Rights Commission.
1580. The Government responded that an investigation had been initiated on 11 October 2002. The statement of the alleged victim was recorded on 30 October 2002. The latter said that the case was settled and that he had voluntarily withdrew the complaint on 8 February 2002.
1581. Lance Corporal Kavinda, a disabled Navy officer, was reportedly arrested and beaten with a club and taken to Padukka Police Station on 29 October 2001. In the police station, he was allegedly slapped on both ears, kicked in the lower abdomen and verbally abused. It was reported that as had felt sick, he had been taken to Padukka Hospital. He reportedly sustained injuries to both ears, left hip and lower abdomen, which were reflected in a medical report. The Attorney General did reportedly not take any action to file charges under the Act no.22 of 1994.
1582. The Government responded that an investigation had been initiated on 25 October 2002. In his statement, the alleged victim said that the case had been settled on 23 October 2002 at the National Human Rights Commission. Accused persons agreed to pay Rs. 45,000 as compensation.
1583. A. M. E. De Silva of Egoda, Ekala, was reportedly slapped twice by a police constable at Je-ela Police Station on the 9 January 2001. Further, one officer reportedly put his hand between his legs and grabbed his neck and several other officers beat and kicked him. He was forcefully undressed, and beaten on the soles with the belts. The police is said to have insulted navy personnel in the process. On 10 January 2001, a legal officer and a medical officer reportedly came to the police station and examined him. A complaint was lodged at Je-ela police station and at the ASP’s office at Peliagoda. He was allegedly hospitalized at Negombo General Hospital until 18 January 2001. As a result of the ill- treatment, he reportedly had pains in his chest and abdomen and was unable to urinate. On 16 January 2001, he was reportedly taken to the Magistrate’s Court, who released him on bail. Complaints had reportedly been lodged at the National Human Rights Commission.
1584. The Government responded that an investigation initiated on 8 October 2002 was still continuing. On 30 October 2002, statements of the victim and witnesses were recorded. At the time the Government responded to the Special Rapporteur, a report of the Prison Hospital doctor was awaited.
1585. Namal Fernando was reportedly arrested Pitipana Duwa, Negombo, on 6 October 2001 by several police officers from the Mundalama police station. A man in civilian clothes reportedly punched him in the face and a police officer reportedly beat and kicked him. He was also reported to have been pinned to the ground while a police officer pointed a gun at him. Later, another police officer allegedly hit his chest and knees with a gun butt. Due to the severe pain, Namal Fernando was said to have involuntarily defecated. He was taken to hospital at Mundalama on 7 October 2001. On the same day he was reportedly produced before the Magistrate and remanded. He was said to have been released the next day without charge. It was believed that he had been arrested on mistaken identity. He allegedly entered Ragama Hospital for treatment.
1586. The Government responded that an investigation was conducted in November 2002. The statement of the alleged victim was recorded on 14 November 2002. Minor injuries were reported. Two accused individuals were due to appear before the Special Investigations Unit on 19 November 2002. A Home Guard involved in the case has been suspended of his functions and disciplinary action will be taken against an accused officer.
1587. Ajith Nawaratne Bandara was allegedly taken into custody and assaulted by the Keselwatte Police personnel on 2 May 2001. He was subsequently taken to the Panadura Hospital District Medical Officer’s (DMO) official residence by the police sergeant and his assistant but was allegedly not examined by the doctor. Upon having been released on 4 May 2001, he was reportedly hospitalized for five days. It was reported that although complaints were made to the officer in charge of Panadura police and the Human Rights Commission, no action was said to have taken place.
1588. The Government responded that an investigation initiated by the CID on 21 August 2001 was still continuing. A medical examination conducted by a JMO on 7 August 2001 confirmed that he had been subjected to ill-treatment. The statement of the alleged victim was recorded on 7 November 2001.
1589. Vijitha Dissanayake was allegedly arrested by Mathugama Police around 21 March 2001. He was allegedly beaten, burnt with cigarettes and had a finger cut off by officers of the Mathugama police station, in particular the officer in charge. Upon his release, he was allegedly admitted to the Mathugama hospital and subsequently transferred to the teaching hospital in Nagoda, Kalutara, where he reportedly stayed six days. No legal action was said to have been taken against the OIC.
1590. The Government responded that the CID had initiated an investigation on 5 August 2002. On 11 September 2002 the CID held an identification parade during which three suspects were identified. On 8 October 2002, the attorney General advised the CID to file indictment s and to take disciplinary action against them.
1591. A.M. Maithreepala was reportedly arrested on 29 December 2000 by a sub-inspector of Rajagiriya Police, where he was allegedly taken and severely beaten, despite the fact that he had recently undergone an operation. He was said to have been later produced before the courts and remanded. He reportedly died as a result of the beatings on 19 January 2001. No complaint had reportedly been made for fear of reprisals from the police.
1592. The Government responded that the investigation was continuing. So far, statements of neighbors and relatives had been recorded.
1593. Bandula Rajapakse, R.P. Sampath Rasika Kumara, Mr. Ranaweera and Chaminda Dissanayake were reportedly ill-treated on 19 and 20 February 2002 in the police station of Ja-ela. The policemen are said to have beaten Bandula Rajapakse, R.P. Sampath Rasika Kumara, and Mr. Ranaweera, on the back using rubber hoses and PVC pipes. R.P. Sampath Rasika Kumara was reportedly beaten on the knees and fingers as well. Chaminda Dissanayake was allegedly kicked by a policeman. Bandula Rajapakse was denied water. The four men were allegedly taken to a District Medical Officer and produced before a magistrate, who reportedly ordered their release on bail and that they were examined by a JMO. The Deputy Inspector General of Police was said not to have conducted a criminal investigation.
1594. Angaline Roshana was reportedly forcibly taken to Narahenpita police station where she was allegedly assaulted and forced to sign a confession on 3 December 2000. She was also believed to have been threatened with being suspended and beaten.
1595. The Government responded that the CID had initiated an investigation on 20 March 2002. The statement of the victim was recorded on the same day. On 25 March 2002, a medical examination conducted by a JMO confirmed that she had been assaulted. The CID investigation revealed that she had been arbitrarily detained and tortured by officers attached to the Narahenpita police station. On 4 June 2002 the Attorney General advised the CID to arrest and produce the alleged perpetrators before the Court and to forward the reports on the case in order to take disciplinary actions.
1596. Eric Antunia Kramer was allegedly beaten and subjected to other forms of ill-treatment by police from Mutuwal police station on 28 and 29 May 2002 to determine whether he had been involved in this attempted burglary. He was allegedly beaten all over the body and the soles of his feet with a leather belt and wooden poles, slapped and kicked. It was also alleged that an officer but a leather belt around his neck, tightened it and threatened him to kill him. As a result of this treatment, he was said not to be able to walk properly and to have received treatment in a hospital. A complaint was lodged with the authorities.
