A LEGACY TO REMEMBER SRI LANKA S COMMISSIONS OF INQUIRYhumanitariansrilanka.org/newchapdf/IHR/COI...

i

A LEGACY TO REMEMBER;SRI LANKA’S COMMISSIONS OF INQUIRY

LAW & SOCIETY TRUST

SEPTEMBER 2010

Edited by Kishali Pinto-Jayawardena

1963 - 2002A Reference Guide Commission Reports

with a Tabulated List of Recommendations

ii

© All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission of the Law & Society Trust.

ISBN : 978-955-1302-27-6

Published by :

Law & Society Trust3 Kynsey Terrace,Colombo 08,Sri Lanka.T : +94 112 691228 & 2684845F : +94 112 2686843E : [email protected] : www.lawandsocietytrust.org

September 2010

Printed by :

Karunaratne & Sons (Pvt) Ltd.67, UDA Industrial Estate,Katuwana Road,Homagama,Sri Lanka.

iii

DEDICATION

For all the named and unnamed family members of victims who have testifi ed before Sri Lanka’s various Commissions of Inquiry throughout the past decades in the hope of redress and recognition of the pain that they have suffered.....

And who still remain in hope.

v

Acknowledgements

The Civil & Political Rights Programme of the Law & Society Trust (LST) wishes to thank the team of lawyers and human rights practitioners who made this effort possible in tumultuous times. While some have preferred to remain anonymous, we place our appreciation on record to human rights lawyer Lisa Kois for her contribution to the contents of this publication and to Attorney-at-law Dinushika Dissanayake for her dedication in proof reading and meticulously updating the document.

LST acknowledges the fi nancial assistance provided by CORDAID and HIVOS and in particular, is grateful to Ms Frederique Drumpt and Ms Artien Utrecht for their constant encouragement in this regard.

vii

Table of Contents

Abbreviations .................................................................................. xi

Preface ........................................................................................... xvi

Overview ........................................................................................ 1

Part 1 REPORTS OF THE COMMISSIONS ......................................................... 5

1. Report of the Commission to inquire into and report on thedeath of Prime Minister S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike ........................... 5

2. Presidential Commission of Inquiry into the incidents which took place between 13 August and 15th September, 1977 (Sansoni Commission) .................................................................... 9

3. Presidential Commission of Inquiry into the Kokkadicholai Incident ........................................................................................... 15

4. Sri Lanka’s Commissions of Inquiry into Involuntary Removals and Disappearances: Precedents .................................................... 20

4.1 Presidential Commissions of Inquiry into Involuntary Removals of Persons: President R. Premadasa (1991, 1992, 1993) ................................................................ 20

4.2 Presidential Commission of Inquiry into Involuntary Removals: President Wijetunga (1993) ............................... 21

4.3 The Question of “Involuntary Removals”............................. 23

4.4 Reports and Recommendations ............................................. 24

5. Sri Lanka’s Commissions of Inquiry into Involuntary Removals and Disappearances: the three zonal Commissions ...... 25

5.1 Mandate ................................................................................. 25

5.2 Commission of Inquiry into the Involuntary Removal or Disappearance of Persons in the Central, North Western, North Central and Uva Provinces .......................... 34

viii

5.3 Commission of Inquiry into the Involuntary Removal or Disappearances of Persons in the Northern & Eastern Provinces ............................................................................... 39

5.4 Commission of Inquiry into the Involuntary Removal or Disappearance of Persons in the Western, Southern and Sabaragamuwa Provinces ............................... 44

6. Commission of Inquiry into the Involuntary Removal and Disappearances of Certain Persons (All Island) ............................. 52

7. Commission of Inquiry into the establishment and maintenance of Places of Unlawful Detention and Torture chambers at the Batalanda Housing Scheme .................................. 58

8. Presidential Commission of Inquiry into incidents that took place at the Bindunuwewa Rehabilitation Centre, Bandarawela on 25 October 2000 ................................................... 63

9. Presidential Truth Commission on Ethnic Violence (1981 – 1984) .................................................................................. 6810. Other mechanisms

10.1. Ministry of Defence Board of Investigation into Disappearances in the Jaffna Peninsula ................................ 73

10.2. The Committee on Disappearances in the Jaffna Region, Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka ............................. 78

Part 2 THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE DISAPPEARANCESCOMMISSIONS ........................................................................................... 82

Investigations .......................................................................................... 83

Legal proceedings ................................................................................... 90

Punitive measures................................................................................. 103

Arrest and detention ............................................................................. 106

Legal reform ......................................................................................... 117

Relief and rehabilitation ....................................................................... 121

ix

Returned detainees ............................................................................... 134

Specifi c actors/ groups ......................................................................... 135

Miscellaneous ....................................................................................... 137

Alleged disappearances not within mandate ........................................ 138

Part 3RECOMMENDATIONS OF OTHER COMMISSIONSOF INQUIRY .............................................................................................. 140

Introduction ........................................................................................... 140

Table of Recommendations of other Commissions of Inquiry ............. 141

Report of the Commission to inquire into and report on theassassination of Prime Minister S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike, 1965 ........... 141

Report on incidents which took place between 13th Augustand 15th September, 1977 (Sansoni Commission), 1980 ..................... 143

Report of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry into theKokkadicholai Incident, 1992 ............................................................... 151

Report of Unlawful Detention and Torture at the BatalandaHousing Scheme, 2000.......................................................................... 153

Report of the incidents that took place at the BindunuwewaRehabilitation Centre, 2001 ................................................................. 156

Report of the Presidential Truth Commission onEthnic Violence (1981 - 1984), 2002 .................................................... 164

Part 4COMPARATIVE EXPERIENCES & CONCLUSION ............................... 168

Table of Authorities ..................................................................................175

xi

Abbreviations

AC Appeal Cases [a United Kingdom publication of law reports]

AG Attorney General [the chief legal offi cer of the State and the Head of the Attorney General’s Department of Sri Lanka]

AHRC Asian Human Rights CommissionAI Amnesty InternationalA-L Advanced Level ExaminationALR Appellate Law Recorder [a Sri Lankan publication

of law reports] ASP Assistant Superintendent of Police [upper-rank

offi cers having wide range of powers]B-C Pact Bandaranaike-Chelvanayakam PactCA Court of AppealCAM Court of Appeal MinutesCAT Convention against Torture and Other Cruel,

Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or PunishmentCC Constitutional CouncilCCP Act Code of Criminal Procedure Act, No. 15 of 1979

(as amended) [a statute]CCPR Committee on Civil and Political RightsCLW Ceylon Law WeeklyCHRD Centre for Human Rights and DevelopmentCID Criminal Investigation Division [of the Sri Lanka

Police Department]CJC Act Criminal Justice Commission Act [a statute]CO Concluding ObservationsCOI Act Commissions of Inquiry Act [a statute]

xii

CGR Ceylon Government RailwaysCRM Civil Rights MovementCSU Counter Subversive UnitCTB Ceylon Transport BoardDDC District Development CouncilDIG Deputy Inspector General [of Police]DIU Disappearances Investigation Unit CGRDNA Deoxyribonucleic AcidDPP Director of Public ProsecutionsDSCPB Decisions of the Supreme Court on Parliamentary

BillsDSG Deputy Solicitor GeneralEMPPR Emergency (Miscellaneous Provisions and

Powers) Regulation No 1. of 2005 as contained in Gazette No 1405/14

EPRLF Eelam People’s Revolutionary Liberation FrontEROS Eelam Revolutionary Organization of StudentsFP Federal PartyFR Fundamental RightsFRD Fundamental Rights DecisionsGOSL Government of Sri LankaHC High Court [of the Provinces in Sri Lanka]HCA Habeas Corpus ApplicationHCM High Court MinutesHon. HonourableHQI Head Quarters InspectorHRCSL Human Rights Commission of Sri LankaHRTF Human Rights Task ForceIATR International Association of Tamil Research

xiii

IBA [HRI] International Bar Association [Human Rights Institute]

ICC [NHRI] International Coordinating Committee of National Human Rights Institutions [United Nations]

ICCPR International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

IGP Inspector General of PoliceIIGEP International Independent Group of Eminent

PersonsINFORM Sri Lanka Information Monitors IPKF Indian Peace Keeping ForceJOC Joint Operations CommandJSAB Judicial Services Advisory BoardJSC Judicial Service CommissionJSDB Judicial Services Disciplinary BoardJVP Janatha Vimukthi PeramunaLST Law & Society TrustLt. Col. Lieutenant Colonel of ArmyLt. General Lieutenant General of ArmyLTTE Liberation Tigers of Tamil EelamMC Magistrate CourtMIRJE Movement for Inter-Racial Justice (ditto) and

EqualityMP Member of ParliamentMPU Missing Persons UnitMSF Medecins Sans FrontieresNLR New Law Reports [a Sri Lankan publication of

law reports]NPC National Police Commission

xiv

NSSP Nava Sama Samaja PartyOIC Offi cer-in-ChargeO Level Ordinary Level ExaminationP.C. President’s CounselPCIIRP Presidential Commissions of Inquiry into the

Involuntary Removal of PersonsPLOTE People’s Liberation Organization of Tamil

EelamPSO Public Security Ordinance, No. 25 of 1947 (as

amended) [a statute]PTA Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions)

Act, No. 48 of 1979 (as amended) [a statute]QC Queen’s CounselRCT Rehabilitation and Research Centre for Torture

VictimsRI Rigorous ImprisonmentSC Supreme Court [of Sri Lanka]SCM Supreme Court Minutes SC (FR) No. Supreme Court Fundamental Rights Application

NumberSC Ref No. Supreme Court Reference NumberSC (Spl.) L.A. No. Supreme Court Special Leave Application

NumberSD No. Supreme Court Determination NumberSLFP Sri Lanka Freedom PartySLMC Sri Lanka Muslim CongressSLRC Sri Lanka Rupavahini CorporationSPCI Law Special Presidential Commissions of Inquiry

Law No. 7 of 1978 (as amended) [a statute]Sri LR Sri Lanka Law Reports [a Sri Lankan publication

xv

of law reports]SSP Senior Superintendent of Police [upper rank

offi cers having wide range of powers]TAB Trial-at-BarTELO Tamil Eelam Liberation OrganizationTUF Tamil United FrontTULF Tamil United Liberation FrontTYL Tamil Youth LeagueUN United NationsUNHRC United Nations Human Rights CommitteeUNICEF United Nations Childern’s FundUNP United National PartyUNWG United Nations Working GroupUS United StatesUTHR University Teachers for Human Rights

xvi

Preface

Sri Lanka has constituted Commissions of Inquiry during past decades as instruments to investigate and prevent human rights abuses. However, whether these Commissions of Inquiry established by successive political regimes in Sri Lanka ever visualized justice, truth and reconciliation for victims as core objectives of their work, is a pertinent question. The failure to investigate un-inquired cases, the lack of public faith in the commission proceedings, the reluctance of victims to look to the law and Commission processes for relief all point to the fact that Commissions of Inquiry in Sri Lanka have been more political exercises than genuine attempts to reconcile a traumatized nation.

To many observers and advocates of human rights in Sri Lanka, the lack of political will in terms of implementing the recommendations of Commissions of Inquiry has been a foregone conclusion. Presidential commissions of inquiry have become part of the impunity apparatus; an expedient mechanism to divert unwanted attention by providing a veneer of accountability. Despite the obvious failure of prior commissions to lead to prosecutions and to necessary legal and institutional reform, commissions have been mostly supported by civil society, (and prominent members of civil society who agree to sit on such commissions), as if commissions of inquiry represent a meaningful approach to accountability.

As a reference tool, this publication does not provide analyses of the prior commissions or their reports. Nonetheless, certain lessons and trends are revealed. An examination of the reports of commissions of inquiry from 1963 to 2002 reveals that Sri Lanka’s numerous Presidential Commissions of Inquiry into rights violations have been created to fulfi ll multiple stated and unstated objectives. The purpose of most commissions – the creation of a fact-fi nding or truth seeking body that will promote justice for a past injustice or past injustices – has rarely, if ever, been fulfi lled. The Commissions, in some cases, have facilitated the granting of compensation. They have rarely led to prosecutions and have failed to counter impunity. They have failed to deter further grave violations of human rights.

xvii

Nonetheless, commissions have served some important, albeit limited, fact-fi nding functions. In some cases, the reports do provide offi cial, publicly available, records of incidents and events that have otherwise tended to be offi cially obscured, erased and/or manipulated. The reports of the 1994 Zonal Disappearances Commissions – with lists of names of the disappeared that run into the thousands – provide one such example, albeit a complicated one. For example, some reports also provide names and addresses of those who testifi ed before the Commissions, thus creating or exacerbating security concerns for those people. No longer in print, the reports received very little publicity or circulation by the Government and were not provided to the families of the disappeared who testifi ed before the commissions.

What becomes obvious when examining the reports of the commissions as well as the reports of other mechanisms of inquiry is that the work of these bodies is overwhelmingly ad hoc in nature. Appointed with little forethought about substance and process, with scant reference to the work of prior commissions, and overwhelmingly with insuffi cient funding, facilities and independence, these mechanisms are left to determine the ways and means of fulfi lling their mandates, most of which are overbroad and egregiously time-limited. Further, the mechanisms have been driven by the personality or personalities of their members. Take, for example, the three 1994 Zonal Commissions on Disappearances, all of which had the same mandate, save the geographic focus, but all of which had vastly different procedures.

The way forward is none too clear at this juncture. The success enjoyed by some community initiated truth commissions and commissions of inquiry in other countries provides an alternative avenue for some type of reconciliatory mechanism to be set up which will in fact enable reparation and reconciliation in some form for those seeking justice in Sri Lanka. However, these processes too are fraught with diffi culty in a context where the basic securing of Rule of Law norms in constitutional and legal processes is singularly absent.

It is hoped that this publication will aid serious and deliberative thinking on these matters.

Civil & Political Rights Programme of the Law & Society Trust

1

Overview

This publication provides two kinds of information on prior commissions of inquiry. Part 1 comprises summaries of the reports of fourteen commissions of inquiry and two special mechanisms established in Sri Lanka during 1963-2002. In summarizing the reports of the commissions, we have endeavoured to use the words of prior commissions, themselves, and excerpts from commissionreports. Parts 2 and 3 provide compilations of the publicly accessible recommendations of the prior commissions. Except for small grammatical corrections and thematic reorganization of the recommendations, we have tried to reproduce, verbatim, the recommendations of the commissions.

We have attempted to present the information in this publication in such a way that it provides a map of the fi ndings and recommendations of prior commissions, and reveals some obvious truths about commission results.

This work seeks to demystify the history of prior commissions of inquiry relating to various issues of human rights in Sri Lanka by providing factual information about prior commissions, their fi ndings and their recommendations during 1963-2002. All of the information in this publication is available in the reports of the commissions1. As such, this publication is not intended to serve as a substitute to the original texts of the reports. Nor is it intended to provide an analytical critique of the fi ndings of these bodies.2 However, it does seek to fi ll a gap in available resources by serving as a reference guide to the reports and recommendations of the commissions and providing a consolidated overview of those fi ndings and recommendations.

1 The full reports of all the commissions considered in this publication are available at The Law & Society Trust, No 3 Kynsey Terrace, Colombo 8.

2 For one such recent analytical survey, see Kishali Pinto-Jayawardena, “Still Seeking Justice in Sri Lanka; Rule of Law, the Criminal Justice System and Commissions of Inquiry since 1977”, International Commission of Jurists, January 2010.

2

It comprises summaries of the fi nal reports of fourteen prior commissions of inquiry, appointed under the Commission of Inquiry Act No. 17 of 1948, as well as two special mechanisms of inquiry into disappearances.

The commissions under consideration examine an assassination of a former prime minister (Commission to Inquire into the Assassination of S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike); ethnic violence (Commission of Inquiry into Incidents which Took Place between 13th August and 15th September, 1977 and Presidential Truth Commission on Ethnic Violence [1981 – 1984]); an incident of reprisal killings (Presidential Commission of Inquiry into the Kokkadicholai Incident), the establishment of and violations at an unoffi cial place of detention (the Commission of Inquiry into Unlawful Detention and Torture at the Batalanda Housing Scheme); a massacre at a government rehabilitation centre(Commission of Inquiry into the Massacre at Bindunuwewa Rehabilitation Centre), and disappearances (Presidential Commissions of Inquiry into Involuntary Removals of Persons and the three zonal Commissions and the All-Island Commission of Inquiry into the Involuntary Removal or Disappearances of Persons). The two special mechanisms – the Board of Investigation established under the Ministry of Defence and the Committee established under the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka – also inquired into disappearances.

Sri Lanka has seen a more recent Commission of Inquiry to Investigate and Inquire into Alleged Serious Violations of Human Rights which

3 On 2 November 2006, President Mahinda Rajapakse created “The Commission of Inquiry Appointed to Investigate and Inquire into Serious Violations of Human Rights which are alleged to have arisen in Sri Lanka since 1st August 2005” (the Commission). The Commission was specifi cally mandated to investigate and inquire into sixteen alleged cases of serious human rights violations, and was created in response to growing national and international pressure on the Rajapakse government to investigate the rise, in both frequency and severity, of human rights violations during the relevant years. Although the call had been for an international inquiry, the President settled on a local commission of inquiry and an international observer body, the International Independent Group of Eminent Persons (IIGEP), who was invited to serve by the President of Sri Lanka. The functioning of the Commission and the IIGEP were fraught with controversy. See Final Statement of

3

was established by President Mahinda Rajapakse in 2006. The Report of this Commission has not been published todate.3

By providing a compilation of information about prior commissions, this publication seeks to provide important historical background and context to better understand commissions of inquiry into human rights violations in Sri Lanka.

Insofar as Sri Lanka is concerned, the public and victims of serious human rights abuses have been given little reason to repose their faith in national commissions, appointed more to placate the international community than to seek answers and promote reconciliation. The possibility of putting community based initiatives for reconciliation in place provides hope for those who aspire to heal the wounds of war ravaged victims. The opportunities for post war Sri Lanka are tremendous, if the political will and spirit of truth and reconciliation commissions were to be recognised.

We hope that this publication will be useful for this most essential healing process in bringing about a better understanding of the failures of the past.

the International Independent Group of Eminent Persons ( IIGEP), 15 April 2008, REF: IIGEP-PS-006-2006, Colombo, available at http://www.ruleofl awsrilanka.org/resources/IIGEPnbspSTM.pdf, also see, Amnesty International: “Twenty Years of Make Believe – Sri Lanka’s Presidential Commissions of Inquiry” (AI Index: ASA 37/05/2009, June 2009), for a critique of the functioning of the 2006 Commission of Inquiry.

5

PART 1REPORTS OF THE COMMISSIONS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARIES

This Part provides an introduction to the work of commissions of inquiry in Sri Lanka. Included are summaries of fourteen commissions of inquiry on various issues of human rights, and two special mechanisms on disappearances. The summaries of the commissions have been organized chronologically, beginning with the 1963 Commission to Inquire into the Death of Prime Minister S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike and ending with the 2001 Presidential Truth Commission on Ethnic Violence (1981 - 1984). Following the summaries of the commissions, are summaries of two special mechanisms on disappearances, the 1996 Ministry of Defense Board of Investigation into Disappearances and the National Human Rights Commission’s 2002 Committee on Disappearances. As revealed by the dominance, in this list, of disappearance commissions and mechanisms to probe such incidents, disappearances have been a persistent topic of inquiry by commissions on inquiry in Sri Lanka. As such, these mechanisms are of particular relevance in determining the effect and/or utility of such inquiries, particularly at a time when disappearances and political killings have become, once again, all too commonplace in Sri Lanka.

1. REPORT OF THE COMMISSION TO INQUIRE INTO THE DEATH OF PRIME MINISTER S.W.R.D. BANDARANAIKE

WARRANT NO. : G.-G. O. No. N. 101/63DATE APPT’D : 28th June 1963BY : William Gopallawa, Governor-General of Sri

Lanka

6

COMPRISING : Thusew Samuel Fernando, Judge of the Supreme Court of Ceylon

Adel Younis, Judge of the Court of Cassation, United Arab Republic

G.C. Mills-Odoi, Judge of the Court of Appeal, Ghana

Assisted By:

Mr. J.R.M. Perera, Crown Counsel (Secretary)

Mr. A.C. Alles, Solicitor General Mr. R.S. Wanasundera, Department of the

Attorney General Mr. R.I. Obeysekera, Department of the

Attorney General MANDATE : A very narrow and specifi c mandate, which

included ten questions to determine whether there was a wider political plot to assassinate S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike.

REPORT TITLE : Report to His Excellency the Governor-General by the Commission Appointed in Terms of the Commissions of Inquiry Act to Inquire into and Report on Certain Matters Connected with the Assassination of the Late Prime Minister Solomon West Ridgeway Dias Bandaranaike

DATED : March, 1965 CONTENTS : 61 page Report. Part I presents an overview

of the Commission’s mandate, procedures, historical context and fi ndings. Part II examines the responsibility, in turn, of six individuals.

7

BRIEF STATEMENT OF FACTS:

During the fi nal years of the Prime Minister’s life, there had been a growing factional struggle within his party, the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP), and “a number of infl uential persons within the government were suspected of murder and complicity in the murder.”4 It is against this backdrop that the Commission was appointed to inquire into whether there was a wider political plot to assassinate the Prime Minister.

This Commission is noteworthy as one of the few commissions appointed to inquire into a political assassination under the Commission of Inquiry Act of 1948. Two of the three commissioners were from outside of Sri Lanka.

The Commission was appointed four years after the assassination of the late Prime Minister, and long after the prosecutions of six persons on charges of murder and conspiracy had been successfully concluded. Thus the Commission’s report provides a unique perspective on balancing parallel, and possibly competing, processes – i.e., judicial proceedings and commissions of inquiry.

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS:

In answering the question as to whether any organized body of persons was directly or indirectly involved in the plot, which in the view of the Commission was “the most important and far-reaching”5 question of the Terms of Reference from which all other questions derived, the Commission answered in the negative.

