Font size:

The widely publicized case of wrongful abduction and imprisonment of the two brothers, Rathnachandra and Udayachandra Liyanage, took place in July, 1989. Rathnachandra “disappeared,” while his brother managed to escape and later gave evidence against the police officers.

In the late 1980s a large number of such disappearances were taking place – estimated officially at 30,000. Peiris and many other senior police officers were accused of causing widespread disappearances, but strangely, these cases were not successfully prosecuted.

The prosecution of this particular case has taken 20 years. It is one of only a handful of cases, out of the huge number of disappearances, that has been prosecuted. Many failed, mostly due to witness intimidation or the natural death of witnesses in the long course of court delays.

The investigations themselves began many years after the actual incidents occurred due to political pressure to protect the perpetrators. It was only after government changes and under popular pressure that action was taken – although still wholly inadequate to deal with all the cases.

The government appointed various commissions of inquiry into forced disappearances, often several years after the incidents took place. The mandate of these commissions was mostly only fact finding. However, many people turned to these commissions and provided extensive information on how disappearances occurred. The witnesses gave detailed information on the perpetrators involved in abductions, detentions, interrogations, torture, killings and the disposal of bodies.

At the conclusion of their inquiries the commissions submitted a list of persons against whom there was sufficient evidence to prosecute, and where necessary, to conduct further investigation in keeping with Sri Lanka’s legal procedures.

The list of these persons was submitted to the government and the Attorney General’s Department. However, in most cases no prosecutions or further inquiries were conducted. The lists revealed that many persons involved in carrying out the disappearances held high political positions, including in the police and military services. Some are still in those positions.

Governments that have come to power subsequent to the submission of these reports by the commissions of inquiry have kept these reports secret. Thus the credentials of these politicians and officers to hold these positions have never been challenged.

In Sri Lanka, “disappearance” means one is killed after being arrested. Police or military personnel have taken many young persons from their homes and promised their families that they would be safely returned after their statements were recorded. However, they were never returned. In many instances, within a short period their dead bodies were found on the streets.

Of course it is a crime, both under Sri Lankan and international law, to arrest and then kill a person. This is different from killing in combat between rebels and armed forces. Even in that instance, if someone surrenders or is taken into custody after being wounded, the captors have an obligation to protect the person’s life and, if necessary, bring him to justice. However, in Sri Lanka the killing of arrested persons has taken place on a large scale.

The case prosecuted before the Gampaha High Court involved two young brothers, one of whom was 16 years of age. The Commission of Inquiry into Forced Disappearances revealed that 15 percent of the cases reported to the commission involved persons 19 years of age or younger. Thus, out of the 30,000 disappearances from the late 1980s, over 4,500 were teenagers.

Since that time a criminal tradition has become entrenched within Sri Lanka; whenever it wishes, the government abandons the judicial process and engages in extrajudicial killings.

The disappearances in the late 1980s were the result of a deliberate government policy. This policy itself has never come before a public inquiry. The Commission of Inquiry into Forced Disappearances provided countless details of the disappearances of the time. These details reveal a well-designed policy carried out by the government, police, military and paramilitary groups, with full knowledge of the heads of the armed forces.

The names of many senior officers, such as Peiris, became notorious in discussions relating to these disappearances, but almost all of them escaped inquiry and prosecution. The adverse impact of that has been to undermine the respect for rule of law within the law enforcement agencies themselves.

--

(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.)