Font size: 
At 10 a.m., on a busy street, two persons riding a motorbike shot Nishanta Fernando, who was driving a vehicle, twice with a rifle and fled without difficulty. The deceased’s wife told the court in no uncertain terms that she suspects a number of police officers. This story does not surprise Sri Lankans; such crimes can happen to anyone, at any time, in any part of Sri Lanka, despite widespread police checkpoints.
At the time, Nishanta Fernando was the complainant of a bribery case proceeding before the Colombo High Court against a police inspector and had repeatedly appealed for protection against death threats. A translation of the affidavit attached to all the appeals reads as follows:
“I, Siyaguna Kosgodage Anton Sugath Nishanta Fernando […] make oath and declare as follows:I am the declarant in this case. On 06/23/2008 at around 11 a.m., my wife Surangee and I were traveling in my three-wheeler […] going to Negombo hospital to get treatment for her asthma. While passing the Chilaw, Colombo Road at Dalupata Bridge, a lorry […] appeared. There we saw Niroshan and Namal, who are known to us, and two other persons who are not known to us. Since Niroshan and Namal extended their hands and signaled for us to stop, we stopped the three-wheeler. The drive of the three-wheeler was Ajith. Niroshan and Namal put their heads into the vehicle and told us, threateningly, “If you fellows do not withdraw the petition for human rights you have filed against the Negombo police by tomorrow, we will kill all of you. We have the permission of the Negombo police to kill you.” Frightened by this threat, we turned back and returned home. Shortly after arriving, we heard a loud banging on the door of our gate and two people outside shouted, “Open the gate! If you do not withdraw the petition, we will kill you all by tomorrow evening. The police have given us permission. Open it!” Fearful to fear, we did not open the gate and when we looked outside, we saw Niroshan, Namal and the two others that we saw before. Those hitting our gate and shouting were Niroshan and Namal. After a time, the group drove off in a vehicle. I have learned that Niroshan has fled from the armed forces. It is very clear that these threats are being made to force us withdraw the fundamental rights petition we filed against several Negombo police officers regarding human rights violations. On the same day, we went to the crimes office of the Deputy Inspector General of Police and made a complaint […]. Due to these threats, we are frightened to remain in our house and respectfully request protection and an environment where we can continue to live our lives. This affidavit was signed by Nishanta Fernando before Justice of the Peace Rev. Gnanarathane on June 24.”
The authorities he appealed to were: the president of Sri Lanka; the chief justice of the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka; the Ministry of Disaster Management and Human Rights and the secretary to this same ministry; the inspector general of police; the deputy IGP at Peliyagoda; the National Police Commission; the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka and the Magistrate's Court of Negombo.
This tragedy could have been avoided if any of these Sri Lankan authorities had lifted a finger; none did. Naturally, one might ask why. The real answer may not be convincing to anyone unaware of Sri Lanka’s internal reality: namely, that the protection of the individual is no longer a priority to Sri Lanka’s state institutions.
Looking at the masses of people displaced due to the armed conflict, if we could record the individual stories of a few hundred, what a change it could make. However, the media is prevented from getting the true stories of these people. The scant information that does surface reveals tragedy.
This morning, Sept. 25, a Sri Lankan aid worker, who left the north due to government evacuation orders, told the BBC Sinhala Service of frightened mothers trying to calm even more frightened children after a bombing raid. Perhaps that imagery best conveys the reality of the people, who must constantly be on the move, squatting under trees and unable to find a way out.
Individuals and their families do not matter in Sri Lanka. A romanticized view of the war is presented as an epic story with the promise of ultimate salvation. Individuals’ suffering does not fit into this story; under these circumstances, the lives of individuals are treated as mere trivialities.
The state media devotes all its efforts to brainwash the population with this romanticized view of war through endless propaganda. Anyone who raises concern for the individual is denigrated as a traitor. The alternative media is not allowed to tell the story of ordinary people; those who do so face harassment, threats and death.
The trivialization of the individual is illustrated by the story of Nishanta Fernando from Negombo, a place safe from the war and in an area supposedly more secure under the control of the Sri Lankan state. Given this tragedy, how much concern for the individual could there be in the actual conflict areas?
A state that ignores the individual and propagates a romanticized view of war can only bring the people more suffering. Instead of salvation, what the country is facing is inaction by the state and the trivialization of the individual and the family.
The case of Nishanta Fernando needs to be considered seriously by everyone inside and outside Sri Lanka who still believes that respect for the individual and the family is the only foundation upon which the legitimacy and stability of an organized society can rest.
--
(Basil Fernando is director of the Asian Human Rights Commission based in Hong Kong. He is a Sri Lankan lawyer who has also been a senior U.N. human rights officer in Cambodia. He has published several books and written extensively on human rights issues in Asia.)