Interestingly, the Commission was constituted after prosecutions had been concluded by the State and sentences passed. Commissioners

4. Rajasingham, K.T. “Sri Lanka the Untold Story”, http://www.atimes.com/ind-pak/Cl01Df05.html

5. Bandaranaike Report, p. 11.

8

were cognizant of the dilemma presented by this situation, and thus the inquiry did not encompass the persons already tried by Court, whether convicted or acquitted. “It could not have been otherwise. It was unreasonable to have expected the Commission of Inquiry to re-examine the questions which had been fi nally decided by an order of the highest judicial authority of the Country.”6 It therefore proceeded on the case “as fi nally established in the Court proceedings as a fi xed basis.”7 With regard to the individuals acquitted by Court, the Commission was of the view that “as they had both faced a long inquiry followed by a long trial in a criminal court, we [the Commission] felt that they should be permitted to enjoy the results of the verdict they were able to obtain in the Court proceedings and that they should not be vexed a second time at our inquiry.”8

The Commission envisaged serious consequences stemming from any adverse fi ndings. The Report states that, “the functions that devolve on us by our present Commission are substantially not dissimilar to those that devolve on a Court or other judicial tribunal. For that reason and also on account of the circumstance that the consequence of adverse fi ndings by us can be serious or damaging to individuals, we decided to adhere, so far as practicable, to procedure obtaining in a Court of Justice.”9

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS:

The Report does not include any specifi c recommendations apart from the recommendation that the law on contempt be amended in relation to its application to Commissions of Inquiry.10

6. Bandaranaike Report, p. 8.7. Bandaranaike Report, p. 8.8. Bandaranaike Report, p. 12.9. Bandaranaike Report, p. 10.10. “…we think it necessary, in order to enable [commissioners] to perform their functions

effi ciently and with independence and so better secure the public interest, to extend the defi nition of contempt against or in disrespect of the authority of the Commission to certain other acts or omissions….” Bandaranaike Report, p. 5.

9

2. PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSION OF INQUIRY INTOTHE INCIDENTS WHICH TOOK PLACE BETWEEN 13 AUGUST AND 15 SEPTEMBER, 1977 (SANSONI COMMISSION)

WARRANT NO. : P.O. No. N. 143/77DATE APPT’D : 9th November 1977BY : William Gopallawa, President of Sri Lanka

COMPRISING : Miliani Claude Sansoni, former Chief Justice of Sri Lanka

MANDATE : (1) To ascertain the circumstances and causes that led to, and the nature and particulars of, the incidents which took place in the Island between the 13th day of August, 1977 and the 15th day of September, 1977, and resulting in –

(a) death or injury to persons; (b) the destruction or damage of property

belonging to, or in the possession of, or any State Institution or the State;

(c) the robbery or theft of any such property: (2) Whether any person or body of persons or

any organization, or any person or persons connected with such organization-

(a) committed or conspired to commit; (b) aided or abetted in or conspired to aid or

abet in the commission of; (c) in any manner assisted, encouraged, or

were concerned in or conspired to assist or encourage the commission of, any of the acts referred to in paragraph (1); and

10

(3) To recommend such measures as may be necessary –

(a) to rehabilitate or assist in any other manner the persons affected by such acts; and

(b) to ensure the safety of the public and to prevent the recurrence of such incidents.

REPORT TITLE : Report of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry into Incidents which Took Place between 13th August and 15th September, 1977.

DATED : July 1980 CONTENTS : 311 page Report, of which 278 pages comprise

fi ndings, including historical backdrop for the incidents, and 33 pages comprise appendices, including names of witnesses, appearances marked by counsel, and organizations that provided information.


The Commission was appointed to inquire into the communal violence of August – September, 1977 that erupted subsequent to the July 1977 elections which brought the United National Party (UNP), led by then-Prime Minister J.R. Jayawardene, into power in an unprecedented landslide victory in which they received a fi ve-sixths majority. In these same elections the Tamil United Liberation Front (TULF) won the majority of seats in the Northern Province, thereby becoming the main opposition in Parliament.

The August 1977 violence marked the fi rst major outbreak of communal violence since that of 195811 and came on the heels of post-election

11. See Vittachi, Tarzi. “Emergency 58”. London: Andre Deutsch, 1958.

11

violence by the UNP and their allies against supporters of the defeated opposition. The communal violence of 1977 began in Jaffna and spread throughout the island. Through both acts and omissions, State actors were widely implicated in the violence. There were reports of police attacks on Tamils, as well as police inaction as Sinhalese mobs targeted Tamils for violence. The majority of the victims were Hill-country Tamils. The then Prime Minister, J.R. Jayawardene, failed to immediately declare a State of emergency or a curfew to stem the violence.

At the insistence of the Leader of the Opposition, A. Amirthalingam, a Commission of Inquiry was constituted by Prime Minister J.R. Jayawardene (under the hand of President William Gopallawa). Mr. M.C. Sansoni, a former Chief Justice of Sri Lanka, was appointed as the Commissioner to the one-man commission popularly known as the Sansoni Commission.


The Sansoni Report provides “strong direct and indirect evidence of the State’s blatant complicity in the communal violence.”12 Although strong on evidence, the Commission’s conclusions are weak. Despite the fact that the Commission was charged with inquiring into both causes and responsibility, the report fails to substantially address responsibility. In fact, the chapter of the report addressing responsibility13 is only one page long.

12. Hoole, Rajan, “The Arrogance of Power - Myths Decadence and Murder,” University Teachers for Human Rights, Jaffna, Colombo, Sri Lanka, 2001, 32.

13. Section (2) of the mandate, to which the one page Chapter IV of the report is dedicated, states:

Whether any person or body of persons or any organization, or any person or persons connected with such organization-

(a) committed or conspired to commit; (b) aided or abetted in or conspired to aid or abet in the commission of; (c) in any manner assisted, encouraged, or were concerned in or conspired to assist or

encourage the commission of, any of the acts referred to in paragraph (1)

12

In examining events, Sansoni was careful, even where the facts demanded it, to avoid any implication that would point to serious culpability on the part of the State,”14 despite the fact that he “could easily have answered the question in his mandate about who was responsible for the communal violence of 1977.15

Although Sansoni picked through the evidence and chose, in some cases, to ignore or minimize the signifi cance of some evidence, the Report nonetheless presents a clear picture – albeit at times muddled – that the violence “was organized by the Police at the behest of their new political bosses – the UNP.”16

The facts, however, are obscured by the politics. The fi ndings refl ect the premise that the Tamil political leadership was to blame for the violence committed against the Tamil people. Sansoni devotes the fi rst two chapters of the report, a total of eighty two pages, to establishing the culpability of the TULF leadership. “[T]he communal violence was retaliation for a section of the Tamil leadership asking for a separate state and fostering a militant movement.”17 This sentiment is repeated throughout the report and recommendations.

I want to make it quite clear, that what is objectionable and worthy of condemnation in the speeches from which I have quoted, is the expression of views which encourage and instigate the use of violence and weapons in the bid to obtain a separate state. So far as the population of the whole Island is concerned, the claim to a separate state is unpopular and will be resisted by the majority community.18

14. Hoole, 21.15. Hoole, 34.16. Hoole, 34.17. Hoole, 21.18. Sansoni Report, p. 54

13

The Commission’s perspective mirrored that of the State, as refl ected in the Prime Minister’s Parliamentary speech of 18 August 1977, which was two days after the violence began in Jaffna and as it was spreading throughout the island.

[W]e are still one nation [and] this Government is elected to govern the whole Island… The vast majority of the people in this country … become restive when they hear such remarks as that a separate state is to be formed …

Whatever it is, when statements of that type are said and the newspapers carry them throughout the island, and when you say you are not violent but that violence may be used in time to come, what do you think the other people in Sri Lanka would do? How will they react? ‘If you want to fi ght let there be a fi ght; if it is peace, let there be peace! 19

Although Jayewardene goes on to claim that these are not his words, and that “the people of Sri Lanka will say that…,” he closes with the following warning.

But I say, be careful of the words that you use… Such words can infl ame people of other nationalities. And what has happened can happen in a greater degree if such words are used by responsible leaders….20

As pointed out by Rajan Hoole, this premise is fl awed in two respects, namely that the majority of the victims of the 1977 violence were hill-country Tamils, whose leadership under Mr. S. Thondaman rejected separatism, and that the prior episode of violence against Tamils in 1958 occurred without any violence or call for separatism by the Tamil minority or their leadership.

19. Hoole, 31.20. Hoole, 31.

14

The Sansoni Report examines the evidence carefully, if not always consistently, and documents emerging patterns and practices of the State, particularly in regard to their handling of the Tamil minority.

Although Sansoni did not say so, what he has recorded strongly suggests connivance between the security services and the mob similar to the Welikade prison massacre of July 1983.21

Thus the Sansoni Report is an important historical document that foreshadows the communal violence to come and provides insight into that violence and the State’s responsibility for that violence.


The emphasis of the recommendations is on promoting unity and providing compensation rather than on accountability and punishment22.

It must be noted that promotions of some of the responsible parties were given at the same time that the Sansoni Commission was sitting. “Even as the Sansoni Commission was sitting, Jayewardene made Ana Seneviratne the Police Chief (IGP). Also under Jayewardene, A.S. Seneviratne became DIG (Metropolitan) and SSP Ronnie Gunasinghe who earned notoriety for political killings was his immediate subordinate.”23

Many of the Report’s recommendations have been taken from non-governmental sources such as the Tamil Rehabilitation Organisation and the All Ceylon Buddhist Congress, with a suggestion that such recommendations be considered by the Government.

21. Hoole, 33 ..22. Hoole, 37. A few police offi cers were mentioned by Sansoni as bearing responsibility but

no action, either disciplinary or prosecutorial, was taken against them.23. Hoole, 35.

15

3. PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSION OF INQUIRY INTO THE KOKKADICHOLAI INCIDENT

WARRANT NO. : P.O. No. PPA/6/N/174/91DATE APPT’D : 18th June 1991BY : Ranasinghe Premadasa, President of Sri

Lanka COMPRISING : Kappina Degiri Oswald Stanley Mendis

Seneviratne Sivanathan Selliah Dr. Abdul Majeed Mohamed Sahabdeen Assisted by: Mr. L.M.K. Arulanandam, State Counsel,

Attorney-General DepartmentMANDATE : To inquire into and obtain information and in

respect of the circumstances relating to: (1) the explosion of device buried under

the surface of the road between 12 noon and 1.30 p.m. of 12th June, 1991 on the Kokkadicholai – Manmuni Ferry Road, in Batticaloa District in consequence of which two soldiers were killed and a third seriously injured,

(2) the deaths of 67 civilian inhabitants of the villages of Mahiladitivu, Mudhaaikuda, and Munaikadu, in the Batticaloa District, and the destruction of property in the said villages,

16

And Report On – (a) whether there is any connection between

the two incidents, (b) whether any incidents in paragraph (2)

above resulted from any action taken by any members of the armed forces, and if so whether it was a result of:

(i) military action taken against those who occasioned, or were suspected of having assisted the causing of the explosion referred to in paragraph (1) above, or were suspected of harbouring those so responsible; or

(ii) military action in excess of the needs of the situation of taking action against those who occasioned, or were suspected of having assisted the causing of the explosion referred to in paragraph (1) above, or were suspected harbouring those so responsible;

(iii) deliberate retaliatory action taken against those who were suspected of having assisted in the causing of the explosion referred to in paragraph (1) above, or were suspected of harbouring those so responsible,

(iv) deliberate retaliatory action taken against persons not in anyway connected with causing of the explosion referred to in paragraph (1) above, or suspected of harbouring those so responsible,

17

24. Kokkadicholai Report, Annexure 1 – Presidential Warrant, p. 23.

(c) whether any action if any, against any members of Armed Forces, should be under Military Law or normal Civil Law,

(d) whether the incidents in paragraph (2) above resulted from any action taken by persons other than any members of the Armed Forces, and if so, by whom such action had been taken,

(e) what compensation would suffi ce to make reparation for any fi nancial loss suffered by any civilian inhabitants in the villages of Mahiladitivu, Mudhaaikuda, and Munaikadu, in the Batticaloa District, as a consequence of the incidents referred to in paragraph (2) above,

(f) what steps should be taken to prevent the recurrence of any such similar incident.24

REPORT TITLE : Final Report of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry into the Kokkadicholai Incident

DATED : 9th March 1992 CONTENTS : 40 page Final Report, of which 7 pages

are fi ndings and 33 pages are schedules and annexures, to be read with the interim report, which addresses certain aspects of the mandate.


On 12th June 1991 a landmine explosion killed two government soldiers and wounded another in the area of Kokkadicholai in Batticaloa District.

18

Later that day, attacks of three villages by government soldiers left at least sixty seven Tamil civilians dead, and another fi fty six missing and presumed dead. In addition to the killings, women were raped, civilians were beaten and property was destroyed. Seventeen youth were taken to the crater left by the landmine explosion and reportedly shot and burned in the crater.25

Six days after the incident, a Commission of Inquiry was appointed to inquire into the two incidents.


The Commission’s fi ndings in the Kokkadicholai incident were published in an interim report and a fi nal report. According to the fi nal report, the interim report addressed paragraphs (a), (b) and (d) of the mandate – namely whether the two incidents were linked and whether government forces were responsible. The fi nal report dealt with paragraphs (c), (e) and (f) of the warrant – prosecution, compensation and prevention respectively.26 Most of the seven-page report and many of the schedules and annexures are devoted to the issue of compensation.

A criticism of the Commission has been that “the terms of reference limited the scope of the inquiry, and the commissioners failed to use the full extent of their powers, thus failing to obtain all the information necessary to the inquiry.”27

25. For a report of the incident, see “The Kokkadichcholai Massacre and After,” in University Teachers for Human Rights (Jaffna), The Debasement of Law and of Humanity and the Drift Towards Total War, 28 August 1991. http://www.uthr.org/Reports/Report8/chapter3.htm

26. Kokkadicholai Report, p. 127. Nissan, Elizabeth, “Impunity”, Sri Lanka State of Human Rights 1994, (Law & Society

Trust, 1995), p.106 at 113.

19

28. Kokkadicholai Report, p. 6. Reportedly, “[t]he case was turned over to the military for investigation, and in early August 1992 the government reported that soldiers involved in the Kokkadicholai massacre faced possible court-martial. On October 28, the commander, Lieutenant H.I.S. Kudaligama, was found guilty of ‘allowing his soldiers to use their weapons’ in the massacre and allowing them to dispose of the bodies. The nineteen soldiers implicated were acquitted, reportedly for lack of evidence. Informed sources told Asia Watch that the military command was reluctant to pursue the prosecution of soldiers in this case because Sri Lankan troops were already so demoralized by the deaths in August of General Denzil Kobbekaduwa, head of military operations in the north, and eight other senior offi cers whose vehicle detonated an LTTE land mine in northern Sri Lanka.” Human Rights Watch, http://www.hrw.org/reports/1993/WR93/Asw-10.htm. Nonetheless, the Offi cer-in-Charge was reportedly convicted on the lesser charges of failing to control his troops and disposing of bodies illegally. Nissan, Elizabeth “Impunity”, State of Human Rights 1994, Law & Society Trust, 1995, p.106 at 113.

29. Compensation is set forth according to the following categories: (1) compensation payable to the dependants of those killed and burnt in the crater; (2) compensation payable to the survivors of those killed in the house and mill premises of Kumaranayagam; (3) compensation payable to civilians whose houses were completely burnt by the soldiers; (4) compensation payable to the civilians whose houses were partly damaged or burnt and whose possessions were stolen; (5) compensation payable to those seriously injured by the soldiers; and (6) compensation payable to the owner of the tractor borrowed by the soldiers, which was blown up as a result of the explosion. Kokkadicholai Report, p. 1.

30. Kokkadicholai Report, p. 6


Although the Commission found that the conduct of the soldiers “comes under Civil Law—Penal Law offences under the Penal Code,” it goes on to recommend that “the Army should make its own investigations and that action be taken under the Military Law against the Army men who committed these crimes.”28

Recommendations for exact amounts of compensation to be given to particular classes of victims and dependents are set out in the fi nal report.29

As to steps that could be taken to prevent such happenings from taking place in the future, the Commission limits itself to a vague recommendation that “the Members of the Armed forces be given intensive instructions and the Army men be trained not to indulge in, or execute extra-military or non-military acts of this kind.”30

20

4. SRI LANKA’S COMMISSIONS OF INQUIRY INTO INVOLUNTARY REMOVALS AND DISAPPEARANCES: PRECEDENTS

4.1 PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSIONS OF INQUIRY INTO INVOLUNTARY REMOVALS OF PERSONS:

PRESIDENT PREMADASA (1991, 1992, 1993)

It has been reported that the fi rst commission of inquiry into “disappearances,” though not named as such, was created under President Premadasa in January 199131. The Commission of Inquiry into Involuntary Removals of Persons was followed by two others, also appointed by President Premadasa, in 1992 and 1993.32 Despite the fact that the fi rst Commission was created just after the Bheeshanaya (or Reign of Terror), during which tens of thousands of people disappeared in Sri Lanka, it and its two successor commissions were not mandated to inquire into past acts. Instead, their mandates were to inquire into acts – so called involuntary removals – that had not

31. The Gazette of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka, Extraordinary, No. 644/27 of January 11, 1991. According to the Schedule A, the Commission was to inquire into allegations “that persons are being involuntarily removed from their places of residence by persons unknown” and report on the following:

(i) any complaints of such alleged removal, and/or the subsequent lack of information of the whereabouts of the person or persons so removed;

(ii) the evidence available to establish the truth of such allegations; (iii) the present whereabouts of the person or persons so removed; (iv) the identity of the person or persons or groups responsible; (v) the evidence available to establish the truth of such allegations; (vi) the steps law to be taken against such persons responsible; (vii) whether such illegal acts took place by reason of any lack of legal provision in the

present laws relating to law enforcement; (viii) the remedial measures necessary to prevent the future occurrence of such illegal

activity. Schedule ‘A’, Extraordinary Gazette No. 644/27 of January 11, 1991.32. Rather than extending the term of the mandate, which was time limited and confi ned to the

twelve months following the date of the warrant, each year the Commission was given a new warrant to consider complaints of disappearances for another twelve months, for which they had seventeen months to do so.

21

33. Nissan, Elizabeth,“Impunity,” Sri Lanka State of Human Rights 1994 (Law & Society Trust, 1995), p. 114.

34. The Gazette of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka, Extraordinary, No. 784/1 of September 13, 1993. The Commission appointed by Wijetunga was mandated to inquire into the following:

Schedule “A” (i) whether such illegal acts took place by reason of any lack of legal provision in the

present laws relating to law enforcement; (ii) the remedial measures necessary to prevent the future occurrence of such illegal

activity. Schedule “B” (i) any complaints of such alleged removals, and/or the subsequent lack of information of

the whereabouts of the person or persons so removed; (ii) the credibility of such complaint; (iii) your recommendation as to whether or not further investigations into such complaints

are warranted for the purpose of the institution of legal proceedings.

yet occurred, thus suggesting that the creation of the Commissions was pretense. The effect was to render the Commissions ineffectual from the moment of their inception. In fact subsequently, in 1993, their warrants were revoked, thereby obfuscating their very existence. Reportedly, however, the Commission(s) “had submitted reports on at least one hundred and forty two cases of disappearance to successive presidents between January 1991 and the end of 1994. In some cases at least, the reports are believed to contain evidence implicating individual offi cers in perpetrating disappearances.”33

4.2 PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSION OF INQUIRY INTO INVOLUNTARY REMOVALS: PRESIDENT WIJETUNGA (1993)

After President Premadasa was assassinated on May 1, 1993, the then Prime Minister, D.B. Wijetunga, assumed power as President of Sri Lanka. Subsequently, on August 23, 1993, President Wijetunga revoked the warrants of the three prior Commissions of Inquiry and appointed another Commission into Involuntary Removals of Persons34. The mandate of this Commission was in respect of past involuntary removals – those occurring during the period of two of

22

Premadasa’s three Commissions – and was comprised of all of the prior commissioners except the Chairman.

Although the mandate was to inquire into past involuntary removals, the mandate was limited to the period 1991 – 199335 and thus failed to cover the period during which large scale disappearances had occurred (1987 – 1990). This raised serious and continuing questions of intent and suggested that the UNP regime, under which the violations had occurred, lacked the political will to inquire into rights violations committed during its reign.

Although both Premadasa’s Commissions and Wijetunga’s Commission looked at the same time period, albeit from the different perspectives of ongoing violations versus past violations, substantive elements of the mandates were different. Reportedly, Premadasa’s Commissions were “criticized for employing slow procedures.”36 The mandate of Wijetunga’s Commission was less rigorous, calling for the Commission to inquire into “the credibility” of complaints37 as opposed to “the evidence available to establish the truth of such allegations”38; and calling for the Commission’s “recommendation as to whether or not further investigations into such complaints are warranted for the purpose of the institution of legal proceedings”39 instead of “the identity of the person or persons or groups responsible”40 and “the steps at law to be taken against such persons responsible.”41

35. The Commission was called upon “to inquire into and obtain information and report in respect of the period commencing 11th January, 1991 until twenty-four months following upon the date hereof…” Exactly two years prior, on January 11, 1991 President Premadasa signed the Warrant creating the fi rst Commission on Involuntary Removals.

36. Amnesty International, “Time for Truth and Justice: Observations and recommendations regarding the commissions investigating past human rights violations” (AI Index: ASA 37/04/95, April 1995).

37. Schedule ‘B’, ii, Extraordinary Gazette No. 784/1 ibid.38. Schedule ‘A’, ii & v, The Gazette of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka,

Extraordinary, No. 751/1 of January 25, 199339. Schedule ‘B’, iii, Extraordinary Gazette No. 784/1 ibid.40. Schedule ‘A’, iv, Extraordinary Gazette No. 751/1.41. Schedule ‘A’, vi, Extraordinary Gazette No. 751/1.