1597. The Government responded that an investigation initiated by the SIU on 14 October 2002 was continuing.
1598. T. K. Hiran Rasika, aged 10, and E. A. Kasun Madusanka, aged 12, were reportedly arrested on 9 July 2002 by two police officers from Hiniduma police station who allegedly hung them on beams by their legs and beat them. They reportedly also pulled their hair with pliers and inserted pins under their fingernails. The boys were released on 10 July and reportedly had to be hospitalised for their injuries. The two officers had reportedly not been charged but only transferred to another police station.
1599. By letter dated 7 November 2002, the Government informed the Special Rapporteur that a police investigation had been initiated in the context of which the statements of several persons involved in the incident, including the alleged victims, were recorded. A medical report issued by the JMO of Karapitiya Hospital, Galle, indicated that Hirran Rasika did not sustain injuries and that Kasun Madusanka sustained a non grievous abrasion caused by a blunt weapon. An inspector of police was transferred to Colombo on disciplinary grounds and charged with neglect of duties, discreditable conduct and being an accessory to breach of discipline. A police constable was transferred to Akmeemana police station and charged with discreditable conduct, oppressive conduct, neglect of duties, and falsehood or prevarication. A second police constable was sent a warning letter and a senior superintendent of police (SSP) was instructed to take disciplinary action against the police officers involved in the incident. 1600. By letter dated 16 September 2002 sent jointly with the Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences, the Special Rapporteur advised the Government that he had received information on the following cases. By letter dated 16 December 2002, the Government responded to a number of them.
1601. Thambipillai Thanalakshmi was allegedly raped in her house at Meesalai by soldiers from the Sri Lankan army on 7 July 2001. Her mother was reportedly hit when she tried to rescue her. A complaint was reportedly filed with police in Kodikamam. It was alleged that two soldiers had been arrested by the military police on 12 July 2001.
1602. The Government responded that two suspects for her rape were produced at an identification parade conducted by the Jaffna Magistrate on 25 July 2001. However, the alleged victim could not identify them. At the time the Government responded to the Special Rapporteurs, the two men were in fiscal custody. Reports on the investigations had been sent to the Attorney General.
1603. Mahendiran Nageswari was reportedly sexually abused by personnel attached to the STF camp at Kaluthawalai in April 2001. She was later admitted to the Batticaloa teaching hospital. The matter was alleged to have been reported to the Kaluwanchikudy police station for inquiries.
1604. The Government responded that the case was proceeding. So far, the accused, a man belonging to the Special Task Force, has been charged by the Batticaloa Magistrate Court
1605. Vijayaratnam Subashini and Thangiah Vijayalalitha, aged 14, were reportedly sexually assaulted by more than ten Navy personnel, on 20 April 2001. It was alleged that Vijayaratnam Subashini had been blindfolded and her hands had been tied behind her back and that the soldiers had touched and squeezed her breasts and her genital area for about two hours. They both were later said to have been taken into custody in Vavuniya army camp.
1606. The Government responded that the District Secretaries of Mullathivu and Vanni had been requested to check their presence in the addresses they gave upon their release on 13 June 2002 in order to record their statement and initiate an investigation into the allegations of torture.
1607. Sivamany Archunan and Wijikala Nanthakumar were reportedly arrested by members of the navy accompanied by members of the Special Investigation Unit (SIU) of the police in Mannar on 19 March 2001. They were allegedly beaten and raped by navy and SIU personnel at the office of the Counter-Subversive Unit (CSU) of the police along Palimunai Road. The two women were also believed to have been hung on a crossbar which was placed between two tables. The initial medical examination by the JMO Mannar allegedly did not confirm rape as both victims had refused to be examined reportedly as a result of threats from the CSU officers taking them to hospital. Later examinations by the JMO Mannar and the JMO Colombo reportedly did confirm that they had been raped. After widespread protests, an investigation by the CID from Colombo was allegedly ordered. A Mannar magistrate hearing was said to have taken place on 3 April 2001
1608. The Government responded that following a directive made by the Inspector General of Police, the CID conducted an investigation into the allegations included in the Special Rapporteurs’ communication. On 4 April 2001, the alleged victims were interviewed by CID officers at the Mannar Police Station. In their statements, the two alleged victims reported that they had been raped and subjected to other forms of torture by both Naval and Police personnel. The two alleged victims subsequently underwent a medical examination by the consultant Judicial Medical Officer of Colombo. A series for identification parades were held in Mannar Magistrate Court, in which 14 Naval and Police personnel were produced. The latter were also produced before Mannar Magistrate Court and later released on bail by Vavuniya High Court. At the time the Government responded to the Special Rapporteurs, indictments were being prepared by the Attorney General.
1609. Yogalingam Vijitha was allegedly raped while in detention in the Negombo police station, between 21 and 27 June 2000. She was believed to have been beaten with poles on her knees, back, chest and the lower abdomen, and trampled on with boots. She was reportedly forced to lie on a table and pins were inserted under the nails of her fingers and toes, and she was slapped on her ears. On another occasion all her clothing, except her underwear, was reportedly removed and her face was covered with a polythene bag filled with chilli powder and petrol. It was also alleged that chilli powder was inserted into her vagina, as a result of which she fainted. She was reportedly produced in the Colombo Chief Magistrate Court on 21 July 2000, who allegedly ordered that she be examined by a JMO. The latter reportedly confirmed that she sustained scars, that she was suffering from post traumatic stress disorder and depression. A fundamental rights petition was reportedly filed in March 2001 and continues to be heard. She was said to have been released on 26 April 2001.
1610. The Government informed the Special Rapporteurs that the Supreme Court, who heard the Fundamental Rights application filed by the alleged victim, gave a judgment in her favor and granted her a compensation of Rs. 250,000. The Court also directed the Attorney General to pursue the possibility of criminal prosecution against those responsible for. Police has made several attempts to trace her whereabouts until it was found out that she had gone abroad. The Government expressed that it would welcome any further information that would held in locating her.
1611. A mother of two children was reportedly raped by a STF commando at Cheddipaalayam in Batticaloa district, on 5 February 2001. According to the reports, the woman was collecting firewood when she was raped by a member of the STF. It is alleged that he had also threatened to kill her, if she complained to anyone. She was reportedly admitted to Batticaloa Hospital. The suspect who is said to be attached to Cheddipaalayam STF camp, whose name is known to the Special Rapporteur, was reportedly arrested by the police and produced before the Batticaloa District Judge.
1612. Velmurugu Thanalauxmi, Velmurugu Thangeswaray and another woman, Thamotharam Yokampikai were reportedly raped by Sri Lanka Army (SLA) soldiers attached to the Kumburumoolai army camp, who were on duty at a checkpoint in Vembu on 10 August 2000. It was also alleged that the men in the ir houses were assaulted by the soldiers. One of the victims allegedly complained to the officer in charge of Kumburumoolai army camp.
1613. A 33-year-old mother of one child, married to a man working in Korea, was reportedly taken into custody by the officers of Negombo CID on 27 June 2000 and ill-treated for two days. She was believed to have been beaten with the rear of the chair and to have been threatened with further ill- treatment. On 30 June 2000, some drunken male police officers were said to have gone to her cell and forced her to remove all her clothes. It was reported that she had later been admitted in the Negombo hospital.
