26 June 1998 is the International Day against Torture
- so declared by the General Assembly of the United Nations. On 17 June
1998, Amnesty International issued its annual report, covering events in Sri
Lanka during 1997.
Amnesty said:
"Torture and ill-treatment in army and
police custody were widespread...Methods included near-suffocation with
plastic bags filled with petrol; beatings with wire and plastic pipes;
electric shocks; and suspension by the thumbs or ankles... No
prosecutions were initiated under the Convention against Torture and
other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment Act.."
However,
Sri Lanka's torture of Tamil prisoners in custody is not something new. A
quick tour of the
record will prove
that during the past twenty years and more, torture has been carried
out in a systematic, deliberate and sustained manner by the Sri Lanka
authorities. And, notwithstanding earnest appeals by organisations
such as Amnesty, 'business has gone on, very much as usual'.
The systematic and planned use of torture by
Sri Lanka during these several years cannot be explained away as the
misdemeanours of a few 'bad eggs' in the Sri Lanka security forces. Timothy
J. Moore from the International Commission of Jurists was right
when he
concluded in 1983 that in Sri Lanka, it was 'the
almost universal practice
of the military authorities to physically assault and mistreat
those persons who have been in their custody'. And, over the
ensuing years, it is clear that practice has led to perfection.
The
proven record
shows that thousands of Tamil prisoners have been tortured with
burning cigarettes;
by insertion of chilli powder in the nostrils, mouth and eyes
and on the genitals; with red ants being applied to sensitive
parts of their bodies; by being suspended upside down by the toes whilst
their heads were placed in a bag with suffocating fumes of burning chillies;
with prolonged beatings especially on the soles of the feet
while lying stretched out on a bench or while hanging by the knees from a
pole; by having pins driven
under fingernails and toenails and in the heels; by
being deprived of food and sleep; by
beatings on the genitals and other parts of the body with
sticks, batons and sand-filled plastic pipes; by electric shocks; by the
insertion of iron rods in the anus; and by mock or threatened executions.
The Amnesty File on
Torture in Sri Lanka in 1985 remains essential reading even today,
because the methods of torture identified therein, continue to be used
today, more than a decade later.
Amnesty reported in 1992:
"Torture of detainees was common... . Victims bodies
were left in public places often in a mutilated state. ..Detainees in
the north-east were systematically tortured. Victims were beaten,
stabbed, burned and scalded, partially buried or had nails driven
through the soles of their feet. Dozens of people reportedly died as a
result...."
Torture continued unabated in
1996 and
1997.
"Seevaratnam Rajanimala from Kilinochchi was arrested in Colombo on
28 November 1996 and for two days assaulted with a plastic pipe filled
with concrete.Two of her four children are detained with her at the
Welikada women prison. Her other two children are held at a Salvation
Army hostel in Borella and her husband is detained at the Kalutara
prison. She has so far not been informed of the reasons for her
arrest... Jaffna student R Pragalathan says in a fundamental rights
application that after his arrest at Bambalapitiya suburb on 7 January
1997 pins were inserted under his nails and when he refused to sign a
confession was brutally assaulted... Another detainee Davis Aloysius
arrested in Trincomalee on 17 March 1997 says he was hung by his legs
and beaten with batons. His head was covered with a plastic bag dipped
in petrol..."(British Refugee Council Publication, Sri Lanka
Monitor, June, July 1997)
Sri Lanka's 'culture of torture' has deep roots. The
resort to torture by the Sri Lanka security forces is a logical extension of
the methods used by Sinhala political leaders (and their goon squads) to
stifle Tamil resistance from the Satyagraha days of non violent resistance
in 1956,
1958 and
1961.
In 1956, when Tamil Parliamentarians protested against the
enactment of the Sinhala Only law, they were set upon in the
precincts of Parliament House, under the very nose of the Sinhala Prime
Minister of the country, and
their ears bitten and beaten up
mercilessly.
"Thereafter on that day, 6 June, every Tamil man was set upon and
robbed. He was beaten up. His fountain pen and wristlet were snatched
away. He was thrashed mercilessly, humiliated and sent home. ..
rowdies and hooligans were given a free hand to assault, humiliate and
rob any innocent Tamil walking the roads on that day. That was the
attitude taken up by a Cabinet composed of Sinhalese Ministers...