23

The differences in the mandate may stem from the difference between a body established to monitor ongoing violations and a body established to inquire into past violations. The changes may also have been intended to speed the work of the commission. According to Amnesty International, there was a “marked increase in the number of reports on individual cases submitted to the President [after the change in mandate]. For instance, whereas in the fi rst two years of its existence [under Premadasa’s warrant], the PCIIRP had only concluded investigations into eleven cases, in its third year [under Wijetunga’s warrant] it concluded investigation into another twenty nine cases; in its fourth year it concluded investigations into approximately one hundred and forty cases.”42

4.3 THE QUESTION OF “INVOLUNTARY REMOVALS”

Premadasa’s Commissions coined the term “involuntary removals” and established a precedent for future commissions to follow.43 There is no defi nition of what constitutes an “involuntary removal” in the warrants that created the commissions and the term has no legal meaning. In the mandates of both Premadasa’s Commissions and Wijetunga’s Commission the term “involuntary removal” seems to relate to a particular phenomenon, which was “persons who [were] involuntarily removed from their places of residence by persons unknown”.44


43. In addition to Premadasa’s Commissions and Wijetunga’s Commission, the four disappearances commissions have maintained this terminology: Commission of Inquiry into the Involuntary Removal or Disappearance of Persons in the Northern & Eastern Provinces (1994); Commission of Inquiry into Involuntary Removal or Disappearance of Persons in the Western, Southern and Sabaragamuwa Provinces (1994); Commission of Inquiry into the Involuntary Removal or Disappearance of Persons in the Central, North Western, North Central and Uva Provinces (1995); Commission of Inquiry into Involuntary Removal and Disappearances of Certain Persons (All Island) (1998).

44. See the Warrants of the Commissions Gazette No. 644/27 of January 11, 1991, The Gazette of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka, No. 697/5 of January 13, 1992, Gazette No. 751/1 of January 25, 1993, and Gazette No. 784/1 of September 13, 1993, all of which use this same language regarding involuntary removal of persons.

24

Nonetheless, it is not clear why the drafters of the mandates chose to use a term with no precise legal defi nition.

Amnesty International, however, “understands the term “removals” to refer to abduction by non-state actors.”45 This understanding is not shared by the various commissions on involuntary removals and disappearances. Overwhelmingly, involuntary removal is used as a euphemism for or as a synonym of “abduction.” Employing terminology that had relevance and meaning under the Penal Code may have enabled subsequent prosecutions, as the evidence collected by the commissions would have related more directly to the elements of a crime. Perhaps, however, the use of such terms was intended to distinguish the work of commissions of inquiry from judicial proceedings and avoid any confusion that there were penal consequences linked to suchcommissions’ work. The fact is that commissions of inquiry into disappearances and other rights violations have been employed overwhelmingly not as a means to a prosecutorial end, but as a substitute for meaningful legal action.

4.4 REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

There are no publicly accessible reports of the Premadasa or Wijetunga Commissions.


25

5. SRI LANKA’S COMMISSIONS OF INQUIRY INTO INVOLUNTARY REMOVALS AND DISAPPEARANCES: THE THREE ZONAL COMMISSIONS

Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga and her People's Alliance were voted into power in 1994 on a platform of human rights, peace and democracy, which included a promise to address past violations of human rights. Soon after assuming power, the new government began the process of creating three geographically distinct commissions (commonly referred to as “zonal commissions”) to investigate involuntary removals and disappearances alleged to have taken place from 1988. The geographic breakdown of the three Commissions was as follows: (1) Central, North Western, North Central and Uva Provinces (hereinafter “Central Commission”); (2) Northern & Eastern Provinces (hereinafter “North East Commission”) ; (3) Western, Southern and Sabaragamuwa Provinces (hereinafter “Southern Commission”). The Commissions were appointed in November 1994 and commenced sitting in 1995.

5.1 MANDATE

But for the geographic jurisdiction of each Commission, the mandates of the three were the same.

…to inquire into and report on the following matters: (a) whether any persons have been involuntarily removed

or have disappeared from their places of residence in the [Central, North Western, North Central and Uva Provinces/Northern & Eastern Provinces/ Western Province, Southern Province and the Sabaragamuwa Province] at any time after January 1, 1988;

(b) the evidence available to establish such alleged removals or disappearances;

(c) the present whereabouts of the persons alleged to have been so removed, or to have disappeared;

26

(d) whether there is any credible material indicative of the person or persons responsible for the alleged removals or disappearances;

(e) the legal proceedings that can be taken against the persons held to be so responsible;

(f) the measures necessary to prevent the occurrence of such alleged activities in the future;

(g) the relief, if any, that should be afforded to the parents, spouses and dependents of the persons alleged to have been so removed or to have disappeared (sic);

and to make such recommendations with reference to any of the matters that have been inquired into under the terms of this Warrant…. 46

5.1.1 Limitations of The Commissions’ Mandates - Concerns about Political Will

Limitations built into the Commissions’ mandates raise questions about the intent, seriousness and capacity of the Government to address past violations of human rights and counter the prevailing climate of impunity. According to the then Minister of Justice, Constitutional Affairs and External Trade, G.L. Peiris:

[t]he government owes a duty to the parents and kith and kin to help them to ascertain the fate of their loved ones and offer some compensatory relief to lighten their misery… [but] it is not possible for us to embark on a futile and impossible task of apportioning blame.47

46. See Mandates of the Commissions for the Central Zone, P.O. No. SP/6/N/191/94, 30 March 1995 (Final Report, Appendix 1, p. 7) and Southern Province, P.O. SP/6/N/192/94, 13 November 1994 (Final Report, Annexure A, p. 179), and a restatement of the mandate for the Commission for the North and East (Final Report, p. 1).

47. Daily News, 15 October 1994 as cited in Amnesty International, “Time for Truth and Justice: Observations and recommendations regarding the Commissions investigating past human rights violations” (AI Index: ASA 37/04/95, April 1995).

27

However, when the President was asked the following question two days later, “Over the last few weeks there has been a spate of exhumations from mass graves from the time of the JVP uprising fi ve years ago. Do you think it is a good idea to rake up the past in this way?” the President responded:

Quite defi nitely yes. Because all civilized societies use punishment as the major method of prevention. And I think this kind of horrendous happenings have to be exposed even if we have to exhume, every one of them should be investigated, the culprits should be found if possible, and punished.48

When placed side by side, these quotes speak to a fundamental fl aw underpinning the creation and functioning of the Commissions, which was the absence of unequivocal political will to systematically address the structures, policies and practices that gave rise to the gross and persistent violations of human rights during that time. This was further evidenced by the lack of process in the creation of the Commissions. The government did not avail itself of the experience or support of local and international actors who could have contributed substantially to the elaboration of the mandate and procedures of the Commission(s) to ensure that they conformed to international standards and that they resulted in a rigorous and systematic process and concrete results. Instead, process, standards and results were undermined by a problematic mandate and defective institutional arrangements.

5.1.2 The Commissions were Originally Given Four Months to Conclude their Work

The Commissions were originally given only four months to conduct their inquiries. Thus the Commissions were dependent on the President to continuously extend the mandates, which may have undermined

48. BBC Interview, 17 October 1994, as reported in Amnesty International, “Time for Truth and Justice: Observations and recommendations regarding the Commissions investigating past human rights violations” (AI Index: ASA 37/04/95, April 1995).

28

the Commissions’ independence. The mandates were extended eight times, after which the Commissions were asked to conclude their work. Subsequently, another Commission, the All Island Commission, was appointed to investigate the remaining cases.

5.1.3 The Timeframe Under Review was Insuffi cient to Address Patterns and Practices

The timeframe under review by the Commissions was 1988 onwards which failed to adequately cover the period during which disappearances emerged as a pattern of the State.

While the rate at which disappearances were committed undoubtedly soared in the years from 1988 to 1990, they began to be committed as a pattern in 1984 in the context of the armed confl ict in the North and East… From 1984 to mid-1987 AI documented over 680 disappearances in the custody of security forces in the North and East. In 1987 as a whole it recorded 134 cases, 12 of which were committed in the South.49

Amnesty International called on the government to extend the mandate of the commissions to include cases reported since 1984 as it “believ[ed] that the investigation of “disappearances” in this earlier period may provide crucial evidence of the emergence of the practice of “disappearing” people, subsequently adopted by the security in Sri Lanka on a vast scale.”50

49. Nissan Elizabeth, “The Investigation of Past Violations”, Sri Lanka State of Human Rights 1994 (Law & Society Trust, 1995), p.94 and 104.


29

5.1.4 The Timeframe Under Review Covered Both Past and Present Violations

Although the mandate specifi ed that it covered the period commencing on January 1, 1988, it did not specify an end date for complaints. Thus, the mandate did not confi ne the Commissions’ work to past violations. In some cases, particularly the North East Commission, the Commissions were examining past violations under the prior Government, while simultaneously looking into ongoing violations in a deteriorating political and human rights situation under the current Government.

After the PA Government’s peace efforts collapsed in 1995, disappearances and extrajudicial killings began again. In Colombo, bodies of young Tamil men appeared in Bolgoda Lake with clear signs that they had been tortured and extra-judicially executed. After the Government captured Jaffna from the LTTE in 1995, disappearances emerged there. Reports varied from three hundred to six hundred and forty eight disappearances in Jaffna in the period between 1995 and 1997.51 Disappearances were also reported from the East. During this time, Amnesty International recorded the highest number of disappearances since the peak of the Bheeshanaya in 1990.52

Thus, on one hand was an escalation of the armed confl ict and an increase in human rights violations, including disappearances, while on the other hand, three Commissions of Inquiry into Disappearances held their sittings and considered, among other things, prevention of the very abuses that were being committed almost daily, by many of the same actors named in the inquiries of the Commissions. This raised practical challenges for the North East Commission, which recorded complaints of disappearances as late as 1995, but could not hold sittings in some areas due to the prevailing security situation. 51. Nissan Elizabeth, “Integrity of the Persons” Sri Lanka State of Human Rights Report 1997

(Law & Society Trust 1998), p. 11 at 14.52. Amnesty International, Sri Lanka: “Highest Number of “Disappearances” Reported since

1990,” AI Index: ASA 37/10/97, 11 April 1997.

30

Unlike other Commissions this Commission had to investigate disappearances in areas of Military operations. The Commission had to either cancel several sittings or postpone them due to the unsettled conditions caused by the ground situation…. In fact we were advised by the President’s offi ce on 10.12.96 not to go to Jaffna to hold inquiries as conditions were not conducive for holding public inquiries.53

It must be noted that the advise from the President’s offi ce coincided with a sharp increase in the number of cases of disappearances in Jaffna.54

5.1.5 The Establishment of Three Independent Commissions Undermined the Effi cacy of The Commissions

The Commissions into Involuntary Removals and Disappearances were created as three independent commissions, each with the same mandate, but covering three geographically distinct areas. The separation of the mandate according to geography and the creation of three independent Commissions resulted in vastly different procedures, fi ndings and recommendations. Although the mandates were the same for all three, there was no unifi ed procedural framework for tackling the mandate. So, for example, the Southern Commission held all of its sittings, with the exception of the Richard de Soysa case, in camera, whereas the other two Commissions only used in camera proceedings when requested by the complainant. Further, two of the three Commissions initially limited the time period for the receipt of complaints to one month and then subsequently extended it. Additionally, two of the

53. Final Report of Commission of Inquiry into the Involuntary Removal or Disappearance of Persons in the Northern & Eastern Provinces, Sessional Paper No. VII, September 1997, p. 5.

54. Numbers vary for that time period. According to Amnesty International, approximately fi ve hundred and forty people disappeared after being arrested by the army in mid-1996. Atapattu, Sumudu, “Integrity of the Person”, Sri Lanka State of Human Rights 1998 (Law & Society Trust, 1999), p. 12.

31

Commissions used standard complaint forms, whereas the other did not. Further, understandings of what constituted an “involuntary removal,” and to a lesser extent a “disappearance,” seemed to differ between the commissions. Both the North East Commission and the Central Commission included names of some of the alleged perpetrators in their reports, whereas the Southern Commission submitted such names to the president under separate confi dential cover.

The creation of three independent zonal Commissions led to some confusion about the territorial jurisdiction of the Commissions. Police areas do not always coincide with provincial lines.

Certain police areas cover parts of the districts falling within our three provinces as well as districts falling outside of our provinces. For example the Embilipitiya Police area is located in Embilipitiya in the Ratnapura district falling within the Sabaragamuwua Province (which falls within our Mandate). But the Embilipitiya Police area covers parts of the Moneragala district in Uva Province (not falling within our jurisdiction). Consequently, if the evidence revealed that the alleged involuntary removal or disappearance had taken place within the territorial limits of the latter we were obliged to rule that the complaint did not fall within the scope of our Mandate.55

It has never been made clear why the government created three distinct Commissions. It may have been the massive number of alleged disappearances under the period of the Commissions’ mandate that led the government to divide the work regionally. If so, the same end could have been achieved through the creation of one Commission with separate sub-commissions. This would have ensured uniform procedures, fi ndings and recommendations that conveyed a more comprehensive truth than any one of the three zonal Commissions could or did.

55. Final Report of the Commission of Inquiry into Involuntary Removal or Disappearance of Persons in the Western, Southern and Sabaragamuwa Provinces, Sessional Paper No V, September 1997, p. 8.

32

5.1.6 The Lack of Suffi cient and Independent Resources Undermined the Commissions’ Work

The Commissions did not receive suffi cient resources to enable them to conduct their work in a thorough and effective manner. Further, they were not given control of their budgets and thus relied on the Presidential Secretariat to provide funds to undertake their work. This raised concerns about independence, as well as concerns about the practicality of working without an adequate and independent budget over which the Commissions had control. The volume of work was very high. The Commissions should not have had to worry about adequate resources, particularly considering the support internationally for a mechanism to investigate the widespread human rights violations of Sri Lanka’s recent past.

5.1.7 The Limitations of the Mandate did not Undermine All Aspects of the Commissions’ Work

Despite the limitations, it must be noted that the Commissions of Inquiry into Involuntary Removals and Disappearances have served vital functions in terms of exposing, in a public manner, the abuses that had been concealed for so many years. Not only did the Commissions attempt to systematically document allegations of disappearances, but also they worked to verify such allegations and gather evidence on the same, including the names of those responsible for the disappearances. The Commissions also helped facilitate the issue of death certifi cates, the grant of compensation and the provision of services specifi cally tailored to address the particular needs of family members of the disappeared. Further, both the reports and the recommendations of the Commissions are important records of the time. When read together, the extensive, albeit in some cases ambitious, recommendations of the three Commissions, provide an extraordinarily detailed blue print for addressing past disappearances, preventing future disappearances, and providing relief to victims. According to the Southern Commission:

33

56. Final Report, Southern Commission, p. xvi.

Justice does not simply mean the punishment of offenders, and therefore, the penal aspect constitutes only a part of the problem. The question of how to "mete out justice to affected persons" should be looked at from a broader perspective. Being a fact-fi nding Commission, we were able to go beyond the narrow confi nes of a judicial tribunal to address our minds to the other issues of long-term importance contemplated by the mandate. Disappeared persons have left thousands of dependents—old parents, spouses (some were pregnant at the time of the disappearance), and children—and their economic and emotional rehabilitation is of crucial importance both to their own families and to the stability of society. We have also made several recommendations to Your Excellency regarding measures to prevent the occurrence of such tragic incidents in the future, an issue contemplated by the mandate. These recommendations are our response to the problems revealed by the evidence before us.56

It must, however, be noted, that the State’s failure to implement most of the recommendations of the Commissions have rendered some recommendations redundant. In some cases – in particular remedies for the children of the disappeared such as scholarships, counseling and health services – the time has passed for meaningful implementation since as many as twenty years have passed and children have grown. This is not to say, however, that implementation should not still be pursued. It should. There remain numerous recommendations that remain not only relevant, but also essential, for the rehabilitation and restoration of the lives of the families of the disappeared that have been forever altered by the disappearances.

34

5.2 COMMISSION OF INQUIRY INTO THE INVOLUNTARY REMOVAL OR DISAPPEARANCE OF PERSONS IN THE CENTRAL, NORTH WESTERN, NORTH CENTRAL AND UVA PROVINCES

WARRANT NO. : P.O. No. SP/6/N/191/94DATE APPT’D : 30 November 1994BY : President Chandrika Bandaranaike

Kumaratunga COMPRISING : Thirunakukkarasu Suntheralingam Esq.

(Chair) The other two commissioners listed in the warrant did not sit on the Commission. Marnickam Dutton Jesuratnam Esq. declined the appointment due to ill health and Hitihamy Mudiyanselage Senaratna Banda Madawala Esq. requested to be discharged from Commission from 1 April 1995.

Assisted By: M.C.M. Iqbal, Secretary The Commission refers to “an investigation

unit of handpicked police personnel” but it is not clear whether and/or when this investigation unit was set up. One of the early recommendations refers to a special team of investigators that should be set up. By Interim Report V, there is reference to a Special Investigating Team that has commenced work.

There is no reference in the report to assistance by the Attorney General’s Department.

MANDATE : to inquire into and report on the following matters:

35

(a) whether any persons have been involuntarily removed or have disappeared from their places of residence in the Central Province, North Western Province, North Central Province and the Uva Province at any time after January 1, 1988;






(g) the relief, if any, that should be afforded to the parents, spouses and dependents of the persons alleged to have been so removed or to have disappeared

and to make such recommendations….REPORT TITLE : Final Report of the Commission of Inquiry

into the Involuntary Removal orDisappearance of Persons in the Central, North Western, North Central and Uva Provinces, Sessional Paper No. VI – 1997

DATED : 07.07.1997

36


The Commission was one of three zonal Commissions appointed in 1994 to inquire into involuntary removals and disappearances since January 1, 1988.


Of the fi fteen thousand and forty fi ve complaints received, of which several complaints were received in respect to the same person, six thousand four hundred and forty three complaints were inquired into and eight thousand six hundred and two complaints were remaining at the conclusion of the Commission. Although the information is disaggregated in terms of the place where the disappearances occurred, no other disaggregated information (ethnicity, gender, age, occupation, etc) is provided.

Although the report includes names of some of those the Commission found to be credibly implicated in involuntary removals/disappearances,57 the Commission also sent a confi dential list under separate cover to the President. According to the Commission:

CONTENTS : Final Report Part I comprised of 5 pages of fi ndings plus appendices (warrant, newspaper notices, gist of fi ndings of interim reports, graphs indicating trends, quantum of disappearances, etc., places where commission held sittings, list of abbreviations) and Part II Annexures of 241 pages (list of complaints inquired into by this commission, list of complaints pending inquiry, list of vehicles involved in removals and/or disappearances, list of the names of owners of such vehicles during the relevant time) to be read with 9 Interim Reports of approximately 2.5 pages each and published as single document.

37

57. See Interim Reports of the Commission of Inquiry into the Involuntary Removal or Disappearance of Persons in the Central, North Western, North Central and Uva Provinces, Sessional Paper No. III, September, 1997.

“SP Luxman Seneviratne (then SSP Kandy division in 1995) was in charge of counter subversive unit that ran torture chamber at St. Sylvester’s College, Kandy.” Interim Reports of the Central Zone, p. 5.

“ASP Karunaratne (SP Badulla in 1995) in charge of torture chamber at Hali Ela Motors in Badulla with SGT Bandara (Badulla), both of whom were attached to the Counter Subversive Unit.” Interim Reports of the Central Zone, p. 9.

“Lt. Mangala Perera was in charge of torture chamber at the community centre in Moneragala and supervised by Upali Samaraweera (provincial council member and nephew of Chief Minister of the Uva Province, Mr. Percy Samaraweera)…” Interim Reports of the Central Zone, p. 9.

“The names of some leading politicians have been mentioned as the persons who had a hand in the removal of some of those who disappeared. Amongst them, the names of Mr. G.D. Mahindasoma, the Chief Minister of the North Central Province, Mr. A. M.S. Adhikari, a Cabinet Minister in the then Government, and Mr. H.G.P. Nelson, MP for Polonnaruwa, stand out. Even the body guard of one of these politicians is alleged to be responsible for some of the removals and disappearances.” Interim Reports of the Central Zone, p. 11.

“…Sgt. Weerasinghe, who was then attached to the Polonnaruwa Police. He is alleged to have removed and killed a person who had not complied with his request to harvest his paddy fi eld for fear of JVP reprisals.” Interim Reports of the Central Zone, p. 11.

“The Chief Minister of the Uva Province is Mr. Percy Samaraweera and the C.M. of the North Central Province is Mr. G.D. Mahindasoma. In the Uva Province Mr. Percy Samaraweera’s nephews Upali Samaraweera and Ravindra Samaraweera and in the North Central Province Mr. Mahindasoma and his bodyguards are linked with several disappearances. Both … belong to the [UNP].” Interim Reports of the Central Zone, p. 12.

“Inspector Police A.M. Keeragala & Inspector of Police J.A.C. Jayasekara were in charge of Polonnaruwa Police Station during the relevant period…. Police Inspector B. Wijesekara was in charge of Welimada Police.” Interim Reports of the Central Zone, p. 12.

“In most of the complaints inquired into at Anamaduwa the name of ASP Indran who is now attached to the Sri Lanka Reserve Headquarters, has surfaced along with others as being responsible for disappearances in that area… There is credible material placed before this Commission indicating that this ASP had threatened some of the witnesses who had given evidence before the Commission. Interim Reports of the Central Zone, p. 20.

“It is therefore recommended that ASP Indran be sent on compulsory leave immediately to prevent him interfering with the witnesses any further, and to enable investigations into complaints where he is involved to commence.” Interim Reports of the Central Zone, p. 21.