1614. Poomany Saravanai, a 70-year-old woman from Karanthan, Neervely West, Jaffna, was reportedly raped by two Sri Lanka Army service personnel on 31 May 2000, while her son was allegedly held at gunpoint and severely beat him. She was said to have made a complaint to the National Human Rights Commission and to have identified the perpetrators. It was not known whether any action had been taken by the authorities in response to her complaint.
1615. By letter dated 16 September 2002 sent jointly with the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions and the Special Rapporteur on violence against women, the Special Rapporteur advised the Government that he had received information on the following individual cases.
1616. Jeyanthi Veerasingham was reportedly raped and killed while in custody, in an army detachment at Sanasa transit camp, on 17 February 2000. The army reportedly handed over her body to the Vavuniya hospital, claiming that she had committed suicide by swallowing cyanide. The Magistrate inspected her body at the Vavuniya hospital mortuary and reportedly instructed the police to conduct further investigation. The Magistrate reportedly also instructed the JMO of Vavuniya hospital to hold a postmortem examination.
1617. S. Umadevi, a student from Nawalapitiya, Imbulpitiya Estate, was reportedly abducted, raped and murdered on 12 September 2001 at Kopiwatte, Mallanda in Nawalapitiya on her way home. Her parents were said to have filed a case with the Nawalapitiya Police. However, the woman police constable was said to have been abusive and not willing to accept their complaint. The same evening, her father was said to ha ve heard that the corpse of a young woman was had been found in the shrubs near the Malkanda bridge. He reportedly went to the spot and identified the body as that of his daughter. The police reportedly did not show any concern about this case and have so far failed to arrest any suspects, or to visit the home of the victim.
1618. By letter dated 20 September 2002 sent jointly with the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, the Special Rapporteur advised the Government that he had received information on the following individual cases.
1619. W A P Jayaratne, a corporal in the Special Forces brigade of the army, reportedly died during interrogation by the military on 21 June 2001. He had reportedly been arrested on 7 June by the SIU of the Military Police. Within hours of his death, four corporals of the SIU were said to have been taken into custody by the Mahawela police. Army headquarters were also said to have appointed a military court of inquiry into his death.
1620. Kandaiyan Udayakumaran was reportedly taken into custody by the navy personnel on 28 February 2001. On the following day, his family was reportedly informed that he had been handed over to the Mannar police. On 1 March 2001 navy personnel reportedly brought his dead body to Mannar base hospital. According to the post mortem report, the death was caused due to strangulation. Two navy personnel were allegedly arrested. At the time of writing, a magistrate's inquiry was said to be continuing.
1621. W. Sujeewa Priyadarshana reportedly died as a result of ill-treatment by police officers and personnel of Thebuwana Police on 30 January 2001 while in remand custody. He was allegedly taken into custody on 15 January 2001by two sub- inspectors of Thebuwana Police who allegedly severely beat him. He was reportedly produced before a court on 16 and 30 January 2001 and twice remanded. A complaint had reportedly been made with the Matugama A. S. P. on both 15 and 16 January 2001, but the entry was said not to have been entertained. As the report of JMO was reportedly not available during a magisterial enquiry on 31 May 2001, the verdict on his death was reportedly not given. Police were believed to be evading an enquiry.
1622. Mullakandage Lasantha Jagath Kumara, a soldier from Payagala, was allegedly taken into custody by Payagala Police on 12 June 2000 and detained for five days. He was reportedly subjected to ill-treatment during the period. He said to have been produced before Kalutara Magistrate on 17 June 2000 and remanded. As a result of severe beatings, he reportedly died at Welikada Prison on 20 June 2000. It was alleged that according to the autopsy conducted by the JMO, the death had been due to damage caused to muscles and tissues by a blunt weapon, which rendered the kidneys ineffective. An enquiry into this death was said to have been held at Colombo Magistrate's Court and later handed over to a Deputy Inspector General. Police personnel belonging to Payagala police station had allegedly been named as suspects. However, police officers who investigated the murder and presented materials before court were said to cover up for the police officers involved in the murder.
1623. Jayakodige Anura Wijesiri was reportedly found hanging inside his police cell in the Ingiriya Police Station on 12 January 2001. On 11 January, he had reportedly been visited by his brother who he allegedly told that he had been beaten by two police sergeants on the previous night and was in fear of renewed ill-treatment that night. The district medical officer was said to have reported that the cause of death was suicide. However, the magistrate reportedly ordered a second post- mortem to be done by a JMO. The latter reportedly found two hearts and four lungs inside the dead body. It was believed that the body had been reopened in the hospital mortuary in order to subvert the second post-mortem, and other body parts had been placed inside before the second post-mortem was carried out. Despite requests to investigate the case and bring the perpetrators to justice, no investigation was said to have been carried out.
1624. By letter dated 13 December 2001, the Government informed the Special Rapporteur that a Directorate of Human Rights and Humanitarian Law had been created in the Sri Lanka Army. The mandate of the new Directorate includes overseeing the implementation of human rights norms and standards in line with domestic constitutional and other legal provisions and those relating to international human rights law.
Urgent appeals
1625. On 16 May 2002, the Special Rapporteur sent an urgent appeal on behalf of Lalith Rajapakse who had reportedly been arrested on 19 April 2002. Three police officers reportedly assaulted him and took him to the Kabdana police station, accusing him of theft. When his grandfather went to see him, he reportedly found that his grandson was lying on the floor of the cell unconscious, allegedly as the result of the treatment he had been subjected to. He was reportedly taken to the Ragama Hospital in a very serious medical condition. From there he was said to have been immediately transferred to ward 55 of the Colombo Central Hospital. He reportedly
1626. remained unconscious until 7 May 2002. His condition was said to remain very critical, and his family, who are said to be poor, cannot provide him with adequate medical attention.
1627. The Government responded that the CID had initiated an investigation on 24 July 2002, upon advice of the Attorney General. The statement of the alleged victim was recorded on 22 August 2002. A statement of a JMO recorded on 11 October 2002 revealed that Lalith Rajapakse had been assaulted.
1628. On 13 September 2002, the Special Rapporteur sent a joint urgent appeal with the Special Rapporteurs on the independence of judges and lawyers and on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions and the Chairman-Rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention on behalf of Nandini Herat, who had reportedly been arrested on 8 March 2002 by the police in Wariyapola, near Kurunegala. While in custody, she was allegedly subjected to torture of a sexual nature by five police officers. It was reported that in early August the officers, who are still in their posts, were charged with the torture of Nandini Herat before the Magistrates' Court of Wariyapola. Although the magistrate allegedly issued a warning that the witnesses should not be intimidated, the police officer in charge of the station reportedly went to Kandy remand prison where Nandini Herat is currently being held, allegedly in order to ask her to withdraw the case. Her father was also allegedly threatened when he duly requested a copy of the initial complaint made to the police against his daughter. Two lawyers who had been asked to act on Nandini Herat's behalf have already withdrawn their services as a result of intimidation.
