Font size:

In Sri Lanka, killing alleged criminals is considered a cheap method of dealing with them, rather than going through the legal process in court. It is also considered quicker and less risky for the police and military officers who carry out such operations.

In fact, the police and military – or anyone acting on their behalf, which may include underground elements – can be assured of impunity. Secret abductions and killings occur at the time a place of their choice, unlike arrests in accordance with the law.

The number of people already subjected to this mode of "justice" is in the hundreds now. But the promise is that all criminals will soon be eliminated.

BBC’s Sinhala service recently interviewed the official spokesman for the Sri Lankan police on such extrajudicial executions. The spokesman explained that police reports on such cases almost always involve self-defense. For example, they may say that an alleged criminal is taken, handcuffed, to recover a weapon or other object the person has hidden somewhere. Then, at the crucial moment when the criminal is about to show the evidence, he grabs a bomb or gun and tries to harm the accompanying officers, who then shoot him in self-defense.

The BBC correspondent asked the spokesman why police officers do not take precautions when taking criminals out on such investigations, and how people in handcuffs could harm the policemen.

The spokesman replied that such criminals are extremely efficient fellows whose abilities cannot be underestimated despite handcuffs or other restraints. The creation of this image that criminals are super humans is a necessary element in the propaganda supporting the extrajudicial elimination of alleged criminal elements.

The BBC correspondent further asked how the police can determine that suspects in alleged crimes are in fact criminals. True to his element, the police spokesman simply stated that according to the police they are criminals and not suspects.

According to Sri Lankan law, anyone under interrogation is a suspect, and not even named an accused. A person is named an accused only when charges are filed in court. However, the official spokesman for the police did not accept this distinction.

This shows that the police have taken upon themselves the power to convict. Thus, the presumption of innocence is no longer significant, nor is judging a person and imposing punishment the sole prerogative of the judiciary.

The absurd manner in which this practice of abduction instead of arrest takes place and the abuse that follows was illustrated in two incidents that came to public notice this week. An assistant coordination officer working under the Center for Management of the Ministry of Disaster Management and Human Rights was abducted from his house. After receiving frenetic calls on his behalf, the head of this ministry made several telephone calls and managed to locate this person in the custody of some police group.

The police accused this person of being a dangerous criminal and a leader of a criminal gang. According to reports, they also stated that a T-56 firearm and ammunition was found at his house. The minister himself had to make a public statement condemning the kidnapping.

Another published report tells the story of Ravindra, the son of the director of the Colombo Criminal Investigation Division, who reportedly had a quarrel with a schoolmate named Chamie. After taking a test at school on July 4, Chamie went with a friend, Nipuna, to have tea. While they were having tea, Ravindra came and tried to provoke a fight. When the boys left the teashop and started walking toward their boarding house, a police jeep followed them and blocked their path.

Four armed men got out of the jeep. They held Chamie, pressed him against the wall and put a pistol to his head. They also held a pistol to Nipuna’s head. Nipuna shouted at the men to let Chamie go and take him instead. Then the policemen took Nipuna to Ravindra’s house, where he was forced to crawl on the floor while they beat him with poles. The marks from this beating were later shown to the media, after Nipuna was rescued.

Nipuna also complained that Ravindra’s mother – the wife of the director of the CID in Colombo – stood on him and asked, "Do you know my weight now?"

Nipuna was only rescued due to the quick intervention of his relatives when they were informed by Chamie of the incident and reported the matter to the Inspector General of Police and other authorities.

Nipuna was taken to Paliyagoda Criminal Investigation Division where, according to relatives, Ravindra’s father the CID director joined the group. According to Nipuna, he was threatened with legal action on the charge of possessing bombs, and was told that the only way to avoid that was to sign a statement.

In the end the only statement the police took from him was his name, address and identity card number. The boy's life was saved due to the quick intervention from his family, who were able to get assistance from outside.

The horror story of extrajudicial killings under the pretext of crime prevention takes an even more sinister turn with the practice that has evolved in the Magistrate's Courts, where magistrates declare the death of a suspect a "justifiable homicide" purely based on the police report of an incident.

The police spokesman told the BBC that obviously no illegal killings of criminals are taking place in the country because the judges themselves have confirmed these as justifiable homicides.

When magistrates conduct inquests and other inquiries they are expected to follow legal procedures. The criminal procedure code requires an investigation into any suspicious death, particularly in cases where police conduct is suspect. Such investigations should be carried out by independent authorities that are able to resist the pressures from local police.

But the scale of extrajudicial killings points to serious defects in the Magistrate Court inquiries. As these killings are so well known, the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka should inquire into the manner in which magistrates conduct such inquiries. Given the seriousness of the situation, the Supreme Court needs to lay down guidelines stating the basic legal obligations of magistrates. It is also the Supreme Court's duty to ensure proper supervision of the manner in which the magistrates carry out their obligations.

To an outsider, such a policy of eliminating criminals through extrajudicial killings may sound fictitious. However, after over 40 years of using police and the military to conduct extrajudicial killings under the pretext of suppressing terrorism, what is law and what is fiction is no longer clear in Sri Lanka.

To reestablish the authority of the law in Sri Lanka, the central task is to deal with the arbitrary use of power by the police, which has become a menace in the country. When the guardians of the law become its violators, only the strong reaction of society can pave the way for police reforms. If the horror-creating police of Sri Lanka cannot be reformed, there is little reason to be hopeful about the country's future.

--

(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. His blog can be read at http://srilanka-lawlessness.com.)