There appears to be very little progress in implementing the recommendations of the Commission especially with regard to

38

the action to be taken against persons against whom credible material indicative of such persons being responsible for the removals and/or disappearances.58

The Commission further notes:

Most of the complainants do not seem to be interested in receiving compensation, as much as seeing those responsible being punished…. This is particularly so in the case of those complainants who had been involuntarily removed, tortured and released or escaped…. Such persons came before the Commission to give evidence of the persons who had removed and tortured them, braving possible reprisals. Most of them show signs of the effects of trauma. Most of them have been debilitated or incapacitated. They came before this Commission in the hope that their torturers would be brought to book.59


The eleven recommendations summarized in the Commission’s Final Report cover prosecutions of responsible individuals, compensation without discrimination, scholarships for children of the disappeared, issuance of death certifi cates, relief for those who escaped death, and relief for those whose property was destroyed. Previously, in Interim Report II, it was “recommended that the power to issue warrants of arrest, etc. under section 11(4) of the Special Presidential Commission Law No. 07 of 1978 be given to the Commissions appointed under the Commissions of Inquiry Act probing disappearances.”60

58. Interim Reports of the Central Zone, p. 18.59. Interim Reports of the Central Zone, p. 18. 60. Interim Reports of the Central Zone, p. 8.

39

5.3 COMMISSION OF INQUIRY INTO THE INVOLUNTARY REMOVAL OR DISAPPEARANCE OF PERSONS IN THE NORTHERN & EASTERN PROVINCES


Kumaratunga COMPRISING : Krishnapillai Palakidner, Esq. , Chairman

Luwisdura Walter Romulus Widyaratne Esq. Dr. Wedaarachchi Nawalage Wilson

Assisted By: Mr. SC Manicavasagar, Secretary Mr. VS Ganeshalingam, Esq., Legal Offi cer Mr. A. Punithanayagam, Esq., Legal Offi cer There is no reference in the report to assistance

by the Attorney General’s Department.MANDATE : to inquire into and report on the following

matters: (a) whether any persons have been

involuntarily removed or have disappeared from their places of residence in the Northern Province and Eastern Province at any time after January 1, 1988;



40




(g) the relief, if any, that should be afforded to the parents, spouses and dependents of the persons alleged to have been so removed or to have so disappeared;

and to make such recommendations…. REPORT TITLE : Final Report of Commission of Inquiry into

the Involuntary Removal or Disappearance of Persons in the Northern and Eastern Provinces

DATED : September 1997 CONTENTS : The Final Report of the Commission is

broken down into 10 chapters, 8 of which cover the eight districts that fall within the geographic jurisdiction of the Commission (i.e., Trincomalee, Batticaloa, Amparai, Kilinochchi, Mannar, Vavuniya, Mullaitivu, and Jaffna). The Report includes statistical information, as well as short descriptions of some of the cases reported to the Commission. Throughout the Report, those alleged to be responsible for the abuses are named. A list of 48 names of those alleged to be responsible is included as Annexure ‘E’ of the Final Report. Other annexures provide information (mostly lists of names) about particular incidents and copies of communications with relevant authorities.

41


The Commission was one of three zonal Commissions appointed in 1994 to inquire into involuntary removals and disappearances since January 1, 1988. Unlike the other two zonal Commissions, the geographic area covered by the North East Commission was an area in an active state of war, which hindered the functioning of the Commission. As noted in the Final Report of the Commission:

Unlike other Commissions this Commission had to investigate disappearances in areas of Military operations. The Commission had to either cancel several sittings or postpone them due to the unsettled conditions caused by the ground situation. On one occasion in Batticaloa, the Commission found shells zooming over the Circuit Bungalow where it stayed and heard the rattle of gun-fi re for hours. On this occasion the LTTE attacked the Batticaloa Police Station in the heart of the town. In fact we were advised by the President’s offi ce on 10.12.96 not to go to Jaffna to hold inquiries as conditions were not conducive for holding public inquiries.61


There is no aggregate analysis of the fi ndings of the Commission in respect to the entire geographic jurisdiction of the Commission. Rather, the fi ndings are framed in terms of the particular district and tend to be very case specifi c. Thus each district and, to some degree each incident, is isolated. Although patterns of abuse can be seen when reading the report as a whole, there has been little attempt to analyze patterns throughout the Report. Nonetheless, the Commission found that:

According to the evidence recorded, ninety percent of the removals was ascribed to the security forces – Army, Navy,

61. Final Report, North East Commission, p. 5.

42

Airforce and the Police. LTTE also was responsible for its own share of removals. Other militant groups also are in the picture. The name of some offi cers come up often in the course of inquiries. Captain Suresh Cassim, Major Suraweera, ................. Richard Pieris of Trinco Police, Captain Munaz, Captain Palitha, Capt. Gunaratne, Major Majeed and Major Mohan of Kommathurai army camp in 1990. Captain GL Perera and Inspector Soyza of Ampara Police…62

The Report does name the names in regard to whom credible evidence existed in regard to their implication in gross human rights violations.63 In an apparent contradiction, however, the Report asserts that “on ex-parte evidence alone, it cannot decide on the guilt of these people. Hence, proper inquiries have to be undertaken and evidence given by the complainants should stand the scrutiny of cross-examination. This is a task we leave for the next Commission.”64


The twelve recommendations set out in the fi nal Report include recommendations on compensation, employment, pensions of deceased, social security, malnutrition among children, and scholarships for higher education. However, the emphasis on recommended action to be taken relates to the war. In addition to recommending protections against arbitrary arrest and detention, the Report speaks to the root causes of violations.

Two problems are facing the country. One is the problem of the youth which took militant form under the JVP. The other is ethnic problem which takes militant form under the LTTE.

62. Final Report, North East Commission, p. 62.63. See Annexure E, List of Offi cers against whom evidence is available in Files, which lists

forty eight cases of disappearances and the names those alleged to be responsible. Final Report, North East Commission, p. 94.

64. Final Report, North East Commission, p. 62.

43

These two problems unless handled with vision and statemenship will distort all organs of Society and make the Army arbiter in national issues.65

The Commission goes on to state, “Your Excellency has taken the correct decision and especially in the ethnic sphere, Your Excellency’s proposals should be adopted as a basic policy of the land.”66

65. Final Report, North East Commission, p. 63.66. Considering the year of the report was 1997, it can be assumed that the proposals to which

the Commission refers are the 1997 package of constitutional reforms, which included extensive devolution of powers to the regions. Final Report of the North East Commission, p. 63.

44

5.4 COMMISSION OF INQUIRY INTO INVOLUNTARY REMOVAL OR DISAPPEARANCE OF PERSONS IN THE WESTERN, SOUTHERN AND SABARAGAMUWA PROVINCES


KumaratungaCOMPRISING : Manouri Kokila Muttetuwegama –

Chairperson Prof. S.S.R.B.D.A. Amal Jayawardane, BJP de Almeida Guneratne

Assisted By: Wimaladharma Ekanayake, Secretary Mr.

Samith de Silva, Senior State Counsel, Attorney General’s Department Mr. Neil Unamboowa, State Counsel, Attorney General’s Department

And a number of independent lawyers The Commission constituted three units to

assist it in its work: Computer Data Base Unit, Legal Unit, and Independent Investigations Unit

MANDATE : to inquire into and report on the following matters:

(a) whether any persons have been involuntarily removed or havedisappeared from their places ofresidence in the Western Province, Southern Province and theSabaragamuwa Province at any time after January 1, 1988;

45






(g) the relief, if any, that should be afforded to the parents, spouses and dependents of the persons alleged to have been so removed or to have so disappeared;

and to make such recommendations….REPORT TITLE : (1) Final Report of the Commission of

Inquiry into Involuntary Removal or Disappearance of Persons in the Western, Southern and Sabaragamuwa Provinces, Volume I, Sessional Paper No. V – 1997

(2) Final Report of the Commission of Inquiry into Involuntary Removal or Disappearance of Persons in the Western, Southern and Sabaragamuwa Provinces, Volume II, Sessional Paper No. V - 1997

46

DATED : September 1997 CONTENTS : The Final Report of the Southern Commission

is the most comprehensive report of the three zonal commissions. The Final Report is a detailed 178-page report that combines detailed descriptions of methodology and process, documentation of cases, statistical breakdowns of the fi ndings and a comprehensive analysis, which seeks to thoroughly explore all substantive aspects of the mandate. The Commission is concerned with patterns and practices of abuses and analyzes the material from a number of different angles. The Report provides a general analysis of situation in relation to disappearances in Sri Lanka during the time period in question, with specifi c examples from districts, a general historical analysis, analysis of responsibility and impunity, legal proceedings, preventive measures, and relief for families, as well analyses of special categories (women, clergy, trade unions, university students, Tamils lost in Colombo), impact on society and on families.

The Report also comprises almost 30 pages of relevant annexures, which includes the warrant, list of special witnesses summoned (organisations and persons), list of HCA cases where the Magistrate has made fi ndings on responsibility, list of detention camps, a note on advisory bureaus in the UK, district wise breakdown of disappearances (1988 – 1990) on a monthly basis, the position taken by the Army in response to the Commission’s inquiry

47


The Commission was one of three zonal Commissions appointed in 1994 to inquire into involuntary removals and disappearances since January 1, 1988.


The Report of the Southern Commission presents the most detailed documentation of disappearances by the State to date and explores patterns and practices of the State that give rise to disappearances and other grave violations of human rights. It provides a detailed and disaggregated statistical analysis, as well as a comprehensive legal analysis and sociological analyses of the impact of disappearances on certain groups and on society. As directed by its mandate, the Report considers both the past and the future, and contemplates prevention in a holistic framework.

According to the Report, there were eight thousand seven hundred and thirty nine complaints received, of which one hundred and ninety one were from returned detainees and twelve were of physical injury.

regarding certain army camps. Included in Volume I of the Final Report is a 453-page list of the names of the disappeared, names of complainants, addresses of complainants and relationship between the disappeared and complainant.

Volume II of the Report includes the fi ndings of special inquiries into key cases relating to disappearances and killings in the said Provinces. The cases involve abductions and killings where large numbers disappeared during a short time period, as well as a case of the disappearance of a high profi le journalist.

48

67. Final Report, Southern Commission, p. 147.68. Final Report, Southern Commission, p. 29.

Of these, seven thousand seven hundred and sixty one complaints were inquired into and fi ve hundred and forty two remained at the conclusion of the Commission. The Commission found that seven thousand two hundred and thirty nine complaints were proved. Nine thousand seven hundred and forty four witnesses testifi ed before the Commission, including fi fty four special witnesses.

The statistical information provided in the Report is disaggregated by province, district, gender, marital status, age, education attainment, occupation, date of disappearance, and time of disappearance. The ethnicity of victims is not included. However, the report does include a section titled “Tamils Lost in Colombo” which found that “[t]he evidence before this Commission is that the issue of the involuntary removal/disappearances in Colombo of persons of Tamil origin should not be subsumed in the phenomenon of involuntary removals/disappearances that occurred in Southern Sri Lanka.”67

The Southern Commission was the only zonal commission that did not include in its report names of those it found to be responsible. On the issue of responsibility for the alleged involuntary removals and disappearances and the identifi cation of alleged perpetrators, the Commission held:

[W]e do not have before us the evidence of the person against whom there are allegations. Until further investigations by the investigative authorities are held confi dentiality must prevail, both in respect of the nature of the evidence available and in respect of the identity of persons implicated by such evidence. Accordingly we are submitting to Your Excellency under

49

separate cover the list of names of individuals in respect of whom there is credible material before this Commission.68

It further states:

In view of the serious nature of the acts revealed by the evidence available to date, Your Commissioners recommend that the investigations by the IGP should be under the supervision of the Attorney General and be referred to the Attorney General for the determination of the appropriate legal proceedings that should ensure.69

Despite this recommendation for supervision by the Attorney General, the Commission found problematic patterns of (non)investigations that implicated both the police and the Attorney General’s Department.

The Distortion of the Investigations to conceal more than to reveal, and mechanically labelling as ‘subversive act’ without investigation, were some of the practices of avoidance used in the rare instances where the authorities could not refrain from semblance of an investigation.70

The Commission cites the case of prominent journalist, Richard de Soyza, as highlighting the ways in which investigations were undermined and distorted.

The case of Richard de Soyza

R, a Journalist, fi led reports critical of the government's record on human rights to I.P.S., an international news agency. In February ‘90 R's abduction from his home by an armed gang who came in vehicles in the night was reported both to the local police and the

69. Final Report, Southern Commission, p. 29.70. Final Report, Southern Commission, p. 53

50

Senior Superintendent of the area simultaneous with the incident, and recorded as a disappearance. R's corpse was discovered fl oating in the sea the next day, with gun-shot injuries through the neck. This series of incidents received wide publicity nationally and internationally. At the inquest the Magistrate ordered the arrest of a senior police offi cer identifi ed by R's mother to be one of the abductors of her son. The order was not carried out. The reports of investigation fi led by police in court instead referred to an anonymous letter received by the police containing a general allegation of a connection of the deceased to an incident of murder of a fi lm star’s girl-friend which was currently a popular sensation. On the day R's mother was due to give evidence on oath and be available for cross-examination by the several lawyers for the defense, the representative of the Attorney General stated that he would not be calling her as witness as her evidence was ‘irrelevant’. The Magistrate accordingly terminated the proceedings. Files at the Attorney General’s Department shows that the AG in August directed the Inspector-General of Police to ‘hold further investigations’. There is no record of further investigations by the police/further directions by the AG.71

Subversion of justice through distortions in investigations was highlighted through an additional three cases – the Dambarella Incident, the Mawarala Incident, and the Dickwella Incident. These cases are described to demonstrate that non-investigation of cases was “not isolated departures-from-practice or ‘excesses.’ They exemplify a generalised practice, which in its turn warrants the reasonable inference that this practice denotes a generalised direction NOT to investigate such incident (emphasis original).”72

The unpublished Volume II of the Southern Commission’s Report focuses on some of the key cases relating to disappearances and killings

71. Final Report, Southern Commission, p. 53 – 54.72. Final Report, Southern Commission, p. 55.

51

in the said Provinces. The cases involve abductions and killings where large numbers disappeared during a short time period and a case of disappearance of a high profi le journalist. The cases included in Volume II illustrate patterns and practices of the State that enabled widespread human rights violations not only to occur, but also to be met with impunity. These included the complicity of police offi cers through the recording of wrong information or the masking of information, the inability and unwillingness of the Attorney General’s department to pursue leads and rigorously prosecute cases where evidence was available, and the complicity of senior offi cers who turned a blind eye to the actions of others. In many of these cases, legal action had been pursued in the form of criminal inquiries and proceedings or Habeas Corpus cases. The Commission, however, was able to reveal many of the facts that had been previously excluded or covered up by revisiting the evidence.

It must be noted that the published Report includes a list of names of the disappeared and complainants. This list includes names of the disappeared, names of the complainants and their relationship to the disappeared, and addresses of complainants. This list raises concerns regarding allegations of threats against complainants who testifi ed before the commission.


The Southern Commission has the most comprehensive set of recommendations of any commission of inquiry under consideration. There is a total of one hundred and forty fi ve recommendations categorized in eight sections: (1) relief measures; (2) women; (3) legal proceedings; (4) preventative measures; (5) Habeas Corpus applications; (6) emergency regulations; (7) excavation of mass graves; and (8) complaints remaining to be inquired into. The recommendations address a wide range of concerns and, in some cases, seem only tangentially related to the issue of disappearances. Regrettably, the Commission did not prioritize the recommendations to help facilitate implementation of the most urgent recommendations.

52

6. COMMISSION OF INQUIRY INTO INVOLUNTARY REMOVAL AND DISAPPEARANCES OF CERTAIN PERSONS (ALL ISLAND)

WARRANT NO. : SP/6/N/214/97 of 30 April 1998DATE APPT’D : 30 April 1998BY : President Chandrika Bandaranaike

Kumaratunga COMPRISING : Manouri Kokila Muttetuwegama Esq.,

Chairperson Hetti Gamage Dharmadasa Esq. Ponnuchamy

Balavadivel Esq. Assisted By: Mr. M.C.M. Iqbal – Secretary Mr. PVW de

Silva (Ret. Senior Superintendent of Police) – Head of Investigation Unit Ms. Subashini Ramasamy – Head of Computer Unit

There is no reference in the Report to assistance by the Attorney General’s Department.

MANDATE : to inquire into and report on the following matters –

(a) The allegations about the involuntary removal of persons from their residences, or the disappearances of person s from their residences, made to the Commissions of Inquiry appointed under the Commissions of Inquiry Act, and terms of reference of which are published respectively, in Gazettes No. 855/18, 855/19 and 855/20 of January 25, 1995, being allegations in respect of which no investigations have

53

commenced on the respective dates, appointed by the respective warrants appointing such Commission of Inquiry, for the rendering of the reports of such Commissions of Inquiry;

(b) The evidence available to establish such alleged removals or disappearances;

(c) The present whereabouts of persons alleged to have been so removed or to have so disappeared;

(d) Whether there is any credible material indicative of the person or persons responsible for the alleged removals or disappearances;

(e) The legal proceedings that can be taken against the person held to be so responsible;

(f) The measures necessary to prevent the occurrence of such alleged activities in the future;

(g) The relief if any that should be afforded to the parents, spouses and dependents of the persons alleged to have been so removed or to have disappeared;

And to make such recommendations with reference to any of the matters that have been inquired into under the terms of this warrant.73

73. Final Report of the Commission of Inquiry into Involuntary Removal and Disappearances of Certain Persons (All Island), Sessional Paper No. I – 2001, March 2001, Annexure I, p. 91-93.

54

REPORT TITLE : Final Report of the Commission of Inquiry into Involuntary Removal and Disappearance of Certain Persons (All Island)

DATED : March 2001 CONTENTS : The All Island Commission Report

comprises two published Volumes, totaling 323 pages, of which Volume I comprises 87 pages of fi ndings and analysis, and 64 pages of annexures, the most relevant of which include lists of individuals for whom specifi c relief is recommended, relevant circulars regarding relief, correspondences with security forces regarding information on those responsible for disappearances, IGP’s circular regarding retention of information books; public administration’s ruling on who is a terrorist for relief purposes; President’s Directive on Arrests of Persons; and list of returned detainees cases where well founded evidence of abductors is available. Volume II comprises a 157-page list of names of the disappeared, including names of complainants and complainants’ addresses and a 14-page list of complaints of returned detainees inquired into, which includes their addresses. Two other volumes were also submitted. Volume III contains a list of persons against whom credible material indicative of responsibility for disappearances is available, which was handed over to the President under confi dential cover. Volume IV is a list of persons whose disappearances have been confi rmed by the president commissions.

55


The All Island Commission was created to complete the work of the three zonal commissions and inquire into the cases pending from those three commissions. Unlike the zonal commissions, the All Island Commission looked at involuntary removals and disappearances across the entire island and thus its Report presents a more complete picture of the period from 1988 onwards.


The structure of the Report follows the structure of the mandate and includes chapters on: (1) the mandate; (2) the present whereabouts of disappeared persons; (3) responsibility for the disappearances; (4) legal proceedings regarding those responsible; (5) preventative measures; and (6) recommendations on relief to affected persons. In addition, like the Southern Commission, the All Island Commission Report looks at special issues, including disappearances from the Jaffna district and Eastern Province, border villages, and the evidence of special witnesses. While not as comprehensive as the Southern Commission, the All Island Commission Report examines patterns and practices causing disappearances and includes specifi c cases illustrative of such patterns and practices.

The Report presents the most coherent and structured fi ndings and analysis of any of the Commissions. This is a result of two factors. First, the island-wide mandate of the Commission enabled it to examine the phenomenon of disappearances more completely. Second, the chairperson and the secretary of the All-Island Commission had been, respectively, the chairperson of the Southern Commission and the secretary of the Central Zone Commission, and thus they had developed experience on issues of both substance and process.

According to the Report, ten thousand one hundred and thirty six complaints were handed over to the Commission from the three zonal

56

Commissions. After excluding duplicates and complaints that did not come within the mandate, six thousand three hundred and forty fi ve were determined to be for inquiry. Of those, four thousand four hundred and seventy three were inquired into by the Commission. Of the six hundred and fi fty four complaints pertaining to returned detainees, the Commission inquired into three hundred and eighty four of them.

Although the Report does not clarify the reason behind the failure to inquire into all complaints, it implies that it was due to non-appearance of the complainants. Signifi cantly, the passage of time and the loss of hope were cited as major factors in non-appearance of complainants.74

Cases inquired into fell into the following categories: bodies were found and identifi ed; credible evidence of detention/seen in detention, evidence of abduction only; no evidence of abduction or detention; those abducted & released; and those alleged to have disappeared but traced subsequently.75

The Commission states that, although bodies were found in a mere six hundred and forty seven cases, “in the given context, the word “disappearance” is only a euphemism for the death caused by extra judicial killings.”76


While the All-Island Commission’s Report does make some suggestions for the importance of establishing in international law

74. Final Report, All Island Commission, p. 5.75. Final Report, All Island Commission, p. 6.76. Final Report, All Island Commission, p. 7.77. Keenan, Alan, “Exorcizing Ghosts and Disappearing Reports: Building the Political and

Social Conditions for Implementing the Recommendations of the Report of the All-Island Commission of Inquiry into Involuntary Removal and Disappearance of Certain Persons”, Presentation to the Law & Society Trust, Colombo, Sri Lanka, 14 August 2002.

57

the liability of non-state armed groups like the LTTE for violations of human rights, the bulk of its recommendations for confronting Sri Lanka’s recent legacy of unaccountable power and violence concern legal reforms to control the excesses of state power.77

The Commission “adopt[s] the recommendations of the earlier Commissions and stress[es] the need for swift action in respect of those recommendations.” Additionally, the Commission makes seventy nine specifi c recommendations of its own. Many of these recommendations are also recommendations made by prior commissions or variations on the same. The recommendations are organized according to the mandate: (1) present whereabouts; (2) responsibility; (3) legal proceedings; (4) preventive measures; (5) relief measures; and (6) alleged disappearances not within mandate.

58

7. COMMISSION OF INQUIRY INTO THE ESTABLISHMENT AND MAINTENANCE OF PLACES OF UNLAWFUL DETENTION AND TORTURE CHAMBERS AT THE BATALANDA HOUSING SCHEME

WARRANT NO. : SP/6/N/206/95DATE APPT’D : 15th December 1995BY : President Chandrika Bandaranaike

KumaratungaCOMPRISING : Dharmasiri Jayawickrame (Chairman) – High

Court Judge Nimal Edward Dissanayake – High Court Judge Mr. S.T. Gunawardena, former offi cer of SLAS – Secretary.