1629. By letter dated 10 October 2002, the Government responded that the Attorney General had instructed the Criminal Investigations Department (CID) to take over the investigations on the alleged torture of the above-mentioned person. The Attorney General had also directed the CID to arrange for another medical examination of the alleged victim by the JMO and the CID had been asked to submit all reports of the medical examination and the investigation in order to enable the consideration of filing indictments under the Convention aga inst torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment act. Finally, the Government stated that the CID has also been directed by the Attorney-General to conduct criminal investigations into the threat to Mr. Priyantha Gamage, Counsel of Ms. Herath and Mr. Nishantha Kumara, by Wariyapola Police.
Follow-up to previously transmitted communications
1630. By letter dated 6 December 2001, the Government responded to the urgent appeals sent jointly with the Chairman-Rapporteur of the Working Group on arbitrary detention on 23 July 2001 and with the Special Representative of the Secretary General on human rights defenders on 2 August 2001 and to the communication sent jointly with the latter on 30 August 2001 (see E/CN.4/2002/76/Add.1, paras. 1517, 1534 and 1535). The Government indicated that upon being informed that a group of Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) cadres were in the area of Uralu, search operations were conducted by a group of army personnel. In this context, in the morning of 2 July 2001, Krishnaswami Thivyan and another person traveling with him disobeyed to an order to stop. While the other one managed to escaped, Krishnaswami Thivyan was apprehended. As he was in possession of a weapon, he was detained under the Prevention of Terrorism Act. As a result of detailed interrogation, a LTTE safe house in which a considerable arsenal was hidden was discovered in Urumbirai. Krishnaswami Thivyan was handed over to the Anti- Terrorist Unit of the Sri Lanka Police in Kankasanthurai to proceed with the investigations on his alleged involvement in terrorist activities. Representatives of the International Committee of the Red Cross and the National Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka were permitted to visit him during his detention. According to the results of the investigations, Krishnaswami Thivyan had been in charge of LTTE activities within Jaffna University. He has been indicted before the High Court in Jaffna by the Attorney General who has filed three cases under the Prevention of Terrorism Act. By letter dated 16 April 2002, the Government further informed that in January 2002, in pursuance of ongoing efforts to resolve the conflict in the North East and with the view to creating a suitable environment in which fruitful negotiations could take place between the Government and LTTE, the Attorney General begun to withdraw indictments filed against persons whose indicted involvement in terrorist activity was minimal. As a result, on 22 February 2002, the indictment against Thivyan Krisnasamy for having failed to provide information regarding LTTE terrorist activity was withdrawn. Further, on 15 March 2002, the High Court of Jaffna discharged Thivyan Krisnasamy in the two other cases pending against him after witnesses failed to appear in Court. By the same letter, the Government assured that he was not subjected to torture or other form of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment while in detention.
1631. By letters dated 7 December 2001, 18 December 2001, 21 December 2001, 8 April 2002, 29 April 2002 and 29 November 2002, the Government responded to cases previously transmitted.
1632. Concerning the case of Shanmugam Manogaran (E/CN.4/2002/76/Add.1, para. 1512), the Government responded that the CID had made several attempts to find the whereabouts of the alleged victim in order to record his statement. However, since all the attempts have been unsuccessful, the CID could not pursue its investigations.
1633. Concerning the case of Michael Edwards (ibid., para. 1513), the Government responded that the Inter-ministerial Standing Committee on Human Rights had directed the CID to initiate an investigation. However, by an affidavit dated 27 November 2002, the alleged victim informed the Standing Committee on Human Rights that he did not wish to participate in the investigation and that he did not want the alleged perpetrators to be prosecuted. In these circumstances, the CID decided to terminate its investigations.
1634. Concerning the case of Nadarajah Thiruchelvan (ibid., para. 1414), the Government responded that on 25 April 2001, the CID had initiated an investigation. The latter revealed that the records of the Terrorism investigation Department (TID) indicate that this person had never been arrested by the TID. In these circumstances, further investigations into allegations of torture could not be continued. However, the Government expressed that further action could be taken if more information regarding this case is provided by the Special Rapporteur.
1635. Concerning the case of Vijitha Siriwardena (Dissanayake) (ibid. para. 1515), the Government responded that the CID had been directed by the Attorney General to conduct inquiries on the allegations of torture. The CID investigations revealed that according to the JMO of Nagoda hospital who examined the alleged victim on 22 March 2001, the burn marks and the cut injuries of the fore finger of the left hand were self- inflicted. The alleged victim was invited by the CID to undergo a second medical examination by a JMO in Colombo but he did not appear to the appointment. In these circumstances, it was not possible for the CID to pursue its investigations. On 22 July 2002, the case was forwarded to the Attorney General who was to file action against Vijitha Siriwardena for making false complaints.
1636. Concerning Uchita Thussara Kumaea (ibid., para. 1518), the Government responded that upon completion of criminal investigations, the Attorney General will be invited to consider the institution of criminal proceedings against those responsible for his torture and death.
1637. Concerning Velauthapillai Rajani (ibid., para. 1520), the Government responded that the Military Police (CCMP) had conducted inquiries into her disappearance, rape and death and identified four army personnel as responsible for these crimes. Six army personnel were subsequently arrested and handed over the Kankasanthurai Police for the conduct of criminal investigations. The case was subsequently sent to the Attorney General, who presented indictment in the High Court of Colombo against a Corporal, a Lance Corporal and two privates of the Sri Lanka Army. The Government also informed that the body of the victim was exhumed under judicial supervision in October 1996 and that a Post Mortem Examination was conducted by a qualified Forensic Pathologist.
1638. Concerning the rape and murder of Ida Hamilitta (Ida Camaleeta) (ibid., para. 1521), the Government indicated that investigations had been conducted by the CID of the Police and that a post mortem examination was conducted by a qualified JMO. Initial investigations revealed that a group of soldiers entered her house on 20 July 1999, raped and killed her. As a result, two soldiers were arrested and produced before a magistrate. They were identified during an identification parade conducted on 20 July 1999. Further investigations revealed the complicity of three other soldiers in the rape and killing. The latter subsequently surrendered to the Magistrates Court. The case was transferred to the Chief Magistrates Court of Colombo who initiated a non-summary case. On 3 July 2001, the Court discharged three of the suspects due to lack of evidence but the two main suspects remained accused. The non-summary inquiry was still continuing when the Government transmitted this information.
1639. Concerning Krishnapillai Thayayothy (ibid., para. 1522), the Government responded that Serunuwara Police investigations had been obstructed by the fact that the location of the grave in which the victim was buried was under the control of terrorist groups. The Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP) of Serunuwara interviewed the deceased’s relatives, who did not implicate security forces in the murder of the victim. The case was transferred to the Magistrate who, without being able to exhume the body of Krishnapillai Thayayothy, concluded the inquest, issued a death certificate and forwarded the information to the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). The Government responded that further investigations, including a Post Mortem Examination, were expected to proceed upon the restoration of normality in the area.
1640. Concerning Wijikala Nanthan and Simvamani Sinnathamby Weeralon (ibid., para. 1524), the Government responded that criminal investigations on the alleged rape and torture against them were conducted by the CID. In the context of these investigations, the two alleged victims were examined by the District Medical Officer of Mannar on 27 March 2001 and by the Consultant Judicial Medical Officer of Colombo. Further, a series of identifications parades permitted to identify 14 suspects belonging to the naval and police personnel of Mannar, who were subsequently arrested. Upon conclusion of criminal investigations, the case was transferred to the Attorney General.