These (hooligans) were instigated by some members of Parliament... they
were heading the gang of hooligans. The Prime Minister made a remarkably
wonderful speech on that occasion. He came, he smiled and he told the
crowd, "Don't do that. Rain is coming down. They will be cooled in no
time." That was the type of appeal he made. If Sinhalese men were being
thrashed by Tamils and their ears bitten, I wonder whether the Prime
Minister would have adopted the same attitude." - Senator S.Nadesan
Q.C., Sri Lanka Senate Hansard 4 June 1958
That the Sinhala police have taken their cue from the
declared attitude of their own Prime Minister, should not come as a
matter for surprise. It would have been surprising if they had not. Again,
in 1961, the Sri Lanka army, sent to Jaffna on the orders of then Prime
Minister, Mrs.Srimavo Bandaranaike,
proceeded to beat up non violent
satyagrahis and thereafter vent their wrath on the Tamil civilians of the
Jaffna peninsula:
" Why have the military on their own imposed a curfew even in
villages in respect a curfew had not been declared? ...Why have the
military been beating and thrashing innocent passers by on the streets
of Jaffna? Why have some of them been helping themselves to goods and
articles in shops and asking the owners to send the bills to the Federal
Party leader? .. Why have they set fire to fences and madams and put the
blame on the people? Are these acts of organised terrorism
and lawlessness the result of any orders given to the army to strike
terror into the inhabitants of Jaffna so that they might give up their
agitation for their language rights? Today there is greater
lawlessness in the Northern and Eastern Provinces and particularly in
the Jaffna Peninsula than there has ever been at any time in its recent
history - lawlessness by the guardians of the law..." - Senator.S.
Nadesan Q.C., Sri Lanka Senate Hansard, 2 May 1961
The Sri Lanka security forces were not engaged in a frolic
of their own. The harsh truth is that the Sri Lanka security forces
have at all times acted in accordance with the perceived wishes of the
Sinhala dominated Sri Lanka government.
Indeed, in 1981, Sinhala
Members of Parliament (belonging to the ruling party) were
unafraid to give open expression to their views on torture:
"Since yesterday morning, we have heard in this honourable House
about the various types of punishment that should be meted out to them
(Tamil Parliamentary leaders). The MP for Panadura (Dr
Neville Fernando) said there was a punishment during the time of the
Sinhalese kings, namely, two arecanut posts are erected, the two posts
are then drawn toward each other with a rope, then tie each of the feet
of the offender to each post and then cut the rope which result in the
tearing apart the body. These people also should be punished in the same
way.....some members suggested that they should be put to death on the
stake...; still other members said that they should be stood at the
Galle Face Green and shot. The people of this country want and the
government is prepared to inflict these punishments on these people."
- Mr. G.V.Punchinilame, Sinhala M.P. for Ratnapura in Sri Lanka's
Parliament, July 1981.
"Now, Sir... what should we do to this so called leader of the
Tamils? If I were given the power, I would tie him to the nearest
concrete post in this building and horsewhip him till I raise him to his
wits. Thereafter let anybody do anything he likes - throw him into the
Beira (lake) or into the sea, because he will be so mutilated
that I do not think there will be life in him. That is war."
-
Mr.D.M. Chandrapala, Sinhala M.P. for Kundasale in Sri Lanka's
Parliament, July 1981
To the ruling Sinhala party, torture was war.
And 14 years later,
mutilated bodies of Tamils were found floating not in the Beira lake,
but in an another lake near Colombo, the Bolgoda lake. Initially, the
international outcry forced the Government of Sri Lanka to initiate
prosecutions against its own elite Special Task Force. But
eventually, the court case was allowed to collapse.
The British Refugee Council,
Sri Lanka Monitor reported in March 1997:
"The case relating to the 1995 murder in custody of 21 Tamils, whose
(mutilated) bodies were found in
Bolgoda
and other lakes around Colombo, was struck off the court roll
by Colombo Chief Magistrate Munidasa Nanayakkara on 13 March 1997 as
neither the accused nor the Attorney General’s representative were
present. The 22 Special Task Force (STF) members arrested in
connection with the killings in September 1995 and released on bail
three months later had allegedly returned to active duty. ...