Assisted By: Mr. R.I. Obeysekere PC, former Crown

Counsel and former president of the Human Rights Committee of the Bar Association of Sri Lanka.

Mr. Sarath Jayamanne, State Counsel, representing the Attorney General’s Department.

Mr. Yasantha Kodagoda, State Counsel, representing the Attorney General’s Department.

Investigative Teams: The Committee had the assistance of two

investigative teams. Led by Senior Superintendent of Police S.C.

Pathirana, a team of eleven offi cers was permanently attached to the Commission.

59

Led by Deputy Inspector General T.V. Sumanasekera, a CID team of nine offi cers which had already conducted preliminary investigations into certain aspects covered by the Warrant, continued to investigate into some matters in respect had already been investigated by them.

MANDATE : to inquire and report on the following: (a) the circumstances relating to the

disappearance of Sub Inspector Rohitha Priyadarshana of the Sapugaskanda Police Station… and the persons directly or indirectly responsible…

(b) the circumstances relating to the arrest and subsequent detention of Sub Inspector Ajith Jayasinghe of the Peliyagoda Police Station… and the persons directly or indirectly responsible…

(c) the establishment and maintenance of a place or places of detention at the Batalanda Housing Scheme of the State Fertilizer Manufacturing Corporation and whether … any person or persons were so detained … and were subject to inhuman or degrading treatment or to treatment which constitute an offence under any written law as a result of a conspiracy and the person or persons directly or indirectly responsible for the same;

(d) whether any inquiry or probe into any of the aforesaid matters had been conducted by any offi cer and whether any person or persons directly or indirectly interfered

60

in such inquiry or probe and the person or persons responsible for such interference;

(e) whether any offi cer of any other person was responsible for the commission of any criminal offence under any written law, or the use of undue infl uence or misuse or abuse of power in relation to any of the aforesaid matters.

REPORT TITLE : Report of the Commission of Inquiry into the Establishment and Maintenance of Places of Unlawful Detention and Torture Chambers at the Batalanda Housing Scheme

DATED : 2000 CONTENTS : 167 page Report, of which 125 pages

comprise the main report, which presents a detailed factual accounting of the events and actors in context of the time period under review, the fi ndings as per the mandate and the recommendations, and 42 pages comprise annexures to the Report, including the mandate, lists of witnesses, counsel who appeared for witnesses, documents and productions, etc.


The Batalanda Housing Scheme was a government housing scheme widely rumored to be an unoffi cial place of detention, torture and death outside of Colombo during the Reign of Terror (1987 – 1991). A few high ranking UNP politicians, including former Prime Minister Ranil Wickramasinghe, were rumored to be involved in Batalanda.

Upon assuming offi ce in 1994, President Chandrika Kumaratunga constituted a number of Commissions of Inquiry into political

61

78. Report of the Commission of Inquiry into the Establishment and Maintenance of Places of Unlawful Detention and Torture Chambers at the Batalanda Housing Scheme, Sessional Paper No. I – 2000, p. 1.

79. Three victims who were housed in the Batalanda houses gave evidence before the Commission while two others, a policeman and an ayurvedic doctor, who were taken to the houses to see the tortured inmates, also testifi ed.

killings and human rights violations, including three Commissions on disappearances and the Batalanda Commission. The time period covered by the warrant for all these commissions is the same, from 1988 to 1990.78


The Commission’s detailed Report arises out of six thousand seven hundred and eighty pages of typed proceedings, contained in twenty eight volumes, and handed over to the President with the report. The Commission’s sittings spanned one hundred and twenty seven days, during which eighty two persons appeared before the Commission and one hundred and twenty six items of productions and documents were produced and marked as evidence by the witnesses.

The Report is signifi cant in that it provides the most well documented and substantiated case against individuals at every level of the state apparatus for human rights violations, including torture, disappearances and extra judicial killings, during the Reign of Terror. The Commission looked at the entire chain of command and, through the evidence presented, found that there was direct and indirect involvement at the highest levels of government.

The Report suggests that the Commission undertook a rigorous fact fi nding exercise, applying evidentiary standards not dissimilar to that of a court of law. The Commission was able to trace the events with the help of witnesses who had been detained at the same centres and had subsequently been released or escaped.79 The Committee took care to ensure that the testimony of witnesses was corroborated before being accepted as credible.

62

The Report presents a concise chapter of fi ndings, which details the specifi c fi ndings for each component of the mandate.80 This includes names of those individuals the Commission found to be responsible. The Report includes the names of thirteen police offi cers found to be directly responsible for torturing and illegally detaining individuals as part of counter subversive activities at the Batalanda Housing Scheme. The Commission named ASP Keerthi Atapattu as directly responsible, and ASP Peiris indirectly responsible, for the disappearance of SI Priyadharshana and indicated a political motive for the disappearance and killing. The Commission found ASP Peiris directly responsible for violating the human rights of SI Jayasinghe. Further, it found Minister Ranil Wickremasinghe indirectly responsible for violations for facilitating the use of the Housing Scheme and found that there was evidence to suggest that the Minister was aware of the illegal activities being carried out at Batalanda and that he tacitly supported those activities. Additionally, the Commission faulted a number of high-ranking offi cials in the police for not taking action as demanded by law.


The Commission, comprised of two sitting judges of the High Court, was concerned primarily with legal remedies. It recommended prosecutions, disciplinary action, and further investigations of the incidents and individuals found by the Commission to be responsible for those incidents. Additionally, the Commission recommended a code of conduct that would set out the responsibilities and duties of politicians and law enforcement offi cers and recommended that the Supreme Court be vested with the jurisdiction to deprive persistent violators of human rights of their civic rights.

80. Batalanda Report, p. 113-123.

63

8. PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSION OF INQUIRY INTO INCIDENTS THAT TOOK PLACE AT BINDUNUWEWA REHABILITATION CENTRE, BANDARAWELA ON 25 OCTOBER 2000

WARRANT NO. : SP/6/N/221/2001 DATE APPT’D : 8th March 2001BY : President Chandrika Kumaratunga

Bandaranaike COMPRISING : Mr. P.H.K. Kulatilaka, retired Appeal Court

Judge, Commissioner Mr. Edmund Jayasuriya, retired offi cer of the SLAS, Secretary

Assisted by: Deputy Solicitor General S. Palitha Fernando,

Attorney General’s Department Senior State Counsel S. Gamalath, Attorney General’s Department State Counsel S. Tissera, Attorney General’s Department

MANDATE : to inquire and report on the following matters;

(a) The circumstances that led to the incidents that took place at The Bindunuwewa Rehabilitation Centre on 25.10.2000 in the course of which 27 inmates died and 14 persons were injured.

(b) The administration of the Rehabilitation Centre at Bindunuwewa and the conduct of the Public offi cers in so far as it is relevant to the said incident.

(c) The person or persons, if any, directly or indirectly responsible, by act or omission for-

64

1. bringing about the said incidents 2. causing injuries to persons or the

death of inmates (d) The criteria applicable to the admission

of persons to rehabilitation centres and the location of such centres

(e) Methods adopted in rehabilitation of persons admitted to such centers

(f) The measures necessary to prevent the recurrence of such incidents and the remedial measures if any, to be taken in this regard, and to make such recommendations with reference to any of the matters that have been inquired into under the terms of the warrant.

REPORT TITLE : Report of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry into Incidents that Took Place at The Bindunuwewa Rehabilitation Centre, Bandarawela, on 25 October 2000

DATED : November 2001 (unpublished Report) CONTENTS : 242-page Report, of which 207 pages

comprise a discussion of various aspects of the mandate, including questions of fact, policy and law, as well as recommendations, and 31 pages comprise appendices including the mandate and lists of witnesses, documents produced, names of inmates, and names of deceased, etc.

65


On 25th October 2000, a mob attacked the government-run Bindunuwewa Rehabilitation Centre, unleashing violence that killed twenty seven Tamil inmates and injured fourteen inmates. The inmates were Tamil men and boys, some of who had been detained and others who had surrendered. Communal violence between Sinhalese and Tamils in the area surrounding Bindunuwewa ensued, lasting at least three days.

The Commission was appointed to inquire into the facts and circumstances surrounding the massacre and to address questions related to whether there was any outside infl uence or “unseen hand” behind the incident and the role played by the police who were armed and on duty at the centre and yet did nothing to stop the massacre.


The Report is a lengthy presentation of fact, policy, practice and law. The theory and practice of rehabilitation in general, in Sri Lanka, and at the Bindunuwewa Rehabilitation Centre is considered, including the suitability of the location of Bindunuwewa and other rehabilitation centres, the housing of surrendees and detainees in the same premises, the justifi cation for detention and rehabilitation of those who surrender out of fear of recruitment or terrorist activity, the methods of rehabilitation practiced at the centre and the general administration of the Centre.

The Report presents, in detail, the factual accounts of numerous victims, witnesses and alleged perpetrators of the massacre and the events that preceded the massacre, namely the revolt by the inmates on the 24th of October. The Commission reproduces the testimony of witnesses and juxtaposes testimony to present and analyze contradictions in its effort to reach conclusions about what actually happened.

66

The Report does identify responsible parties. After the revolt by the inmates on the 24th of October, the inmates, themselves, are deemed to be partially responsible for the massacre, as are the administrators of the centre. Heavy criticism is also directed at the police who failed to act even though some sixty armed policemen were present at the scene. The theory of a larger political conspiracy or unseen hand, however, is rejected with no obvious basis.

Despite the detail of the testimonies, the Report nonetheless fails to provide an exhaustive record of the events that occurred at the Bindunuwewa Rehabilitation Centre on the 25th October 2000 and reaches unsubstantiated conclusions about the lack of involvement of outside forces.81 According to one commentator.

While the Commission report certainly adds much to our knowledge about the massacre and the conditions that led to it… the overall framework it employs to interpret the attack obscures many of the deeper political dynamics at work in the camp and the rehabilitation system and largely depoliticizes the attack itself. 82

The limitations of the Report to some degree refl ect the limitations of the mandate. Rather than providing a focused mandate to thoroughly examine the massacre and assess responsibility, the mandate focuses more broadly on issues of rehabilitation. Thus, the Commission was more concerned with prevention of future incidents than understanding or punishing the crimes committed at Bindunuwewa.

81. According to Justice Kulatilaka, “I have already placed on the record that this attack was not master-minded or planned by any external forces and that it was not a pre-planned one.” Report of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry into Incidents that Took Place at Bindunuwewa Rehabilitation Centre, Bandarawela, on 25 October 2000 (unpublished), November 2001, p. 197.

82. Keenan, Alan, “Making Sense of Bindunuwewa – From Massacre to Acquittals”, LST Review, Vol. 15 Issue 2, 12 June 2005, 19 – 42, at 27.

67


Recommendations focus on changes to law, policy and practice related to rehabilitation, including the location and security of rehabilitation centres, the separation of detainees and surrendees and of adults and youth, the limitation of time periods for rehabilitation, staff recruitment and training, and screening of and limitations on those considered for rehabilitation. The Commission recommends prosecution of the responsible parties but does not specifi cally identify who those parties are. Rather, it recommends disciplinary action be taken against six police offi cers and that further inquiries be conducted into the conduct of the Offi cer-in-Charge of the Centre and his assistant.

68

9. PRESIDENTIAL TRUTH COMMISSION ON ETHNIC VIOLENCE (1981 – 1984)

WARRANT NO. : SP/6/N/223/2001DATE APPT’D : 23 July 2001BY : President Chandrika Bandaranaike

Kumaratunga COMPRISING : Suppiah Sharvananda Esq. (Retired CJ) -

Chairman Sathyaloka Sasita Sahabandu Esq., PC - Member Mohamed Mohamed Zuhair Esq., PC - Member

Assisted By: S.M.J. Senaratne (Ret. SLAS Offi cer) –

Secretary A.H.M.D. Nawaz, State Counsel, Attorney-General’s Department

MANDATE : Inquire and report on the following matters:- (a) the nature, causes and extent of – (i) the gross violation of human rights;

and (ii) the destruction of and damage to

property, committed as part of the ethnic violence which occurred during the period commencing from the beginning of the year 1981 and ending in December 1984, with special reference to the period of July 1983, including the circumstances which led to such violence;

(b) whether any person, group or institution was directly or indirectly responsible for such violence;

69

(c) the nature and extent of the damage, both physical and mental, suffered by the victims of such ethnic violence;

(d) what compensation or solatium should be granted to such victims or to their dependents or heirs;

(e) the institutional, administrative and legislative measures which need to be taken in order to prevent a recurrence of such violations of human rights and destruction or damage of property in the future and to promote national unity and reconciliation among all communities and to make such recommendations with reference to any of the matters that have been inquired into under the terms of this Warrant;

REPORT TITLE : Report of the Presidential Truth Commission on Ethnic Violence (1981 – 1984)

DATED : September 2002 CONTENTS : 235 page Report, approximately half of which

comprises a description of the historical context, fi ndings and recommendations and half of which is a case-by-case summary of the nature and extent of the damages suffered by the 939 victims listed. Volume II comprises documents that are not for publication, including recommended compensation for victims, record of evidence, and the list of documents and productions.

70


The year 1983 stands out in Sri Lanka’s history for its unprecedented levels of State sanctioned communal violence by the Sinhala majority against the Tamil minority. July 1983 – or Black July as it is commonly called – is often cited as the beginning of the war between the Government of Sri Lanka and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, although many commentators point to earlier dates. The violence, which had been foreshadowed by communal violence in 1958 and 1977 and the attack on the Jaffna Public Library in 1981, forever transformed the nature and identity of Sri Lanka and its people. After almost two decades of silence, the government of Sri Lanka appointed a Presidential Commission of Inquiry – which it called a “Truth Commission” – to inquire into the nature, causes and extent of gross violations of human rights and the destruction of property between January 1981 and December 1984.


As is evident in the Report, the Commission was a “truth commission” in name only.83 It was neither designed nor intended to be an actual truth commission, which had, as its fundamental objective, the search for truth. As such, the Report is weak on fi ndings. Instead, the commission devotes a signifi cant portion of its report to excerpts and quotes from

83. The Commission did not have, as its primary objective, the search for truth. Further its mandate was limited, both in terms of substance and time. Although extensions were subsequently given, the Commission originally was given a mere six months to submit its report. There was no transparent process that gave rise to the Commission. It was not part of a process of national reconciliation, although the language of reconciliation was used in both the mandate and the report. Although this was the fi rst time a Sri Lankan commission of inquiry was actually named a “truth commission,” the term “truth commission” has been loosely used at times to refer to some of Sri Lanka’s prior commissions of inquiry, namely the disappearances commissions. See, for example, Bulankulame, Indika “The Debates on Truth Commissions: A Retrospective Healing Process?”, Law & Society Trust, 2004. The use of the term is indicative of the term’s currency internationally, and does not adequately refl ect the reality of Sri Lanka’s commissions. Never has the requisite forethought and deliberation been devoted to the creation of any of Sri Lanka’s commissions of inquiry. Rather, they have been ad hoc and expedient institutional mechanisms that serve practical political ends while, in some cases, also serving important fact-fi nding, relief and rehabilitation functions.

71

other sources, including many that speak to the experiences of other countries. Further it endorses recommendations of others and suggests that the State further explore such recommendations rather than providing concrete recommendations of its own. Notably, the Report does refer to the Sansoni Commission and its Report, and quotes from the report.84

The Report is the most comprehensive documentation by the State to date of a period, the early 1980s, that was critical in the unfolding of Sri Lanka’s ethno-national political history. Nonetheless, the Commission’s fi ndings are limited. As pointed out by Suriya Wickremasinghe, Secretary of the Civil Rights Movement of Sri Lanka:

Where the Welikade massacres were concerned for instance [the commission] did hardly any – if any – investigation of its own. It relied on me (CRM) for practically everything (for instance, even the inquest proceedings were supplied to it by us) and seemed more than happy with just our material. What it should have done is taken our material as a starting point and then followed up from there, with all its powers of investigation and summoning witnesses, which we didn't have….85

The Report does not follow the structure of the mandate and does not devote a separate chapter to the question of responsibility. Instead, the substantive fi ndings are structured according to events – the burning of the Jaffna Public Library, July 1983, Sunday 24th July 1983, and ethnic violence at Welikada Prison – in which responsibility generally and in respect to particular individuals is discussed to varying degrees, depending on the information made available to the Commission.

84. The reference to the Sansoni Commission and its Report is found in the concluding comments of the Commission Report. In fact, the “Truth Commission” excerpts from a quote by Rev. Fr. Paul Caspersz S.J., who is quoted extensively in the Sansoni Report. Interestingly, both the Sansoni Report and the Truth Commission Report rely heavily on the words of others rather than reaching their own conclusions.

85. University Teachers for Human Rights (Jaffna), “Scripting the Welikada Massacre and the Fate of Two Dissidents”, Supplement to Special Report No. 25, 31 May 2007, p. 2.

72

86. Truth Commission Report, p. 27. 87. But see p. 64, Truth Commission Report, “[t]he Commission accepts the claims in 949

cases and is determined to recommend payment of compensation”.

There is no detailed analysis of State responsibility. Rather than focusing on patterns and practices of the State, the Report includes descriptions of incidents and conclusions regarding responsibility. For example, according to the Report, “[w]e can conclude that on the evidence placed before us, the burning of the library was a wanton criminal act committed by a contingent of policemen….”86

The Report does provide an overview of proximate and deeper causes, which include discriminatory polices and practices of the State and the repeated failure by the State to address Tamil grievances and rectify discrimination.

Notably, however, the Report provides summaries of the nature and extent of the damage suffered by victims of violence. The summaries are one paragraph in length and include the names and addresses of victims, descriptions of the incidents – in some cases with a name(s) of alleged perpetrator(s) – and whether compensation has been requested and/or received. The inclusion of summaries of nine hundred and thirty nine87 cases accepted for compensation is a unique feature of the report.


The Commission’s main recommendations relate to compensation and to national unity and ethnic reconciliation. There are no specifi c recommendations regarding prosecution or punishment for past acts or omissions by State actors. Instead, the Commission recommends prosecution of future acts of ethnic violence.

73

10 OTHER MECHANISMS

10.1. MINISTRY OF DEFENCE BOARD OF INVESTIGATION INTO DISAPPEARANCES IN JAFFNA PENINSULA

DATE APPT’D : 05.11.1996 BY : On a directive issued by President Chandrika

Bandaranaike in October 1996, the Secretary, Minister of Defence, appointed a Board of Investigation to inquire into complaints of disappearances in the Jaffna Peninsula.

COMPRISING : Mr. E.S. Gunathilake, Additional Secretary Defence – Chair Replaced by Mr Bandula Kulatunga, retired civil servant – Chair (12.96)

The Board included members from the three forces and from the police:

Major General W.A.A. de Silva, General Commanding Offi cer of the 1st Division of the Army

Rear Admiral H.C.A.C. Tissera, Chief of Staff of the Navy

Air Vice Marshal K.G.A. Peiris, Chief of Staff of the Air Force

P.B. Ekanayake –Senior Deputy Inspector General of Police.

Assisted By: Secretary, Offi cer from the Navy, two Petty Offi cers, a stenographer and a translator

74

MANDATE : Examine the written representations that have been made by the complainants and provide them an opportunity to make any further oral representations;

Examine all reports made by the Services and the Police Department on each of these incidents/allegations;

Assess whether proper procedural steps have been taken by the authorities concerned with regard to any incident and identify if any, failure on the part of the investigating offi cer to discover the true facts;

Assess whether there had been any attempt on the part of any offi cer or person to refrain from revealing the true position;

Examine whether there had been any avoidable delay in initiating inquiries on receipt of the fi rst information, if so why?

Assess the experience and capability of the Offi cers who conducted the investigations and as to whether they were properly acquainted with the correct procedure;

Examine the time taken to establish a Prima Facie Case;

Assess any action taken against the Offi cers, immediately on establishing a Prima Facie case, pending further inquiries;

Examine the corrective action taken by the supervising staff to arrest any further incidents;

Review and comment on the superior Offi cer’s knowledge and control over the persons under his command;

75

Can the Board of Investigation account for any person missing or can it identify an offi cer who is specifi cally accountable?

Has the inquiry been done to the satisfaction of the aggrieved Party? If not why?

Dissent and reservations expressed by the complainant.

REPORT TITLE : Report of the Board of Investigation into Disappearances in Jaffna Peninsula

DATED : 9 March 1998 CONTENTS : 10 page Report, with approximately 190 pages

of annexures, most of which are lists of names of persons, including most signifi cantly, names of those released, names of those disappeared and the complainants, cases were evidence has revealed suffi cient information regarding the suspected offender, cases where evidence did not reveal information to pursue further action, and others.


The Board was appointed after revelations, in 1996, of a sharp rise in disappearances and other rights violations in Jaffna and widespread national and international pressure that ensued. The increase came in the wake of a July 1996 suicide bombing in Jaffna, targeting a visiting Minister, and the Tiger’s successful attack on Mullaitivu Army Base.


According to the Report, the Government appointed the Board because the “existing procedure of inquiry into these complaints was by the Police or the Military itself against whom these complaints were made” and such procedure was found to be “ineffective and totally

76

unacceptable.”88 However questions persist about the impartiality of the Board appointed by the Ministry of Defence and consisting of personnel from the security forces and police.89

Having received a total of two thousand six hundred and twenty one complaints from a wide range of local and international sources, the Board processed the names and addresses of the complaints and determined that on deletion of repetitions the number of actual alleged disappearances was seven hundred and sixty fi ve.

The seven hundred and sixty fi ve cases were categorized into three groups; (1) cases where facts revealed suffi cient grounds to pursue investigations against offenders, of which there were twenty fi ve; (2) cases in which there was suffi cient information about the incident but where there was insuffi cient evidence for pursuance of legal action, of which there were one hundred and thirty eight; and (3) cases in which evidence did not reveal information to pursue further inquiry, of which there were two hundred and nineteen.