1641. Concerning the case regaring a widowed mother of two (ibid., para. 1525), the Government indicated that a complaint was lodged on 24 June 2001 and that Maradana police launched an investigation within 48 hours after she was allegedly raped. Four suspects were reportedly remanded. The Attorney General assigned a State Counsel to advise the police in the conduct of the investigations. The Judicial medical Officer who examined the alleged victim could not confirm signs of penetration or signs of resistance. During an identification parade conducted on 6 July 2001 by the Magistrate of Maligakanda, the complainant identified two of her alleged aggressors, including a Reserve Police Constable. The latter has been dismissed from his functions. The police investigation was concluded and case was forwarded to the Attorney General, who was due to advice the Police to institute non-summary proceedings at the Magistrates Court against the suspects.
1642. Concerning the case of Lakshmi Pillai (ibid., para. 1527), the Government responded that the suspects were murdered by members of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) on 28 May and 1 August respectively, while the criminal proceedings were still pending. In this context, criminal proceedings into this case had to be terminated.
1643. Concerning the case of Sivasothy Krishnapillai (ibid., para. 1528), the Government responded that criminal investigations had been initiated and the victim had been examined by a JMO. Three persons were arrested in relation to the crime and produced before the Batticaloa Magistrate. Non summary proceedings were instituted against them and the Attorney General indicted them to stand trial before the High Court.
1644. Concerning the case of a 17-year-old Tamil schoolgirl (ibid., para. 1529), the Government responded that a soldier had been arrested and brought before the Jaffna Magistrates’ Court after inquiries had been conducted by the Chunnakkam Police. The case was later transferred to the Mallakkam Magistrates Court, where a hearing was scheduled to be held on 21 December 2001. The soldier who allegedly raped the girl was dismissed from his functions pending completion of Court proceedings.
1645. Concerning the case of Sri Balakumar Ajanthana (ibid., para. 1530), the Government responded that it was unable to provide the Special Rapporteurs with further information since inquiries from Police Stations in Jaffna Peninsula had not revealed the occurrence of such incident. The Government indicated that it is willing to further investigate into the allegations transmitted by the Special Rapporteur if the exact address of the alleged victim is communicated to it.
1646. Concerning the case of Rajeshwari Krishnarajah (ibid., para. 1531), the Government responded that inquiries conducted by the Kodikaman Police confirmed that the victim had been raped. However, the perpetrators had not yet been identified and the alleged victim had not been able certify that they belonged to the Sri Lanka Army. The case was sent to the Chavakachcheri Magistrates Court.
1647. Concerning the case of the 13-year-old girl (ibid., para. 1532), the Government responded tha t the victim had been immediately taken to a hospital for treatment. She was interviewed in connection with her rape and examined by a Judicial Medical Officer. Following criminal investigations, non-summary proceedings were instituted against the suspected for rape. The latter was brought before the High Court, who sentenced him to 25 years imprisonment and to pay compensation to the victim. In its response, the Government did not make any mention to the alleged involvement of five police officers of the Criminal Investigation Division (CID) in the rape of the minor.
1648. Concerning the case of Anthoni Pillai Wimalaraj, (E/CN.4/2001/66, para. 957), the Government responded that on 8 August 2000, the CID interviewed the alleged victim, who reported the treatment allegedly inflicted with full details but who was unable to identify the alleged perpetrators. Given his contradictory statements on the identity of his alleged aggressors, the Attorney General directed the CID to record further statements. The CID investigations revealed that on 20 September 1999 the alleged victim was examined by a JMO who indicated that it was not possible to confirm that the injuries were sustained while in custody. The Government informed the Special Rapporteur that since the perpetrators could not be identified, it was not possible to take further action.
1649. Concerning the case of Saravana Bhavan Kurrukal (ibid., para. 958), the Government responded that the CID, with the collaboration of a special team from Colombo, conducted an investigation into the allegations of rape and murder. The CID recorded statements of the Army personnel based in Boch Army Camp, of the alleged victim’s relatives and neighbors. Army Officers indicated that on the night of the crime, there was a regimental party and most officers had consumed alcohol. However, only two of them left the camp for “listening duties”. The victim’s brother, who was the only witness of the alleged abduction, stated that he was not able to identify the perpetrators because they were wearing black masks. However, he stated that their breath smelled of liquor. According to a report issued on 2 January 2000 by a Colombo JMO, Saravana Bhavan Kurrukal was raped prior to be strangled to death. A subsequent report on a government analyst indicated that there was no evidence to conclude that the blood stains found on her dress was human blood. On 17 August 2002, the Attorney General’s Department advised the CID that a criminal prosecution could not be launched and that no further inquiries into this case were needed, unless any new information regarding the alleged perpetrators is provided.
1650. Concerning the case of Ghanasingham Kulasingham (ibid., para. 959), the Government responded that a postmortem examination conducted by a JMO attached to the Jaffna General Hospital had indicated that the death was due to injury caused by assault. A Captain and a Lieutenant were subsequently arrested. At the time the Government responded to the Special Rapporteur, the case was being heard at the Magistrate Court Anuradhapura. The Government informed that once the verdict of the court will be issued, it will be provided to the Special Rapporteur.
1651. Concerning the case of Kalithas Selvam (ibid., para. 960), the Government responded that the CID had conducted an investigation into the allegations of torture and has made several unsuccessful attempts to interview the victim in order to record his statement. The Department of the Attorney General advised to take further action to trace the alleged victim in an effort to pursue investigations.
1652. Concerning Weerage Buddika Weerasinghe (E/CN.4/2000/9, para. 934), the Government responded that the Supreme Court ruled in October 1997 that he had been victim of unlawful detention but not of torture. The Government also informed that an investigation into the allegations of torture had been ordered on 27 July 2000. The Attorney General decided to refrain from instituting criminal proceedings against the alleged perpetrators on the grounds that the alleged victim kept giving contradictory statements and that the medical evidence to corroborate perpetration of torture was weak. However, the Attorney General directed the Inspector General of Police to institute disciplinary action against a Sergeant and two Sub Inspectors, who were held liable by the Supreme Court for the unlawful detention of Weerage Buddika Weerasinghe. On 7 September 2002, the CID recommended disciplinary action as well.
1653. Concerning Sinnarasa Anthonymalaz (ibid. para. 935), the Government responded that criminal investigations had been conducted in the context of which the alleged victim made a statement recorded on 18 February 2001 at Welikada Reman Prison in presence of her lawyer. She alleged that she had been tortured by the Navy and the CID personnel while in custody. However, in an affidavit sent to the High Court through her lawyer on 22 November, Sinnarasa Anthonymala requested the authorities to refrain from taking legal action against the alleged perpetrators of torture. After having checked the authenticity of the documents and since the alleged victim was not prepared to cooperate with the investigation, the Attorney General decided to terminate the proceedings.