Human rights agencies say the manifest reluctance on the part of the
state’s law enforcement authorities in such an important case encourages
impunity."
The 'manifest reluctance' of the Sri Lanka Attorney General was clearly
not unrelated to the wishes of the Sri Lanka government and the views of the
Sinhala dominated legislature. The comments of Patricia Hyndman in her
Report to Lawasia Human Rights Committee in 1985, retain their validity 12
years later:
"Detainees often have been held in army camps, incommunicado, without
access to lawyers and relatives, and in some cases have been tortured
and even killed whilst in custody...(In one case) it was found, at a
post mortem examination, that the detainee had suffered twenty five
external and ten internal injuries which had been inflicted on him by
force. ...Government explanations that it is impossible to find
reliable evidence to identify those responsible for such killings cannot
be accepted in the absence of a clear indication of a serious public and
impartial attempt to investigate such events."
- Patricia Hyndman - Democracy in Peril, Report to Lawasia Human
Rights Committee, June 1985
On 24 May 1998,
Amnesty International urged
Sri Lanka to use the opportunity afforded by the UN General Assembly
declaration of 26 June as the International Day against Torture, to
officially recognise the suffering of the thousands of victims of torture in
Sri Lanka, by issuing a clear condemnation, and announcing measures to stop
widespread torture and ill-treatment.
Two inferences may be drawn by the refusal of
President Chandrika Kumaratunga and her government to condemn, without
equivocation and unconditionally, the criminal actions of the security
forces under their command and the refusal to diligently prosecute and
bring to justice the torturers.
One inference is that President Kumaratunga
fears that she will lose the support of her armed forces if she condemns and
brings to justice the torturers, particularly since torture has become a
'way of life' for the Sri Lanka security forces.
Another inference is that she and her government, have
themselves (implicitly or expressly) authorised the actions of the Sri Lanka
security forces and can neither condemn nor punish that which they had
sanctioned.
On either view, President Kumaratunga's refusal to
clearly condemn and diligently prosecute, exposes the complicity of
her government - and sends a message to the Sri Lanka security forces that
they may continue to torture Tamil prisoners with impunity.
It is not surprising therefore that the Sri Lanka security forces have
continued to torture with impunity whilst Amnesty International has
continued to report. It is not that Amnesty reports have not been helpful.
Information is necessary for the protection of human rights. But information
is not an end in itself. There is a need for member states of the United
Nations to act as well.
Article 5 of the
Universal Declaration of Human
Rights declares:
"No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or
degrading treatment or punishment"
Unlike some other human rights, the prohibition against torture is
absolute. It cannot be derogated from - neither an emergency nor
an armed conflict sanctions the use of torture. Torture is an
instrument of terror directed to coerce a people to the will of their
ruler. And, a state which resorts to torture on a
systematic basis is a terrorist state and should be categorised as such.
Given the 20 year proven record of torture by the Sri
Lanka authorities,
the continued attempt by the US
to paint Sri Lanka as a 'multi party working democracy' appears
more to
reflect US strategic interests
in the Indian region rather than the harsh reality faced by the Tamil people
under alien Sinhala rule.
However, a 'principle centered' approach may serve US
strategic interests more effectively than any attempt to deny freedom to the
Tamil people and to cover up the harsh brutality of Sinhala rule of the
Tamil homeland. After all, US support for the Shah of Iran
(directed, no doubt, to secure US strategic interests in the Middle
East) showed that, in the end, it was not enough to simply pay lip
service to human rights.
The Shah of Iran tortured so that he may continue his hold on power and
perpetuate his oppressive rule of the Iranian people. The Sri Lanka
authorities torture so that Sri Lanka may succeed in its efforts to conquer
the Tamil homeland and impose its alien rule on the Tamil people - a Tamil
people, who by their free vote at the
General
Elections in 1977 had given a clear mandate for the establishment of an
independent Tamil Eelam. The short point that emerges from the
20 year proven record of torture by the Sri Lanka authorities is that
Sri Lanka cannot impose its rule on the Tamil homeland without
recourse to terror. If it could, it would have.