The Board found that a sudden increase in arrests was triggered by the July 1996 suicide bombing that killed a Minister and the overrunning of the Mullaitivu Army Camp. The Board failed to note, however, that the number of disappearances also rose suddenly at the same time.90 The sudden increase in arrests and reported disappearances is

88. Report of the Board of Investigation into Disappearances in Jaffna Peninsula, Ministry of Defence, March 9, 1998, p. 1.

89. “MoD eyewash over Jaffna disappearances,” TamilNet, October 04, 1997 23:59 GMT, http://www.tamilnet.com.

The Association for the Defense of the Arrested and Disappeared protested about the list of “disappeared” persons published by the Board. Reportedly, the MOD’s list is comprised mostly of people already released or offi cially acknowledged to be under arrest. Leaders of the Association said that they believed that the Board was engaged in delayed tactics aimed at diverting international attention away from the issue.

90. Report of the Committee on Disappearances in the Jaffna Region, Human Rights Commission, October 2003, p. 15.

77

91. MoD Report, p. 3.

suggestive of a pattern of reprisal killings by members of the armed forces. The Board does not speak to this issue.


Where there was suffi cient evidence, cases were referred to the Inspector General of Police (IGP) and commanders of the relevant forces.

The Board requested the service commanders and the IGP “to strictly adhere to the provisions of the Emergency Regulations when arrests are made to ensure accountability”91 and stressed the need for the issuance of receipts to the next of kin upon arrest.

78

10.2. THE COMMITTEE ON DISAPPEARANCES IN THE JAFFNA REGION, HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSIONOF SRI LANKA

DATE APPT’D : 2002, though the date of appointment is not specifi ed in the report.92

BY : The Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka under section 11(b) of the HRC Act of 1996.

COMPRISING : Dr. Devanesan Nesiah – Chair Jezima Ismail - Member KH Camillus Fernando – Member Assisted By: M.C.M. Iqbal – Secretary Staff of fi ve MANDATE : To inquire into complaints [the Human

Rights Commission] has received regarding disappearances and removal of persons from their residences in Jaffna, Kilinochchi and Vavuniya Districts during the period 1990 to 1998 and report on the following matters.

Whether the persons in the list provided by the Guardians’ Association of those Arrested and Disappeared from the North, The Displaced North Muslims Organization, and the complaints pertaining to this period received by the Regional Offi ce of the Human Rights Commission in Jaffna … have been involuntarily removed or had disappeared from their places of residence during the period mentioned by the complainants;

92. “Devanesan Nesiah appointed to inquire Jaffna disappearances,” http://www.tamilnet.com, TamilNet, November 30, 2002 15:20 GMT.

79

All the circumstances pertaining to the alleged involuntary removals or disappearances;

The present condition and whereabouts of the persons alleged to have been so removed or to have so disappeared;

Reports made by complainants that the missing persons are being held in unidentifi ed prisons & places of detention;

The evidence available for identifying the person or persons responsible for these alleged disappearances and the fi ndings based on such evidence;

The relief, if any, that should be provided to parents spouses and dependents of the persons alleged to have been removed or disappeared;

… If in the course of its inquiries the committee

deals with cases of complainants, particularly women and children who are in severely distressed circumstances and who may be in need of special care and support, the Committee should report such cases to the Commission for special relief….

REPORT TITLE : Report of the Committee on Disappearances in the Jaffna Region

DATE : October 2003 CONTENTS : 58 page Report, with 148 pages of annexures,

including lists of persons whose certifi cates confi rming disappearance had been given, persons alleged to be responsible, persons to whom relief is recommended, extracts from reports of prior commission, relevant circulars, etc.

80


After the signing of the Ceasefi re Agreement in 2002, the National Human Rights Commission embarked upon “a special effort directed towards the protection and promotion of human rights in the Jaffna region for the strengthening of the ongoing peace process.”93 As part of this effort, the Commission appointed a Committee to inquire into “disappearances and the removal of persons” during the period 1990 – 1998.


The Report examines patterns and practices of the State that emerge from the two hundred and eighty one cases into which the Committee inquired. It must be noted, however, that these cases span an eight-year period, during which the situation in the North changed dramatically. Jaffna was controlled by the LTTE from 1990 until 1995 and by the government of Sri Lanka from 1995 onwards.

According to the Committee, “it transpired during our inquiries that many complaints of disappearances from Jaffna and a very high number of disappearances from the North and East are yet to be taken up for investigation” and that “the complaints referred to us constitute only a minor fraction of the total number of disappearances that had occurred….”94

The Report examines cases by both State and non-State actors, although the majority of disappearances have been at the hands of State actors.95 The Committee’s attempts to seek information from both the Army

93. HRC Committee Report, p. 95.94. HRC Committee Report, p. 12.95. Of the two hundred and eighty one cases, two hundred and fi fty six were Tamils and twenty

fi ve were Muslims. The twenty fi ve Muslims had been taken by the LTTE and subsequently disappeared. Of the two hundred and fi fty six Tamils, two had been shot dead, two hundred and forty fi ve had been taken by the Army and then disappeared, fi ve had disappeared without a trace, and three had returned home.

81

and the LTTE were unsuccessful. Specifi cally, it had been unable to secure information from the Army about the present whereabouts of thirty seven offi cers implicated in the disappearances.

Factors contributing to the persistence of disappearances include: the Army’s failure to hand over those they arrest to the police; police complicity, including the deliberate distortion of recorded statements; failure of the police to record statements in the language in which they were made. Other practices included: the blindfolding of victims, night arrests by masked men, blatant disclaiming of responsibility even when numerous witnesses identifi ed the responsible party, and denials to family members of the fact of arrest by army personnel.


The Committee made general recommendations, as well as specifi c recommendations in regard to those to whom relief should be granted.

82

PART 2THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE DISAPPEARANCES COMMISSIONS

This Part examines and tabulates the recommendations by the three zonal Commissions of Inquiry into Disappearances (1994) and the 1998 All Island Commission on Disappearances.

It also provides a pointer to the current state of the law as compared against the recommendations and refers to emergency law for that purpose.

The emergency law regime referred to in this Part comprises the Emergency (Miscellaneous Provisions and Powers) Regulation No 1 of 2005 as contained in Gazette No 1405/14, as amended particularly on August 5th 2008 by Gazette No 1561/11 and on May 2nd 2010 by Gazette No 1651/24 as well as the Emergency (Prevention and Prohibition of Terrorism and Specifi ed Terrorist Activities) Regulation No 7 of 2006 as contained in Gazette No 1474/5 of 6 December 2006 (as amended).

These Regulations have been promulgated under the Public Security Ordinance, (PSO) No 24 of 1947 (as amended). The Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance (PTA), Act No 48 of 1979 (as amended) will also be referred to.

83

* R

efer

ral c

onsi

sten

tly to

Rec

omm

enda

tion

num

ber i

n C

omm

issi

on re

port.

**

Ref

erra

l con

sist

ently

to p

age

num

ber i

n C

omm

issi

on re

port.

96.

Rec

omm

enda

tions

by

Am

nest

y In

tern

atio

nal

incl

ude;

“En

sure

tha

t al

l vi

olat

ions

of

hum

an r

ight

s an

d in

tern

atio

nal

hum

anita

rian

law

, irr

espe

ctiv

e of

the

iden

tity

of th

e pe

rpet

rato

r, ar

e pr

ompt

ly, i

ndep

ende

ntly

, im

parti

ally

and

thor

ough

ly in

vest

igat

ed.”

Am

nest

y In

tern

atio

nal,

June

200

9, p

.49.

97.

Not

im

plem

ente

d.98

. “F

or th

is c

olla

bora

tion

to b

e ef

fect

ive,

the

Sri L

anka

n H

uman

Rig

hts

Com

mis

sion

(HR

C) n

eeds

to b

e su

ppor

ted

and

stre

ngth

ened

, and

its

inde

pend

ence

mus

t be

rest

ored

. The

follo

win

g st

eps a

re c

ruci

al.

-

The

HR

C sh

ould

be

in a

pos

ition

to a

ccou

nt fo

r eve

ry h

uman

righ

ts v

iola

tion

inve

stig

ated

as a

crim

e.

- R

esto

re th

e H

RC

’s in

depe

nden

ce a

nd im

parti

ality

, in

parti

cula

r th

roug

h im

plem

entin

g th

e 17

th A

men

dmen

t to

the

Con

stitu

tion

of th

e D

emoc

ratic

Soc

ialis

t Rep

ublic

of S

ri La

nka

(197

8), c

ertifi

ed

on 3

rd O

ctob

er 2

001

and

its sc

hedu

le.

-

Ensu

re th

at th

e HR

C’s

wor

k is

fully

supp

orte

d fi n

anci

ally

so as

to en

able

it to

inve

stig

ate h

uman

righ

ts v

iola

tions

inde

pend

ently

, tho

roug

hly

and

effi c

ient

ly.

-

Esta

blis

h a

syst

em t

o pr

ovid

e th

e re

leva

nt a

utho

ritie

s w

ith d

etai

led

info

rmat

ion

that

the

y ca

n us

e to

aid

the

m i

n in

vest

igat

ions

and

pr

osec

utio

ns. P

roce

dure

s mus

t be

esta

blis

hed

in la

w to

con

side

r the

HR

C’s

reco

mm

enda

tions

.

CAT

EG

OR

YO

F R

EC

RE

CO

MM

EN

DAT

ION

(AS

STAT

ED

IN R

EPO

RT

)C

oI &

RE

POR

TY

EA

R

Furth

er in

vest

igat

ions

of t

he c

ompl

aint

s of r

etur

ned

deta

inee

s be

done

as a

mat

ter o

f urg

ency

.96 I.

1*A

ll Is

land

, Fin

al

(82)

**20

01

The

evid

ence

of r

etur

ned

deta

inee

s on

the

even

ts th

ey w

itnes

sed

whi

le in

cus

tody

be

reco

rded

.97 I.

2A

ll Is

land

, Fin

al

(82)

2001

The

Hum

an R

ight

s C

omm

issi

on b

e di

rect

ed t

o de

al w

ith

inst

ance

s of

tortu

re o

f re

turn

ed d

etai

nees

inqu

ired

into

by

this

C

omm

issi

on.98

I.3

All

Isla

nd, F

inal

(8

2)20

01

INV

EST

IGA

TIO

NS

84

In r

espe

ct o

f th

e lis

ts o

f na

mes

of

indi

vidu

als

in r

espe

ct o

f w

hom

TH

ERE

IS C

RED

IBLE

MAT

ERIA

L in

dica

tive

of th

eir

resp

onsi

bilit

y fo

r dis

appe

aran

ces o

f cer

tain

per

sons

….

… Y

our C

omm

issi

oner

s rec

omm

end

that

-*

the

inve

stig

atio

ns b

y th

e IG

P sh

ould

be

unde

r the

supe

rvis

ion

of th

e Atto

rney

Gen

eral

, and

* t

he d

eter

min

atio

n of

the

appr

opria

te le

gal p

roce

edin

gs sh

ould

be

by

the A

ttorn

ey G

ener

al.”

II.2

All

Isla

ndFi

nal (

9,10

)20

01

-

Esta

blis

h cl

early

defi

ned

rule

s for

co-o

pera

tion

betw

een

the p

olic

e, th

e Atto

rney

Gen

eral

’s O

ffi ce

and

the H

RC

in ad

dres

sing

hum

an ri

ghts

vi

olat

ions

, with

out c

ompr

omis

ing

the

latte

r’s in

depe

nden

ce. T

hese

gui

delin

es m

ust b

e m

ade

avai

labl

e to

the

publ

ic so

that

the

popu

latio

n ca

n un

ders

tand

how

com

plai

nts a

re in

vest

igat

ed a

nd p

rose

cute

d.

“The

HR

C m

ust v

et a

nd su

perv

ise

its st

aff a

t a lo

cal l

evel

to e

nsur

e th

eir p

rofe

ssio

nalis

m a

nd a

dher

ence

to h

uman

righ

ts p

rinci

ples

.” A

mne

sty

Inte

rnat

iona

l, Ju

ne 2

009,

p.4

9. T

he H

uman

Rig

hts

Com

mis

sion

(HR

C) i

s la

rgel

y dy

sfun

ctio

nal a

t the

tim

e of

writ

ing.

It w

as re

-con

stitu

ted

in 2

006

by th

e Pr

esid

ent i

n th

e ab

senc

e of

the

Con

stitu

tiona

l Cou

ncil.

Thi

s app

oint

men

t has

bee

n la

rgel

y cr

itici

sed

as b

eing

a v

iola

tion

of th

e 17

th A

men

dmen

t to

the

Con

stitu

tion,

and

the

HR

C w

as d

owng

rade

d fr

om A

to B

sta

tus

in M

arch

200

7 by

the

Inte

rnat

iona

l Co-

ordi

natin

g C

omm

ittee

of N

atio

nal H

uman

Rig

hts I

nstit

utio

ns. T

he d

owng

radi

ng w

as re

new

ed in

200

9. T

he m

anda

te o

f the

HR

C la

psed

in M

ay 2

009

and

it ha

s not

bee

n re

cons

titut

ed a

s at 3

0/03

/201

0.

85

The

inve

stig

atio

ns

into

th

e pe

rson

s ag

ains

t w

hom

th

eC

omm

issi

on h

ad f

ound

cre

dibl

e m

ater

ial

indi

cativ

e of

the

ir re

spon

sibi

lity

for

disa

ppea

ranc

es b

e do

ne b

y th

e In

spec

tor

Gen

eral

of P

olic

e un

der t

he o

vera

ll su

perv

isio

n of

the

Atto

rney

G

ener

al99

. II.2

The

Atto

rney

G

ener

al

to

dete

rmin

e th

e ap

prop

riate

le

gal

proc

eedi

ngs t

o be

take

n ag

ains

t suc

h pe

rson

s100 .

II.3

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (82

)

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (82

)

2001

2001

It is

impe

rativ

e an

d ac

cord

ingl

y re

com

men

ded

that

the

Polic

e in

vest

igat

ions

be

done

in re

spec

t of t

he re

com

men

datio

ns o

f all

the

Pres

iden

tial C

omm

issi

ons

with

rega

rd to

the

perp

etra

tors

of

disa

ppea

ranc

es o

f pe

rson

s an

d no

t be

don

e on

a c

ase-

by-c

ase

basi

s al

one.

The

inve

stig

atio

ns n

eed

be d

one

in s

uch

a m

anne

r as

to g

ive

the

vict

ims c

onfi d

ence

in th

eir i

mpa

rtial

ity.

All

Isla

ndFi

nal (

15)

1997

99.

Am

nest

y In

tern

atio

nal m

akes

seve

ral r

ecom

men

datio

ns w

ith re

gard

to in

vest

igat

ions

in th

is ty

pe o

f situ

atio

n as

follo

ws;

“Th

e Po

lice

Spec

ial

Inve

stig

atio

ns U

nit (

SIU

) sho

uld

be st

reng

then

ed an

d ex

pand

ed b

y m

akin

g it

an in

vest

igat

ing

unit

man

date

d to

inve

stig

ate c

ompl

aint

s of g

ross

ab

uses

of h

uman

righ

ts o

n a

perm

anen

t bas

is. M

embe

rs o

f the

SIU

shou

ld n

ot b

e as

sign

ed to

any

task

oth

er th

an th

e in

vest

igat

ion

of h

uman

rig

hts

viol

atio

ns. I

ts re

sour

ces

shou

ld b

e ex

pand

ed. C

onsi

der r

ecom

men

datio

ns m

ade

by S

ri La

nkan

lega

l exp

erts

that

the

wor

k of

the

SIU

sh

ould

be

supe

rvis

ed b

y of

fi cer

s of t

he A

ttorn

ey G

ener

al’s

dep

artm

ent,

espe

cial

ly a

ssig

ned

for t

his p

urpo

se, a

nd (t

o av

oid

furth

er c

onfl i

cts o

f in

tere

st) h

oldi

ng n

o ot

her a

ssig

nmen

ts.”

Am

nest

y In

tern

atio

nal,

June

200

9, p

.50.

100.

A sp

ecia

l uni

t nam

ed th

e M

issi

ng P

erso

ns U

nit w

as e

stab

lishe

d in

199

8 at

the A

ttorn

ey G

ener

al’s

Dep

artm

ent t

o ad

vise

on

inve

stig

atio

ns a

nd

to c

ondu

ct p

rose

cutio

ns in

cas

es o

f Dis

appe

aran

ces.

By

1st J

anua

ry, 2

000

this

Uni

t had

initi

ated

two

hund

red

and

thirt

een

pros

ecut

ions

in

the

Hig

h C

ourt

and

seve

nty

nine

non

-sum

mar

y in

quire

s in

Mag

istra

te’s

Cou

rts. A

ll Is

land

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

Ann

exur

e IV

– P

artic

ular

s of

Pros

ecut

ions

Initi

ated

by

Mis

sing

Per

sons

’ Uni

t, p.

98.

86

The

Polic

e in

vest

igat

ions

be

do

ne

in

resp

ect

of

the

reco

mm

enda

tions

of

al

l Pr

esid

entia

l C

omm

issi

ons

on

Dis

appe

aran

ces

with

reg

ard

to p

erpe

trato

rs o

f di

sapp

eara

nces

an

d no

t be

done

on

a ca

se b

y ca

se b

asis

101 .

II.5

The

inve

stig

atio

ns b

e do

ne i

n su

ch a

man

ner

as t

o gi

ve t

he

vict

ims

confi

den

ce i

n th

e im

parti

ality

of

pers

ons

cond

uctin

g su

ch in

vest

igat

ions

102 .

II.6

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (82

)

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (82

)

2001

2001

Fore

nsic

Sk

ills/

M

ass G

rave

sJu

dici

al M

edic

al O

ffi ce

r (J

MO

) to

be

train

ed t

o de

tect

sex

ual

abus

e103 .

II.2

Sout

hern

, Fi

nal

(171

)19

97

It w

ould

be

unde

sira

ble

to d

isin

ter

Mas

s G

rave

s un

til r

equi

site

sk

ills e

xist

. VII

.1So

uthe

rn,

Fina

l (1

78)

1997

101.

“In

resp

onse

to th

e re

com

men

datio

ns o

f the

ear

lier C

omm

issi

ons

that

the

inde

pend

ence

of i

nves

tigat

ions

be

safe

guar

ded,

a D

isap

pear

ance

s In

vest

igat

ion

Uni

t (D

IU) h

as b

een

set u

p un

der t

he D

eput

y In

spec

tor G

ener

al o

f Pol

ice

of th

e C

rimin

al In

vest

igat

ions

Dep

artm

ent.”

All

Isla

nd

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

2001

p. 1

5.10

2.

Am

nest

y In

tern

atio

nal r

ecom

men

ds “

ensu

ring

effe

ctiv

e in

vest

igat

ions

, due

pro

cess

and

swift

pro

secu

tion

of a

ll pe

rpet

rato

rs, i

nclu

ding

thos

e en

joyi

ng p

oliti

cal i

nfl u

ence

and

hig

h so

cial

stat

us;”

Am

nest

y In

tern

atio

nal,

June

200

9 at

p.1

3.10

3.

The f

ailu

re b

y JM

O’s

to d

etec

t and

repo

rt se

xual

abus

e per

sist

s. In

Nan

dini

Her

ath’

s cas

e the

vic

tim w

as sh

own

to th

e Kan

dy G

ener

al H

ospi

tal

JMO

who

reco

rded

onl

y tw

o co

ntus

ions

and

a fr

actu

re, w

here

as sh

e w

as a

vic

tim o

f sex

ual a

ssau

lt an

d fo

rens

ic m

edic

al e

vide

nce

subm

itted

se

ven

mon

ths

afte

r her

arr

est t

estifi

ed

to s

uch

assa

ult.

It is

als

o do

cum

ente

d th

at fo

rens

ic m

edic

al e

xper

ts la

ck th

e tra

inin

g, e

quip

men

t and

ve

hicl

es n

eces

sary

. see

Kis

hali

Pint

o-Ja

yaw

arde

na, “

The

Rule

of L

aw in

Dec

line,

Stu

dy o

n Pr

eval

ence

, Det

erm

inan

ts an

d Ca

uses

of T

ortu

re

and

othe

r For

ms o

f Cru

el, I

nhum

an o

r Deg

radi

ng T

reat

men

t or P

unish

men

t in

Sri L

anka

,” T

he R

ehab

ilita

tion

and

Res

earc

h C

entre

for T

ortu

re

Vic

tims (

RC

T), M

ay 2

009,

Den

mar

k [h

erei

nafte

r ref

erre

d to

as R

CT

Stud

y] a

t p. 1

26 (N

andi

ni H

erat

h ca

se) a

nd a

t p. 1

74.

87

104.

Not

impl

emen

ted.

105.

Not

adh

ered

to.

It is

nec

essa

ry t

o de

velo

p tra

inin

g in

the

req

uisi

te s

kills

with

th

e as

sist

ance

of i

nter

natio

nal a

genc

ies

such

as

the

UN

Hum

an

Rig

hts C

omm

ittee

Wor

king

Gro

up o

n En

forc

ed a

nd In

volu

ntar

y D

isap

pear

ance

s. V

II.2

(i)

Sout

hern

, Fi

nal

(178

)19

97

Esta

blis

h a

Hum

an Id

entifi

cat

ion

Cen

tre (H

RC

) to:

(a) t

rain

fore

nsic

pat

holo

gist

s and

scie

ntis

ts in

all

aspe

cts o

f

ide

ntifi

catio

n.(b

) pr

ovid

e m

oder

n st

ate

of th

e ar

t tec

hniq

ues,

incl

udin

g D

NA

pr

ofi li

ng,

com

pute

rized

fa

cial

re

cons

truct

ion

and

phot

o co

mpa

rison

, vi

deo

supe

rimpo

sitio

n an

d an

thro

pom

etric

an

alys

is.10

4 VII

.2(ii

)

Sout

hern

,Fi

nal (

178)

1997

In t

he m

eanw

hile

, in

form

atio

n sh

ould

be

colle

cted

as

to t

he

exis

tenc

e of

Mas

s G

rave

s, an

d re

cord

loc

atio

n/da

te/a

genc

y in

volv

ed/id

entit

y of

bod

ies

alle

ged

to b

e in

the

sai

d M

ass

Gra

ves.