1654. Concerning Anura Sampath (ibid. para. 936), the Government responded that the CID had initiated an investigation on 15 July 1999 and that on 10 January 1999 a post-mortem examination was conducted by a Judicial Medical Officer in Colombo. The latter determined that the cause for his death was hemorrhagic shock following multiple muscular contentious injuries caused by blunt weapons. The Government also informed that the suspects were produced before a court on 30 December 1998 but bailed out on 24 September 2001. On 14 August 2001, the General Attorney instructed the CID to institute non-summary proceedings against a Sub Inspector and a Police Constable for committing murder. The case was proceeding before the Magistrate Court, Moratuwa, and the next trial was scheduled to be held on 27 January 2003.
1655. Concerning Sathasivam Sanjeevan (ibid. para. 937), the Government responded that an investigation into the allegations submitted by the Special Rapporteur had been launched on 31 July 2000 by the CID. According to this investigation, the alleged victim was admitted to the Kalmunai General Hospital on 14 October 1998. A medical officer stated that he sustained few non-serious injuries and that Sathasivam Sanjeevan did not complain that he was tortured. On the other hand, his parents alleged that when they visit him at Kalmunai Police Station the same day, he reported that he had been tortured on the night of 13 October 1998. While he was being transferred to Ampara Police Station on 15 October 1998, the convoy was allegedly attacked by LTTE members. According to the above-said investigation, the alleged victim was injured during the attack and subsequently taken to Ampara Hospital, where he died. Upon consideration of the investigative materials, the Attorney General concluded that they did not provide a basis to institute criminal proceedings. However, in November 2002, the Attorney General and the CID recommended that disciplinary action should be taken in relation to this case.
1656. Concerning Gopalaratnam Thananjeyan (ibid. para. 938), the Government responded that the CID had launched an investigation into the allegations submitted by the Special Rapporteur. In this context, in January 2001, the alleged victim accused two Sergeants and four other police officers of torture. On 25 July 2002, the alleged victim issued another statement in which he withdrew his allegation of torture because he was unable to identify the perpetrators. Accordingly, on 16 September 2002, the Attorney General instructed the CID to terminate the investigation.
1657. Concerning Kumaru Selvaratnam (ibid. para. 939), the Government responded that the Supreme Court had directed the CID to investigate into the allegations of torture against him. After various attempts to find his whereabouts in order to interview him and record a statement as required to prosecute the alleged perpetrators, on 1 June 2002 the CID informed the Attorney General that they had been unable to record the victim’s statement. In this context, the CID was advised to temporally suspend the investigations.
1658. Concerning Suppu Udavakumar (ibid. para. 940), the Government responded that he had been examined by a JMO on 24 September 1999. The latter confirmed that he had been subjected to torture but could not precise the time of the occurrence. The Government also informed that preliminary investigations into allegations of torture were launched on 2 August 2000 by the CID, who recorded the victim’s statement on 11 August 2000. Upon completion of these investigations, the case was forwarded to the Attorney General’s Department in December 2000. It was considered that Suppu Udavakumar’s statements were inconsistent and lack of credibility. Accordingly, the Attorney General concluded that it was not possible to launch criminal prosecutions.
1659. Concerning Pichchamuththu Chandran (ibid. para. 940), the Government responded that the CID had launched an investigation into the allegations of torture on 16 January 2001, recorded statements from the victim, accused police officers and witnesses. On the basis of a medical report issued by the JMO on 10 February 2000, the investigation revealed that he sustained several injuries while in custody. The case was forwarded to the Department of the Attorney General, who was subsequently instructed to take disciplinary action against the accused police officers.
1660. Concerning Arunasalam Logeshwaran (ibid. para. 940), the Government responded that he had submitted a Fundamental Rights violation application to the Supreme Court on 4 November 1998. On 23 September 1999 he was examined by a Judicial Medical Officer, to whom he complained that he had been subjected to torture by Kandy SIU officers. His statement was recorded on 20 December 2001. The case was forwarded to the Attorney General on 12 June 2001. The latter concluded that the victim’s statements and the affidavit filed by him at the Supreme Court were contradictory. Accordingly, the Attorney General instructed the CID on 26 August 2001 not to institute criminal proceedings.
1661. Concerning Solamuththu Loganathan (ibid. para. 940), the Government responded that an investigation ordered on 16 January 2000 and conducted by the CID had revealed that police officers assaulted him at the time of the arrest on 12 June 1998. A medical report issued by a Judicial Medical Officer on 16 June 1998 as well as evidence provided by the victim’s relatives confirmed that he had been subjected to torture while in custody in Kandy and Colombo. The case had been forwarded to the Attorney General.
1662. Concerning Samimuttu Benedict (ibid. para. 940), the Government responded that the CID had launched an investigation into allegations of torture on 16 January 2001. Based on his statements and on a medical report issued on 23 September 1999 by a JMO which indicated that Samimuttu Benedict had been tortured, the CID forwarded the case to the Department of the Attorney General.
1663. Concerning T. (Siyadoris) Ranjani (ibid. para. 941), the Government responded that the Supreme Court determined in June 1998 that she had indeed been assaulted while in police custody and ordered the State to pay her Rs. 10,000 as compensation. In March 1999, the CID launched a criminal investigation into the allegations of torture. Despite several attempts to trace the whereabouts of the alleged victim in order to record her statement, the CID has not been able to interview her. The case was forwarded to the Department of the Attorney General on 12 June 2000 and further efforts to trace the victim were pursued. In June 2001 the CID was informed that she was working in Saudi Arabia and another attempt was made to trace her through the Sri Lanka Embassy in Riyadh. The Government responded that the CID needed the victim’s record to proceed with the investigations.
1664. Concerning Muthuthamby Vanitha (ibid. para. 942), the Government responded that the CID had launched an investigation into allegations of torture on 7 March 2000. The CID repeatedly attempted to trace her whereabouts in order to interview her and record her statement. In June 2001, it was reported that she left for the United Kingdom and the Government contacted with the Sri Lanka Embassy in London and the British Immigration Service Documentation Unit. As all these attempts to find her had been unsuccessful, the CID was unable to conduct further investigations.
1665. Concerning Periyathamby Subramaniam (ibid. para. 943), the Government responded that the CID had launched an investigation into allegations of torture on 27 June 2000. This investigation revealed that according to a medical report issued by the Judicial Medical Officer who examined the alleged victim on 5 April 2000, he had not been subjected to torture. The Government further informed that since there was no evidence to prove that he had been tortured, CID has not been able to pursue its investigation.
1666. Concerning the case of 35 young men and women allegedly detained at Thavady Camp and subjected to torture in January 1997 (ibid. para. 944), the Government responded that since the Special Rapporteur did not provide it with the names of the alleged victims, it has not been possible to proceed with the investigation.
1667. Concerning Kanapathipillai Sasikumar (ibid. para. 945), the Government responded that on 3 July 2000 the CID had launched an investigation into allegations of torture. The statement of the alleged victim was recorded on 24 April 2002. A Major involved in his arrest acknowledged that the minimum force had been used to arrest him as he had shown resistance. A medical report submitted by the alleged victim to the Supreme Court confirmed that he had been assaulted. However, the allegations of torture were not consistent with the contents of the medical report. Another medical report issued by a Judicial Medical Officer on 8 September 1999 also indicated that Kanapathipillai Sasikumar had been assaulted. In a statement given by the victim on 24 April 2002, the latter said that he was unable to identify the alleged perpetrators. The High Court decided to dismiss the case on 15 March 2002 on the grounds that the alleged victim had withdrawn his complaint.