Acc

ordi

ngly

, an

appr

opria

te a

utho

rity

for

this

task

be

iden

tifi e

d105 .

VII

.2(ii

i)

Sout

hern

, Fi

nal

(178

)19

97

88

Spec

ial

Mec

hani

sms

Spec

ial

Inve

stig

ativ

e U

nit

Polic

e inv

estig

atio

ns by

a sp

ecia

l uni

t und

er th

e dire

ct su

perv

isio

n of

an

offi c

er n

ot b

elow

the

rank

of D

eput

y In

spec

tor G

ener

al10

6 . II

I.1

Sout

hern

, Fi

nal

(171

)19

97

The

Dis

appe

aran

ces

Inve

stig

atio

ns

Uni

t es

tabl

ishe

d in

th

e C

rimin

al In

vest

igat

ion D

epar

tmen

t of t

he P

olic

e be w

ell e

quip

ped

and

prov

ided

with

all

logi

stic

al s

uppo

rt ne

cess

ary

for

them

to

perf

orm

the

ir du

ties

of p

roce

edin

g ag

ains

t th

ose

resp

onsi

ble,

ef

fect

ivel

y107 .

III.1

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (82

)20

01

The

Polic

e re

cord

s su

ch a

s in

form

atio

n B

ooks

, Die

t Reg

iste

rs,

Mov

emen

t of R

egis

ters

and

Med

ical

Rec

ords

be

hand

ed o

ver t

o th

e D

isap

pear

ance

s In

vest

igat

ion

Uni

t of t

he C

ID to

ens

ure

the

safe

ty o

f suc

h bo

oks10

8 . II

I.3

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (83

)20

01

106.

“In

resp

onse

to th

e re

com

men

datio

ns o

f the

ear

lier C

omm

issi

ons

that

the

inde

pend

ence

of i

nves

tigat

ions

be

safe

guar

ded,

a D

isap

pear

ance

s In

vest

igat

ion

Uni

t (D

IU) h

as b

een

set u

p un

der t

he D

eput

y In

spec

tor G

ener

al o

f Pol

ice

of th

e C

rimin

al In

vest

igat

ions

Dep

artm

ent.”

All

Isla

nd

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

2001

, p. 1

5. A

mne

sty

Inte

rnat

iona

l has

com

men

ted

on th

e inv

estig

atio

n of

hum

an ri

ghts

vio

latio

ns in

Sri

Lank

a adv

erse

ly.

It m

akes

the

follo

win

g re

com

men

datio

n; “

Sri L

anka

lack

s com

pete

nt a

nd c

redi

ble

mec

hani

sms f

or in

vest

igat

ing

hum

an ri

ghts

vio

latio

ns. A

s pa

rt of

its

revi

ew, t

he g

over

nmen

t sho

uld

expl

ore

the

crea

tion

of s

uch

a m

echa

nism

(one

sug

gest

ion

is a

n In

depe

nden

t Pro

secu

tor’s

Offi

ce)

with

a m

anda

te to

con

duct

inde

pend

ent i

nves

tigat

ions

in c

o-op

erat

ion

with

the

Hum

an R

ight

s C

omm

issi

on.”

Am

nest

y In

tern

atio

nal,

June

20

09, p

. 49.

107.

The

Dis

appe

aran

ces I

nves

tigat

ions

Uni

t (he

rein

afte

r DIU

) suf

fers

from

lack

of r

esou

rces

and

qua

lifi e

d, d

edic

ated

cor

e pe

rson

nel.

Its p

rese

nt

stat

e of

func

tioni

ng is

unc

erta

in.

108.

Cur

rent

stat

us o

f thi

s rec

omm

enda

tion

is u

ncle

ar th

ough

reco

rds h

ave

been

han

ded

over

to th

e D

IU in

spec

ifi c

case

s.

89

109.

The

next

Com

mis

sion

, the

All

Isla

nd C

omm

issi

on, d

id n

ot h

ave

a m

anda

te to

rev

isit

case

s th

at h

ad a

lread

y be

en c

onsi

dere

d by

the

prio

r C

omm

issi

ons,

see A

ll Is

land

Fin

al, p

.111

0.

Thos

e co

mpl

aint

s wer

e tu

rned

ove

r to

the A

ll Is

land

Com

mis

sion

, see

All

Isla

nd F

inal

, p.1

111.

“The

con

clus

ions

and

reco

mm

enda

tions

of t

hese

Com

mis

sion

s of I

nqui

ry sh

ould

be

mad

e pu

blic

and

eas

ily a

cces

sibl

e, a

long

with

an

offi c

ial

stat

us re

port

on im

plem

enta

tion.

” A

mne

sty

Inte

rnat

iona

l, Ju

ne 2

009,

p. 4

8; “

Dis

cipl

inar

y co

ntro

l of p

olic

e of

fi cer

s sh

ould

not

be

dele

gate

d to

the

Insp

ecto

r Gen

eral

of P

olic

e. T

he N

aton

al P

olic

e C

omm

issi

on (N

PC) s

houl

d cl

early

arti

cula

te w

hat t

ypes

of m

isco

nduc

t or a

buse

of

right

s it

will

inve

stig

ate

and

wha

t pen

altie

s w

ill r

esul

t if

com

plai

nts

are

prov

ed to

be

true.

” A

mne

sty

Inte

rnat

iona

l, Ju

ne 2

009,

p.5

0. T

he

Nat

iona

l Pol

ice

Com

mis

sion

whi

ch is

the

inde

pend

ent b

ody

crea

ted

by th

e 17

th A

men

dmen

t in

char

ge o

f th

e ap

poin

tmen

t, tra

nsfe

r an

d di

scip

linar

y co

ntro

l of p

olic

e of

fi cer

s is n

ow d

efun

ct in

the

abse

nce

of th

e ap

poin

tmen

t of t

he C

onst

itutio

nal C

ounc

il. U

nder

Arti

cle

155J

of

the

Con

stitu

tion,

the

NPC

was

em

pow

ered

to d

eleg

ate

to th

e In

spec

tor G

ener

al o

f Pol

ice

the

pow

ers

of d

isci

plin

ary

cont

rol a

nd d

ism

issa

l of

any

cat

egor

y of

pol

ice

offi c

er, s

ubje

ct to

con

ditio

ns p

resc

ribed

by

the

NPC

itse

lf, se

e R

CT

Stud

y, p

.108

. Dur

ing

its se

cond

term

the

NPC

de

lega

ted

disc

iplin

ary

pow

ers

over

offi

cers

bel

ow th

e ra

nk o

f Chi

ef In

spec

tor t

o th

e IG

P. S

ee K

isha

li Pi

nto-

Jaya

war

dena

, Tho

ught

s on

the

drow

ning

of o

ne m

an, S

unda

y Ti

mes

, Nov

embe

r 8, 2

009,

at p

. 12.

Cur

rent

ly th

e Se

cret

ary

to th

e M

inis

try o

f Def

ence

exe

rcis

es th

e po

wer

s of

the

NPC

in th

e ab

senc

e of

the

cons

titut

ion

of th

e N

PC b

y th

e C

onst

itutio

nal C

ounc

il.

Gen

eral

The

Com

mis

sion

feel

s tha

t on

ex-p

arte

evi

denc

e al

one,

it c

anno

t de

cide

on

the g

uilt

of th

ese p

eopl

e. H

ence

, pro

per i

nqui

ries h

ave

to b

e un

derta

ken

and

evid

ence

giv

en b

y th

e co

mpl

aina

nts s

houl

d st

and

the

scru

tiny

of c

ross

-exa

min

atio

n. T

his

is a

task

we

leav

e fo

r the

nex

t Com

mis

sion

.109

542

com

plai

nts

rece

ived

by

this

Com

mis

sion

rem

ain

to b

e in

vest

igat

ed.11

0 VII

I

NE

Fina

l (62

)

Sout

hern

,Fi

nal (

178)

1997

1997

Spec

ifi c

Pers

ons

It is

ther

efor

e re

com

men

ded

that

ASP

Indr

an (A

nam

aduw

a th

en

at S

L A

rmy

Res

erve

Hea

dqua

rters

) be

sent

on

com

puls

ory

leav

e im

med

iate

ly to

pre

vent

him

inte

rfer

ing

with

the

witn

esse

s an

y fu

rther

, and

to e

nabl

e in

vest

igat

ions

into

com

plai

nts w

here

he

is

invo

lved

to c

omm

ence

.111

Cen

tral,

Inte

rim

VII

(21)

Oct

. 199

6

90

LE

GA

L PR

OC

EE

DIN

GS

CAT

EG

OR

Y

OF

RE

CR

EC

OM

ME

ND

ATIO

N(A

S ST

ATE

D IN

RE

POR

T)

CoI

&R

EPO

RT

YE

AR

Pros

ecut

ions

Fora

The

cour

ts m

ust

alw

ays

be t

he a

rbite

r of

crim

inal

lia

bilit

y.

III.2

(i)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(171

)19

97

Cou

rts o

f fi rs

t ins

tanc

e to

be id

entifi

ed

whe

reve

r pos

sibl

e as m

ost

acce

ssib

le to

the

petit

ione

r, i.e

. the

Mag

istra

te’s

Cou

rt. V

.5.(i

v)So

uthe

rn, F

inal

(1

76)

1997

The

Hig

h C

ourt’

s Ju

risdi

ctio

n of

asc

erta

inm

ent

of l

iabi

lity

be

reta

ined

. IV.

11(ii

)So

uthe

rn, F

inal

(1

74)

1997

The

Hig

h C

ourt

(or t

he C

ourt

of A

ppea

ls a

s the

cas

e m

ay b

e) to

co

ntin

ue to

be

the

ultim

ate

arbi

ter o

n th

e is

sues

of r

espo

nsib

ility

an

d co

mpe

nsat

ion.

V.3

.(iii)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(176

)19

97

Gen

eral

Pr

inci

ples

Evid

entia

ry r

ules

mus

t be

that

of

the

norm

al la

w.11

2 H

owev

er,

once

det

entio

n is

est

ablis

hed,

bur

den

(of p

roof

) to

shift

to p

erso

n ch

arge

d in

the

abse

nce

of a

n ex

plan

atio

n.II

I.2(ii

)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(171

)19

97

112.

Evid

entia

ry ru

les i

n re

spec

t of t

he c

rimin

al la

w re

mai

n un

chan

ged.

91

Prin

cipl

es o

f pr

oced

ural

fai

rnes

s in

clud

ing

the

right

to

be

repr

esen

ted

mus

t pre

vail.

113 I

II.2

(iii)

Sout

hern

, Fi

nal

(171

)19

97

Priv

ate

Plai

ntFi

rst c

ompl

aina

nt o

r an

aggr

ieve

d pe

rson

be g

iven

the r

ight

to fi

le

priv

ate

plai

nt.11

4 IV.

10So

uthe

rn,

Fina

l (1

74)

1997

The

failu

re o

r re

fusa

l pe

r se

to

com

ply

with

the

rul

es t

o be

de

clar

ed a

cts

enta

iling

pen

al c

onse

quen

ces

with

a r

ight

to

fi le

a pr

ivat

e pl

aint

by

the

virtu

al c

ompl

aina

nt, i

n th

e ev

ent o

f th

e Po

lice

faili

ng to

inst

itute

lega

l pro

ceed

ings

.IV.1

5

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (84

)20

01

Rep

rese

ntat

ion

Rig

ht o

f pe

titio

ners

to

be r

epre

sent

ed b

y H

uman

Rig

hts

Task

Fo

rce

and

Pros

ecut

ion

by th

e In

depe

nden

t Pro

secu

tor.11

5 IV.

16So

uthe

rn,

Fina

l (1

75)

1997

Acc

ount

abili

ty/

Liab

ility

The

prin

cipa

l of

acc

ount

abili

ty i

n re

spec

t of

pas

t ac

ts b

e re

affi r

med

for t

he g

ood

of so

ciet

y in

futu

re11

6 . II

I.5A

ll Is

land

, Fi

nal (

83)

2001

113.

Sect

ion

41 o

f the

Judi

catu

re A

ct N

o.2

of 1

978

(as a

men

ded)

pro

tect

s the

righ

t to

be re

pres

ente

d by

any

pers

on w

ho h

as o

r cla

ims t

o ha

ve th

e rig

ht

to b

e he

ard.

11

4.

Und

er th

e C

rimin

al P

roce

dure

Cod

e N

o 15

of 1

979

(as

amen

ded)

an

aggr

ieve

d pe

rson

can

pet

ition

a M

agis

trate

’s C

ourt

by w

ay o

f priv

ate

plai

nt. U

nder

sect

ion

148(

1)a

of th

e C

rimin

al P

roce

dure

Cod

e, th

e pl

aint

may

be

mad

e by

a p

rivat

e pe

rson

. In

the

case

of M

artin

App

uham

y v.

Sub

insp

ecto

r of J

affn

a 64

NLR

43,

an

obje

ctio

n w

as ra

ised

that

it w

as ir

regu

lar t

o fi l

e po

lice

info

rmat

ion

with

a p

rivat

e pl

aint

. The

Cou

rt he

ld th

at p

olic

e in

form

atio

n ca

n be

fi le

d w

ith a

priv

ate

plai

nt a

nd fu

rther

hel

d th

at “

It m

ake

no d

iffer

ence

whe

ther

the

plai

nt is

a p

rivat

e pl

aint

or

a p

olic

e pl

aint

. In

eith

er c

ase

befo

re a

war

rant

is o

rder

ed, t

he la

w re

quire

s th

e m

agis

trate

to b

ring

his

inde

pend

ent m

ind

to b

ear u

pon

the

fact

s.”. S

ectio

n 14

8 of

the

Crim

inal

Pro

cedu

re C

ode

deal

s with

the

way

in w

hich

pro

ceed

ings

in th

e M

agis

trate

s Cou

rt m

ay b

e in

stitu

ted.

115.

The H

uman

Rig

hts T

ask

Forc

e was

diss

olve

d in

199

6, an

d th

e Hum

an R

ight

s Com

miss

ion

was

crea

ted.

An

offi c

e of a

n In

depe

nden

t Pro

secu

tor h

as n

ot

been

crea

ted

to d

ate.

116.

“Alth

ough

hun

dred

s of

oth

er p

olic

e of

fi cer

s an

d m

ilita

ry p

erso

nnel

hav

e be

en in

dict

ed s

ince

199

4 fo

r hum

an ri

ghts

vio

latio

ns (m

ainl

y fo

r to

rture

, abd

uctio

n or

wro

ngfu

l con

fi nem

ent),

ther

e ha

ve b

een

only

a s

mal

l num

ber o

f con

vict

ions

. To

Am

nest

y In

tern

atio

nal’s

kno

wle

dge,

th

ere

have

bee

n on

ly th

ree

conv

ictio

ns u

nder

the

Con

vent

ion

Aga

inst

Tor

ture

and

oth

er In

hum

an a

nd D

egra

ding

Pun

ishm

ent A

ct (T

he C

AT

Act

). U

p to

200

7 th

ere

had

been

few

er th

an 3

0 co

nvic

tions

for

abd

uctio

n or

wro

ngfu

l con

fi nem

ent (

the

char

ges

norm

ally

ass

ocia

ted

with

en

forc

ed d

isap

pear

ance

s). ”

Am

nest

y In

tern

atio

nal,

June

200

9 at

p.1

1.

92

No

defe

nce

of d

ue o

bedi

ence

to b

e en

terta

ined

.117 I

II.2

(vi)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(172

)19

97

No

defe

nce

of d

ue o

bedi

ence

to

orde

rs f

rom

sup

erio

rs,

be

ente

rtain

ed. I

II.4

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (83

)20

01

Cha

in o

f co

mm

and

liabi

lity

to b

e cl

arifi

ed b

y th

e Su

prem

e C

ourt

in t

he e

xerc

ise

of i

ts j

uris

dict

ion

unde

r A

rt. 1

29 o

f th

e C

onst

itutio

n.11

8 III

.2(x

)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(172

)19

97

117.

The

Emer

genc

y R

egul

atio

ns o

f 20

05 b

y R

egul

atio

n 73

pro

vide

s an

imm

unity

cla

use

for

acts

car

ried

out b

y se

curit

y pe

rson

nel u

nder

the

regu

latio

ns, o

r any

ord

er g

iven

und

er th

e re

gula

tions

. Reg

ulat

ion

73 p

rovi

des;

“N

o ac

tion

or o

ther

lega

l pro

ceed

ing,

whe

ther

civ

il or

crim

inal

, sh

all b

e in

stitu

ted

in a

ny c

ourt

of la

w in

resp

ect o

f any

mat

ter o

r thi

ng d

one

in g

ood

faith

, und

er a

ny p

rovi

sion

s of a

ny e

mer

genc

y re

gula

tion

or o

f any

ord

er o

r dire

ctio

n m

ade

or g

iven

ther

eund

er, e

xcep

t by,

or w

ith th

e w

ritte

n co

nsen

t of,

the A

ttorn

ey-G

ener

al”.

See

als

o R

egul

atio

n 19

of E

mer

genc

y R

egul

atio

ns o

f 200

6 an

d Se

ctio

ns 9

and

23

of th

e PS

O a

s wel

l as S

ectio

n 26

of t

he P

TA.

118.

“Sri

Lank

a sho

uld

purs

ue am

endm

ents

to th

e Con

stitu

tion

to en

shrin

e the

righ

t to

life a

s a co

nstit

utio

nal r

ight

, to

incl

ude t

he cr

ime o

f enf

orce

d di

sapp

eara

nces

in th

e pe

nal l

aw, a

nd to

refl e

ct th

e in

tern

atio

nal l

egal

prin

cipl

e of

com

man

d re

spon

sibi

lity

in th

e C

rimin

al P

roce

dure

Cod

e.”

Am

nest

y In

tern

atio

nal,

June

200

9, p

.51.

The

crim

inal

law

in S

ri La

nka

has n

ot re

cogn

ised

Cha

in o

f Com

man

d re

spon

sibi

lity

as y

et. H

owev

er

‘whe

n vi

olat

ions

take

pla

ce in

nor

mal

tim

es, a

pol

ice

offi c

er o

r pr

ison

s of

fi cer

cou

ld b

e vi

cario

usly

hel

d lia

ble

in te

rms

of c

onst

itutio

nal

guar

ante

es a

gain

st to

rture

or

othe

r gr

ave

hum

an r

ight

s vi

olat

ions

com

mitt

ed b

y hi

s or

her

sub

ordi

nate

s’, R

CT

Stud

y, p

.90

para

4. S

ee f

or

exam

ple

Sriy

ani S

ilva

v. Id

dam

algo

da [

2003

] 2

Sri L

R 6

3, a

nd W

ewel

age

Rani

Fer

nand

o SC

(FR

) N

o.70

0/20

02, S

C M

inut

es 2

6/07

/200

4.

“…th

ough

the S

upre

me C

ourt

has b

een

will

ing

to li

bera

lly en

forc

e the

doc

trine

of t

he v

icar

ious

liab

ility

of s

uper

ior o

ffi ce

rs in

rega

rd to

abus

es

com

mitt

ed d

urin

g ‘n

orm

al’ s

ituat

ions

… th

ere

has b

een

a gr

eate

r deg

ree

of re

luct

ance

man

ifest

ed in

rega

rd to

app

lyin

g th

is c

once

pt to

arm

y of

fi cer

s to

enfo

rce

acco

unta

bilit

y du

ring

times

of c

onfl i

ct.”

RC

T St

udy,

p. 8

9 pa

ra 3

. In

the

Embi

lipiti

ya C

ase,

a se

nior

arm

y of

fi cer

was

the

offi c

er in

cha

rge

of th

e ar

my

cam

p w

here

mor

e th

an fi

fty sc

hool

chi

ldre

n ha

d be

en h

eld

and

tortu

red.

The

Hig

h C

ourt

acqu

itted

the

offi c

er o

n th

e bas

is th

at th

ere w

as n

o di

rect

evid

ence

link

ing

him

to th

e crim

es. “

In W

ijesu

riya v

. the

Sta

te [1

973]

77

NLR

25,

the a

ccus

er’s

com

man

ding

of

fi cer

, Col

onel

Nug

awel

a w

ho h

ad p

urpo

rtedl

y is

sued

the

dire

ctiv

e to

the

accu

sed

to “

bum

p of

f” a

ny p

rison

er ta

ken

into

cus

tody

, was

not

in

dict

ed. H

e w

as in

stea

d ta

ken

as a

witn

ess

for t

he p

rose

cutio

n an

d te

stifi

ed to

the

fact

ual s

ituat

ion

that

exi

sted

on

the

day

in q

uest

ion.

” Se

e R

CT

Stud

y, p

. 89

foot

note

395

. Mea

nwhi

le In

tern

atio

nal L

aw c

lear

ly re

cogn

ises

the

conc

ept o

f com

man

d re

spon

sibi

lity;

“In

tern

atio

nal l

aw

has

clea

rly la

id d

own

the

prin

cipl

e th

at e

ven

if a

com

man

der d

oes

not o

rder

his

sub

ordi

nate

s to

com

mit

the

unla

wfu

l act

s, he

/she

is li

able

if

he k

new

, or o

ught

to h

ave

know

n, o

f the

m a

nd fa

iled

to ta

ke st

eps t

o pr

even

t the

m”,

See

RC

T St

udy,

p. 8

9, q

uotin

g Th

e Ya

mas

hita

Tria

l, IV

W

CR

35.

93

119.

Not

impl

emen

ted.

120.

“Com

miss

ions

of I

nqui

ry a

re n

ot re

plac

emen

ts fo

r goo

d po

licin

g or

resp

ect f

or th

e ru

le o

f law

. Brin

ging

per

petra

tors

to a

ccou

nt, i

nclu

ding

hig

h of

fi cia

ls in

pos

ition

s of c

omm

and

resp

onsib

ility

, is t

he o

nly

way

to b

reak

the

cycl

e of

impu

nity

.” A

mne

sty In

tern

atio

nal,

June

200

9, p

. 47.

121.

“The

old

que

stio

n of

impu

nity

rem

ains

ver

y m

uch

with

us.