1668. Concerning Bathatha Jayatunge Gamage Malsha Kumari (ibid. para. 946), the Government responded that the CID had launched an investigation on 3 July 2000. According to the investigations, she committed suicide on 14 February 1998 after a family dispute. In this context, it had not been possible to undertake further investigations since the CID could not record a statement of the victim.
1669. Concerning K.A. Sisira Kumara (ibid. para. 947), the Government responded that the CID had launched an investigation on 3 July 2000 and recorded the statement of the alleged victim and three witnesses. A medical report issued by a JMO on 19 August 2000 confirmed that she had been subjected to ill-treatment. The investigation revealed that a Fundamental Rights application had been submitted to the High Court on 7 January 1999 alleging that she had been subjected to torture by four police officers. On 30 August 2001, the Attorney General advised the CID to indict the accused officers and to take disciplinary action against them. The Government responded that these indictments were served on 19 December 2001 before the Gampaha High Court. The next session of the trial was scheduled to take pace on 11 February 2003.
1670. Concerning Pradeep Kumara Dharmaratne (ibid. para. 948), the Government responded that an investigation had been launched on 3 July 2000 and its report forwarded to the Attorney General on 6 December 2000. The CID was instructed by the Attorney General to file indictments against the accused officers and was advised to take disciplinary action against the accused officers.
1671. Concerning Velusamy Baskaran (ibid. para. 949), the Government responded that the CID had launched an investigation on 3 July 2000. On 21 January 1999, Velusamv Baskaren was examined by the District Medical Officer, who was unable to find any visible mark of torture. It revealed that on 24 May 1999, the Supreme Court ordered his release, upon which the alleged victim allegedly stated that he did not seek redress from the Government. On 2 November 2001, the Attorney General advised the CID to dismiss the case due to absence of evidence to institute criminal proceedings.
1672. Concerning Neelian Yogesan (Neelian Yogeswaran) (ibid. para. 949), the Government responded that the CID had launched an investigation on 25 July 2000. On 10 April 1999, the alleged victim was examined by a District Medical Officer, who did not corroborate allegations of torture. On 24 May 1999, a Court ordered his release, upon which the alleged victim allegedly stated that he did not seek redress from the Government. The Court recommended that a disciplinary inquiry could be instituted against the involved police officers. However, in the absence of evidence, the Attorney General was unable to institute criminal proceedings against the alleged perpetrators.
1673. Concerning Wadival Kanagaratnam (Vadivel Kanagaratnam) (ibid. para. 949), the Government responded that the CID had launched an investigation on 21 July 2000. It revealed that the victim was examined by a District Medical Officer on 21 January 1999 but that the latter was unable to find any visible mark of torture. On 6 December 2000, the CID forwarded the case to the Attorney General who was unable to institute criminal proceedings since available investigative material was not sufficient.
1674. Concerning Somasundaram Shanmugarajah (ibid. para. 949), the Government responded that the CID had launched an investigation on 12 July 2000. It revealed that a Fundamental Rights application was submitted to the High Court alleging that he was tortured by police officers of Nuwara Eliya police station. On 25 January 1999, he was examined by the District Medical Officer who could not confirm the allegations of torture. On 24 May 1999, a Court ordered his release, upon which the alleged victim allegedly stated that he did not seek redress from the Government. In this context, the Attorney General was unable to institute criminal proceedings.
1675. Concerning Michaelpillai Rober Wellington (ibid. para. 950), the Government confirmed the allegations submitted by the Special Rapporteur. It further indicated that a Lieutenant had been arrested in this connection and that non-summary proceedings were before the Point Pedro Magistrate courts.
1676. Concerning Vythilingam Thiruchelvam (ibid. para. 951), the Government responded that an investigation had been launched on 20 November 2000. The CID made several unsuccessful attempts to trace the whereabouts of the alleged victim in order to record his statement regarding the allegations of torture. 1677. Concerning Kandasamy Kalanidi (Kanthasamy Kalanithy) (ibid. para. 952), the Government responded that the CID, including a special team sent from Colombo, had conducted an investigation into the alleged incident on 20 November 2000. The investigation did not reveal any evidence of rape and medical evidence indicated that the victim died as a result of consuming insecticide. Investigations concluded that the alleged victim committed suicide. The only evidence which linked the victim’s death with the officers of the Murusuvil Army camp is that she previously visited the camp. Upon reception of the case on 30 January 2001, the Attorney General concluded that prosecution was not possible due to lack of sufficient evidences. The Government indicated that it was willing to resume investigations if new evidence of torture and murder was provided.
1678. Concerning Vallipuram Suganthi (ibid. para. 953), the Government responded that the CID had launched an investigation on 8 March 2000 and attempted several times to trace the alleged victim in order to record her statement. Upon having been informed that she left for Switzerland, the CID contacted with the Sri Lanka Permanent Mission in Geneva and with the Swiss Federal Judicial Police. It was indicated that the alleged victim had left Switzerland in November 2001. In these circumstances, it was not possible for the CID to conduct further investigations.
1679. Concerning Thambirajah Kamalathasan (ibid. para. 954), the Government responded that the CID had initiated an investigation on 24 November 2000. Several attempts had been made to trace the whereabouts of the alleged victim in order to record her statement. So far, the CID had only been able to record the statement of the victim’s mother on 10 December 2000. The latter indicated that her son had left for Germany in 1999. It is believed that he came back to Colombo since then but the CID has not been able to find. In these circumstances, it was not possible for the CID to conduct further investigations. The Attorney General advised to suspend the investigations.
1680. Concerning Kanapathypillai Navaratnam (ibid. para. 956), the Government responded that the CID had initiated an investigation on 27 November 2000 and attempted to trace the whereabouts of the alleged victim in order to record her statement on the allegations of torture. Once the alleged victim was found in Jaffna, she did not give her statement. The Government indicated that in the absence of the latter, it was not possible to consider the investigation of either criminal proceedings or disciplinary inquiries.
1681. Concerning Mahalingam Mahenthiren (Mahendran) (ibid. para. 957), the Government responded that many attempts had been made, including through the ICRC, to trace his whereabouts in order to record his statement on the allegations of torture. He was eventually found and expected to meet the special investigation team at the office of the District Secretary of Vavuniya on 29 September 2001. However, he did not come to the appointment. The Attorney General instructed to terminate the investigation since the alleged victim did not cooperate with the investigation.
1682. Concerning Veeraputhiran-Thevy (Veeraputhiran Devi) (ibid. para. 958), the Government responded that the CID had been ordered to initiate an investigation on 24 November 2000. However, all CID’s efforts to trace her, including through the Ministry of Foreign Affa irs, in order to interview her, failed. The Government indicated that under the advice of the Attorney General, both the CID and the police will pursue their efforts to find her with a view to prosecute the alleged perpetrators.
1683. Concerning S. Selvarani (ibid. para. 960), the Government responded that the CID with the assistance of the military had conducted investigations into the case. On 16 February 2001, the CID recorded the statements of the victim and her mother and the clothes worn by the alleged victim at the time of the incident were sent to an official analyst for examination. The CID’s investigation revealed that on 18 March 1998 the assistant judicial medical officer examined the alleged victim and confirmed that there had been involuntary penetration of the vagina. The Government informed the Special Rapporteur that some army personnel who had been at the army check-point on the day of the incident were produced before Jaffna magistrate in an identification parade. However, the victim failed to identify any of those produced as her aggressors. The CID was continuing its investigations.
1684. Concerning Ehamparam Damayanthi (ibid. para. 961), the Government responded that on 30 December 1999 the CID had recorded her statement, in which she said that the Army did not subject her to torture and that she had undergone training in an LTTE Women’s Unit. The CID’s investigations also revealed that she had been examined by a JMO on 30 July 1997. However, as the examination took place five months after the alleged incident, the officer was unable to certify that she had been tortured during her detention. On 5 September 2002, the Attorney General concluded that since the allegation of torture had not been proved and the victim herself refuted the allegation in he r statement, there was no evidence to institute criminal proceedings against the alleged perpetrators. On the advice of the Attorney General, the Cid was expected to send extracts of the investigation notes to the relevant sections of the Army and Police, requesting disciplinary inquiries.
1685. Concerning Selvarathnam Raveensagar (selvaratnem Ravinsagar) (ibid. para. 962), the Government responded that the case had been forwarded to the Inter-Ministerial Working Group on Human Rights (IMWG) on 24 November 2000, who directed the CID to conduct an investigation. The investigation lasted two years and was carried out under the supervision of the IMWG. The CID recorded statements of the victim and of the police officers allegedly involved in the torture. In his statement, the alleged victim said that he could not identify any of the police officers who allegedly tortured him and that he was not interested in pursuing the investigation any further. In these circumstances, the Attorney General ruled that the institutio n of criminal prosecution was not feasible. However, the Government expressed its willingness to take further necessary action if new evidence was provided.
1686. Concerning the case of Kandasamy Sri Ram (ibid. para. 963), the Government responded that on 24 November 2000, the CID had been ordered to initiate an investigation. However, when the CID attempted to interview him through the Consul for Sri Lanka in Hong Kong, where he left for, Kanadasamy Sri Ram stated that he did not wish to pursue the matter further. The CID investigation also revealed that when the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka invited him to file a formal complaint against the officials who allegedly torture him, he replied that he was not interested in initiating any procedure. In these circumstances, the attorney General, instructed the CID to terminate the investigations. However, the Government expressed its willingness to take further action on this case with the assistance of the Special Rapporteur in view to institute criminal proceedings against the alleged torturers.
1687. Concerning Selvaraiah Thenuka (ibid. para. 964), the Government responded that the CID had unsuccessfully attempted to find out the whereabouts of the girl in order to record her statement. The CID was later notified by an affidavit dated 10 December 2001 transmitted by the father of the alleged victim that the incident included in the Special Rapporteur’s communication did not occur and that he did not want the matter to be further investigated. The father further stated that he did not want his daughter to undergo a medical examination, as requests by the CID. In these circumstances, the Attorney General advised the CID not to take further action.
1688. Concerning Srilal Priyantha (ibid. para. 965), the Government responded that the alleged victim had not made any formal complaint regarding the alleged torture and assault against the police officers. Since the version of the alleged victim lacked of credibility, the Attorney General instructed the Criminal Investigations Department to terminate its inquiries in relation to the case.
1689. Concerning Pasupathipillai Yogendran (ibid. para. 966), the Government responded that the CID had initiated an investigation on 20 November 2000. On 29 November 2000 a statement of the victim was recorded by the CID in order to ascertain the identity of the alleged perpetrators. However, the alleged victim had not been able to identify or describe them. In these circumstances, the Attorney General advised the CID not to take any further action regarding the case. The Government expressed that it would welcome any further information from the Special Rapporteur that would assist in its efforts to bring the alleged perpetrators to justice.
1690. Concerning Luis Rama (ibid. para. 968), the Government responded that a statement made by the alleged victim had been recorded on 19 March 2001 at Welikada Prison. In her statement, Luis Rama said that she had been assaulted and tortured by the Navy and the CID personnel while in custody. However, in affidavit sent on 27 November 2001 through her lawyer, the alleged victim requested the authorities to refrain from taking legal action against the alleged perpetrators. In this context, the Attorney General decided to terminate the proceedings after the authenticity of the documents submitted was checked.
1691. Concerning Sivalingam Kajenthiran (Gajaindran) (ibid. para. 969), the Government responded that the CID launched an investigation on 18 December 2000.
1692. Concerning Rasanayakam Uthayakumar (ibid. para. 970), the Government responded that according to a report dated 4 January 2001 issued by the JMO who conducted the post- mortem examination, there was no evidence that suggested that the death was due to a cause other than suicide by hanging. It was also reported that there was no evidence of previous injuries on the body. In absence of any other evidence, the Attorney General concluded on 24 February 2001 that the institution of criminal proceedings was not possible.
1693. Concerning Sivam Ashokumar (ibid. para. 971), the Government responded that the CID had initiated an investigation under the direction of the IMWG. This investigation revealed that the victim had been member of the PLOTE organization and had been assaulted and tortured by other members of the same organization during a dispute over misappropriation of the organization’s finance. A medical report issued by the District Medical Officer corroborates that the alleged Sivam Ashok Kumar had been tortured. The CID investigation did not reveal any acquiescence by any official of the state either in the execution of the relevant act or in preventing the prosecution of the perpetrators. Two individuals were arrested by CID on suspicion of being involved in the incident. The latter had been granted bail pending the completion of a non-summary inquiry in the Vavuniya Magistrate Court. A hearing was scheduled to take place on 12 December 2002.
1694. Concerning Arumugam Pakkiri (ibid. para. 972), the Government responded that inquiries conducted by Vavuniya Defence Coordinating Unit had indicated that this person had not been arrested. The Government also informed the Special Rapporteur that so far any attempt to locate the alleged victim had been unsuccessful. The Government expressed its willingness to continue in its efforts to trace his whereabouts in order to record his statement.
Observations
1695. The Special Rapporteur acknowledges the continuing disposition of the Government to provide him with detailed information on individual cases brought to its attention in the past. He takes note with interest of the creation of a Directorate of Human Rights and Humanitarian Law within the Sri Lankan Army and would appreciate further information on its activities.
1696. The Special Rapporteur notes with concern that no response has been
provided to a number of cases brought to the attention of the Government since
1998. The Special Rapporteur considers it appropriate to draw attention to the
views expressed by the Committee against Torture after consideration of the
situation in the country under the procedure provided for by Article 20 of the
Convention against Torture, a summary of which may be found in report A/57/44,
paras 123-195.
Back to Contents
Spain
Sudan
This report has been published by Equipo Nizkor and Derechos Human Rights on August 2, 2005.