Whe

ther

or n

ot e

ach

indi

vidu

al P

olic

e Se

rgea

nt, P

olic

e D

river

, Arm

y C

orpo

ral i

s pr

osec

uted

is h

ardl

y in

dica

tive;

but

ther

e ar

e so

me

key

fi gur

es, a

nd p

eopl

e sa

y: “

If th

ose

are

still

free

wha

t are

you

talk

ing

to u

s abo

ut Ju

stic

e.”

All

Isla

nd C

omm

issi

on R

epor

t, 20

01, q

uotin

g IN

FOR

M, p

. 15.

122.

Alth

ough

no

Inde

pend

ent P

rose

cuto

r ha

s be

en a

ppoi

nted

, “[a

] sp

ecia

l uni

t nam

ed th

e M

issi

ng P

erso

ns U

nit h

ad b

een

esta

blis

hed

in 1

998

at th

e A

ttorn

ey G

ener

al’s

Dep

artm

ent t

o ad

vise

on

inve

stig

atio

ns a

nd to

con

duct

pro

secu

tions

in c

ases

of D

isap

pear

ance

s. B

y 1s

t Jan

uary

, 20

00 th

is u

nit h

ad in

itiat

ed 2

13 p

rose

cutio

ns in

the

Hig

h C

ourt

and

79 n

on-s

umm

ary

inqu

ires i

n M

agis

trate

’s C

ourts

.” A

ll Is

land

Com

mis

sion

R

epor

t, 20

01, p

. 16,

“Th

e es

tabl

ishm

ent o

f thi

s U

nit w

hile

und

erlin

ing

the

spec

ial p

robl

ems

of p

rose

cutin

g ca

ses

of d

isap

pear

ance

s su

ffers

fr

om d

raw

back

s, in

that

the

pros

ecut

or is

the

Atto

rney

Gen

eral

who

inva

riabl

e is

the

repr

esen

tativ

e of

the

Stat

e, e

ither

as

pros

ecut

or o

r as

resp

onde

nt, i

n ju

dici

al p

roce

edin

gs.

In th

is in

stan

ce th

e pr

esen

t arr

ange

men

t mak

es th

e A

ttorn

ey G

ener

al th

e re

pres

enta

tive

of th

e vi

ctim

, an

d pr

osec

utio

ns a

re c

ondu

cted

on

the

basi

s th

at t

he c

rimes

whe

re t

he a

cts

of e

rran

t of

fi cia

ls.

This

aga

in h

ighl

ight

s a

prob

lem

of

the

publ

ic p

erce

ptio

n of

a C

onfl i

ct o

f Int

eres

t, in

that

the

vict

ims

are

very

muc

h af

fect

ed b

y th

e aw

aren

ess

that

Sta

te O

ffi ce

rs a

re in

vest

igat

ing

into

com

plai

nts

agai

nst O

ffi ce

rs o

f [th

e] S

tate

.” A

ll Is

land

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

2001

, p. 1

6. “

Four

teen

yea

rs la

ter,

Am

nest

y In

tern

atio

nal’s

co

nclu

sion

rem

ains

the

sam

e; if

any

thin

g it

is st

reng

then

ed b

y th

e pe

rsis

tenc

e of

new

vio

latio

ns o

f hum

an ri

ghts

and

the

cont

inui

ng a

bsen

ce o

f po

litic

al w

ill to

pre

vent

or s

top

such

vio

latio

ns, i

nves

tigat

e the

m p

rope

rly, p

rose

cute

thos

e sus

pect

ed o

f crim

inal

offe

nces

or e

nsur

e rep

arat

ions

fo

r vic

tims,

in a

ccor

danc

e w

ith S

ri La

nka’

s ob

ligat

ions

und

er in

tern

atio

nal h

uman

righ

ts la

w a

nd in

tern

atio

nal h

uman

itaria

n la

w.”

Am

nest

y In

tern

atio

nal,

June

200

9, a

t p.1

1

Shan

thia

Pat

ciira

na v

. DIG

(Per

sonn

el &

Tra

inin

g) a

nd o

ther

s, C

. A. w

rit A

pplic

atio

n N

o. 1

123/

2002

, C. A

. Min

utes

09.

10.2

006

Rec

ogni

se c

rimin

al li

abili

ty o

f offi

cial

s with

cha

in-o

f-co

mm

and

resp

onsi

bilit

y.11

9 IV.

9(iv

)O

ffi ce

rs w

ith c

hain

of

com

man

d re

spon

sibi

lity

who

ord

er o

r to

lera

te d

isap

pear

ance

s by

tho

se u

nder

the

ir co

mm

and

to b

e m

ade

inva

riabl

y cr

imin

ally

liab

le.12

0 IV.

29

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(174

)A

ll Is

land

, Fi

nal (

85)

1997

2001

Pros

ecut

ions

be

not c

onfi n

ed to

Juni

or O

ffi ce

rs a

lone

.121 I

II.6

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (83

)20

01

Atto

rney

-Gen

eral

Whe

re a

vio

latio

n am

ount

s to

a c

rimin

al o

ffenc

e, A

ttorn

ey

Gen

eral

/Pro

pose

d In

depe

nden

t Pr

osec

utor

to

in

itiat

e pr

osec

utio

ns.12

2 VI.5

(ii)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(177

)19

97

94

Atto

rney

Gen

eral

mus

t ce

ase

to r

epre

sent

per

sons

cha

rged

of

viol

atin

g th

e Fu

ndam

enta

l Rig

hts o

f per

sons

.123 V

I.5(ii

i) So

uthe

rn, F

inal

(1

77)

1997

Inte

rmed

iate

St

eps

Tran

sfer

of pe

rson

s aga

inst

who

m al

lega

tions

are m

ade;

inte

rdic

tion

afte

r disc

iplin

ary

inqu

iry o

r crim

inal

pro

ceed

ings

com

men

ce, o

r at

tem

pts a

t int

erfe

renc

e or

obs

truct

ion

of in

vesti

gatio

n (in

clud

ing

thre

ats t

o la

wye

rs);

such

atte

mpt

s at i

nter

fere

nce

also

to b

e a

basis

fo

r fur

ther

inve

stiga

tions

. III.

2(vi

ii)W

here

in

vest

igat

ions

ha

ve

com

men

ced

agai

nst

alle

ged

perp

etra

tors

, the

y be

tran

sfer

red

out o

f th

e ar

ea o

f th

e al

lege

d in

cide

nts u

nder

inve

stig

atio

n. II

I.9In

terd

ictio

n fr

om s

ervi

ce o

f su

ch a

llege

d pe

rpet

rato

rs t

o ta

ke

plac

e fo

llow

ing

the

initi

atio

n of

crim

inal

and

/or

disc

iplin

ary

proc

eedi

ngs12

4 . II

I.10

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(172

)

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (83

)

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (83

)

2001

2001

2001

123.

Obs

erve

d as

a m

atte

r of p

ract

ice

in th

e pa

st th

ough

som

e ex

cept

ions

to th

is p

ract

ice

have

bee

n ev

iden

ced

in re

cent

tim

es.

124.

By W

rit A

pplic

atio

n N

o. 1

123/

2002

pet

ition

er, S

hant

ha P

athi

rana

, sou

ght a

writ

of c

ertio

rari

to q

uash

a c

ircul

ar is

sued

by

the

DIG

Per

sonn

el

and

Trai

ning

, dire

ctin

g th

e re

inst

atem

ent o

f all

offi c

ers

inte

rdic

ted

follo

win

g in

quiri

es c

ondu

cted

by

the

Dis

appe

aran

ces

Inve

stig

atio

n U

nit

(DIU

) and

cha

rged

in c

ourts

, but

sub

sequ

ently

bai

led

out.

Her

e it

was

hel

d th

at if

crim

inal

pro

ceed

ings

are

take

n ag

ains

t a p

ublic

offi

cer

he s

houl

d ha

ve b

een

deal

t with

und

er, p

arag

raph

27:

10 [C

hapt

er X

LVII

I, Pa

ra. 2

7:10

– W

here

lega

l pro

ceed

ings

are

take

n ag

ains

t a p

ublic

of

fi cer

for a

crim

inal

offe

nce

or b

riber

y or

cor

rupt

ion

the

rele

vant

offi

cer s

houl

d be

forth

with

inte

rdic

ted

by th

e ap

prop

riate

aut

horit

y.] o

f the

Es

tabl

ishm

ent C

ode

of S

ri La

nka

(01s

t Sep

tem

ber 1

985)

, and

that

und

er th

is p

arag

raph

if le

gal p

roce

edin

gs a

re ta

ken

agai

nst a

pub

lic o

ffi ce

r fo

r a c

rimin

al o

ffenc

e it

is m

anda

tory

for t

he re

leva

nt a

utho

rity

to in

terd

ict t

hat o

ffi ce

r. (e

mph

asis

add

ed) T

he is

sue

was

und

er w

hich

sect

ion

of th

e C

ode

the

situ

atio

n in

que

stio

n fe

ll. C

hapt

er X

LVII

I, Pa

ra. 2

7:8

prov

ides

that

‘whe

n a

publ

ic o

ffi ce

r is t

aken

into

cus

tody

by

the

Polic

e or

any

oth

er s

tatu

tory

aut

horit

y is

rele

ased

from

cus

tody

he

shou

ld b

e re

inst

ated

. How

ever

, if s

uch

rein

stat

emen

t wou

ld o

bstru

ct a

form

al

disc

iplin

ary

inqu

iry sc

hedu

led

to b

e he

ld b

y th

e D

isci

plin

ary

Aut

horit

y, th

e ac

cuse

d of

fi cer

shou

ld n

ot b

e re

inst

ated

but

inte

rdic

ted’

. Cha

pter

X

LVII

I, Pa

ra. 2

7:9

prov

ides

that

‘whe

n an

offi

cer r

eman

ded

pend

ing

lega

l pro

ceed

ings

aga

inst

him

is re

leas

ed o

n ba

il, h

e sh

ould

be

rein

stat

ed

in se

rvic

e if

the

Dis

cipl

inar

y A

utho

rity

dete

rmin

es th

at h

is re

inst

atem

ent w

ill n

ot a

dver

sely

affe

ct th

e in

tere

st o

f the

pub

lic se

rvic

e….’

If th

e si

tuat

ion

in q

uest

ion

did

fall

unde

r on

e of

the

abov

e pa

ragr

aphs

, it a

ppea

rs th

at th

e di

scip

linar

y au

thor

ity w

ould

hav

e a

certa

in d

iscr

etio

n re

gard

ing

rein

stat

emen

t. H

owev

er, t

he C

ourt

was

cle

arly

of t

he o

pini

on th

at ‘w

hen

lega

l pro

ceed

ings

are

take

n ag

ains

t a p

ublic

offi

cer h

e ha

s to

be

cons

ider

ed a

s an

offi

cer w

ho h

as p

asse

d th

e st

age

of ta

king

into

cus

tody

and

/or r

eman

ded

pend

ing

lega

l pro

ceed

ings

, the

refo

re h

e ca

nnot

be

cons

ider

ed u

nder

Cha

pter

XLV

III,

Para

s. 27

:8 o

r 27:

9’. O

n th

is b

asis

the

circ

ular

in q

uest

ion

was

qua

shed

. Sha

ntha

Pat

hira

na v

. D

IG (P

erso

nnel

& T

rain

ing)

and

Oth

ers,

C. A

. Writ

App

licat

ion

No.

112

3/20

02, C

. A. M

inut

es 0

9.10

.200

6

95

If a

ny p

erpe

trato

r is

alle

ged

to h

ave

atte

mpt

ed to

inte

rfer

e w

ith

a w

itnes

s, th

reat

ened

law

yers

, th

reat

ened

the

pro

secu

tor,

or

obst

ruct

ed in

vest

igat

ions

, suc

h ac

tion

to b

e a

subj

ect o

f a fu

rther

in

quiry

fol

low

ed b

y fu

rther

pun

ishm

ents

and

it s

houl

d al

so b

e gr

ound

for i

nter

dict

ion12

5 . II

I.11

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (83

)20

01

Gen

eral

This

Com

mis

sion

reco

mm

ends

a v

igor

ous

pros

ecut

ion

of th

ose

resp

onsi

ble

for d

isap

pear

ance

s.126 V

.2(i)

So

uthe

rn, F

inal

(1

75)

1997

Spee

dy

actio

n be

ta

ken

on

fi ndi

ngs

of

Dis

appe

aran

ces

Com

mis

sion

s.127 I

V.19

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (85

)20

01

Step

s be

take

n w

ithou

t del

ay a

gain

st m

iscr

eant

s ide

ntifi

ed b

y th

e C

omm

issi

ons o

f Dis

appe

aran

ces.12

8 IV.

30A

ll Is

land

, Fi

nal (

85)

2001

125.

No

witn

ess p

rote

ctio

n la

w is

in p

lace

in S

ri La

nka.

A W

itnes

s and

Vic

tims o

f Crim

e Pr

otec

tion

Bill

was

pre

sent

ed to

Par

liam

ent i

n Ju

ne 2

008.

It

is st

ill p

endi

ng.

126.

Acc

ordi

ng to

Com

men

ts m

ade

by th

e G

over

nmen

t of

Sri L

anka

on

the

Con

clud

ing

Obs

erva

tions

of

the

Com

mitt

ee A

gain

st T

ortu

re (

Sri

Lank

a, C

AT/C

/LK

A/C

O/2

/Add

.1, 2

0.02

.200

7; s

ee a

lso

Uni

ted

Nat

ions

Com

mitt

ee a

gain

st T

ortu

re, S

econ

d Pe

riodi

c R

epor

t, C

AT/C

/48/

Add

.2, 0

6.08

.200

4), r

ecom

men

datio

ns o

f the

199

4/19

98 D

isap

pear

ance

s Com

mis

sion

s and

the

1996

Boa

rd o

f Inv

estig

atio

n in

to C

ompl

aint

s of

Dis

appe

aran

ces i

n th

e Ja

ffna

Peni

nsul

a, h

ad le

d to

pro

secu

tions

in th

e H

igh

Cou

rt an

d th

e M

agis

trate

’s C

ourt

in fo

ur h

undr

ed a

nd th

irty

two

case

s with

con

vict

ions

bei

ng o

btai

ned

in tw

elve

cas

es a

nd a

cqui

ttals

han

ded

dow

n in

one

hun

dred

and

thirt

y ca

ses.

127.

Not

impl

emen

ted.

128.

Not

impl

emen

ted.

96

Inde

mni

ty A

ct m

ust n

ot c

over

act

s whi

ch a

re g

rave

offe

nces

or a

vi

olat

ion

of ri

ghts

of p

erso

ns.12

9 V.2

(iii)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(175

)19

97

Alle

gatio

ns o

f unj

ust e

nric

hmen

t be

a su

bjec

t of c

onsi

dera

tion

at

a tri

al a

gain

st a

n al

lege

d pe

rpet

rato

r so

as to

obv

iate

the

need

for

a m

ultip

licity

of a

ctio

ns.13

0 III

.12

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (83

)20

01

129.

Acc

ordi

ng to

the

Inde

mni

ty A

ct N

o. 2

0 of

198

2, a

s am

ende

d in

198

8, “

no a

ctio

n or

oth

er le

gal p

roce

edin

g w

hats

oeve

r, w

heth

er c

ivil

or

crim

inal

, sha

ll be

inst

itute

d in

any

cou

rt of

law

for o

r on

acco

unt o

f or i

n re

spec

t of a

ny a

ct, m

atte

r or t

hing

, whe

ther

lega

l or o

ther

wis

e, d

one

or p

urpo

rted

to b

e do

ne w

ith a

vie

w to

rest

orin

g la

w a

nd o

rder

dur

ing

the

perio

d A

ugus

t 1, 1

977,

to th

e re

leva

nt d

ate

(Dec

embe

r 198

8), i

f do

ne in

goo

d fa

ith, b

y a

Min

iste

r, D

eput

y M

inis

ter o

r per

son

hold

ing

offi c

e un

der o

r em

ploy

ed in

the

serv

ice

of th

e G

over

nmen

t of S

ri La

nka

in a

ny c

apac

ity w

heth

er, n

aval

, mili

tary

, air

forc

e, p

olic

e or

civ

il, o

r by

any

pers

on a

ctin

g in

goo

d fa

ith u

nder

the

auth

ority

of a

dire

ctio

n of

a

Min

iste

r, D

eput

y M

inis

ter o

r a p

erso

n ho

ldin

g of

fi ce

or s

o em

ploy

ed a

nd d

one

or p

urpo

rted

to b

e do

ne in

the

exec

utio

n of

his

dut

y or

for

the

enfo

rcem

ent o

f law

and

ord

er o

r for

the

publ

ic s

afet

y or

oth

erw

ise

in th

e pu

blic

inte

rest

and

if a

ny s

uch

actio

n or

lega

l pro

ceed

ing

has

been

inst

itute

d in

any

cou

rt of

law

whe

ther

bef

ore

or a

fter t

he d

ate

of c

omm

ence

men

t of t

his A

ct e

very

such

act

ion

or le

gal p

roce

edin

g sh

all

be d

eem

ed to

be

disc

harg

ed a

nd m

ade

null

and

void

.” N

o ex

cept

ions

for g

rave

vio

latio

ns o

r vio

latio

ns o

f the

righ

ts o

f per

sons

are

mad

e. T

he

Emer

genc

y (P

reve

ntio

n an

d Pr

ohib

ition

of T

erro

rism

and

Spe

cifi e

d Te

rror

ist A

ctiv

ities

) Reg

ulat

ions

200

6 by

Reg

ulat

ion

19 p

rovi

des s

peci

fi c

imm

unity

for a

ctio

ns ta

ken

unde

r the

Reg

ulat

ions

by

secu

rity

pers

onne

l. Si

mila

rly im

mun

ity p

rovi

sion

s a

re p

rovi

ded

for i

n R

egul

atio

n 73

of

Em

erge

ncy

(Mis

cella

neou

s Pr

ovis

ions

and

Pow

ers)

Reg

ulat

ions

, No.

1 o

f 20

05, S

ectio

n 26

of

the

Sri L

anka

Pre

vent

ion

of T

erro

rism

(T

empo

rary

Pro

visi

ons)

Act

No

48 o

f 197

9 [C

ertifi

ed

on 2

0 Ju

ly 1

979]

and

Sec

tion

26 o

f the

Pub

lic S

ecur

ity O

rdin

ance

No.

25 o

f 194

7. T

he

Inte

rnat

iona

l Com

mis

sion

of J

uris

ts (I

CJ)

hav

e co

mm

ente

d as

follo

ws o

n th

ese

prov

isio

ns “

Thes

e pr

ovis

ions

seve

rely

lim

it th

e ac

coun

tabi

lity

of ci

vilia

n an

d m

ilita

ry au

thor

ities

exer

cisi

ng em

erge

ncy

pow

ers,

prov

ided

that

the a

ctio

n of

the o

ffi ci

al to

ok p

lace

in th

e cou

rse o

f dis

char

ging

of

fi cia

l dut

ies.”

. The

IC

J co

mm

ents

“th

e fa

ct th

at a

n of

fi cia

l was

“in

the

disc

harg

e of

his

offi

cial

dut

ies”

can

nev

er b

e us

ed a

s an

exc

use

not t

o pr

osec

ute

or to

acq

uit…

exc

eptio

nal c

ircum

stan

ces

such

as

polit

ical

inst

abili

ty o

r pub

lic e

mer

genc

ies

do n

ot ju

stify

exe

mpt

ing

law

en

forc

emen

t or

othe

r of

fi cia

ls f

rom

pos

sibl

e cr

imin

al/c

ivil

liabi

lity

for

viol

atio

n of

hum

an r

ight

s du

ring

emer

genc

y op

erat

ions

.”, B

riefi n

g pa

per;

Sri L

anka

’s Em

erge

ncy

Law

s, In

tern

atio

nal C

omm

issi

on o

f Jur

ists

, May

200

9, p

.7, p

aras

1 a

nd 2

.13

0.

Not

impl

emen

ted.

97

Hab

eas C

orpu

sA

dver

se fi

ndin

g in

a H

abea

s Cor

pus p

etiti

ons n

ot to

be

confi

ned

to

pay

men

t of

dam

ages

by

the

Stat

e al

one

but

to i

nclu

de

disc

iplin

ary

actio

n ag

ains

t the

offi

cers

resp

onsi

ble.

131 I

V.22

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (85

)20

01

Res

pond

ents

be

requ

ired

to d

epos

it th

e su

m o

f aw

ard

in c

ourt

or

a se

cure

d bo

nd d

uly

hypo

thec

ated

pen

ding

app

eal.13

2 V.4

(i)Th

e ob

ligat

ion

to p

ay t

he a

war

d be

ava

ilabl

e ag

ains

t a

resp

onde

nt’s

ass

ets

and,

if

he h

as d

ied,

aga

inst

his

est

ate.

133

V.4.

(ii)

Res

pond

ents

in

Hab

eas

Cor

pus

Petit

ions

to

depo

sit

the

sum

aw

arde

d, in

Cou

rt, p

endi

ng a

ppea

l and

the

oblig

atio

n to

pay

the

awar

d be

mad

e av

aila

ble

agai

nst h

is a

sset

s and

est

ate.

IV.2

3

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(176

)So

uthe

rn, F

inal

(1

76)

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (85

)

1997

1997

2001

Publ

icity

to

be g

iven

to

the

avai

labi

lity

of t

he r

emed

y of

H

abea

s Co

rpus

and

the

supp

ort s

ervi

ces

avai

labl

e fr

om th

e B

ar

Ass

ocia

tion

of S

ri La

nka/

Lega

l Aid

Com

mis

sion

/Mov

emen

t for

D

evel

opm

ent a

nd D

emoc

ratic

Rig

hts

and

Law

yers

for

Hum

an

Rig

hts a

nd D

evel

opm

ent.13

4 V.5

(i)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(176

)19

97

131.

To d

ate,

the

Cou

rt of

App

eal h

as n

ot e

nfor

ced

disc

iplin

ary

actio

n ag

ains

t offi

cers

per

se

alth

ough

it h

as d

irect

ed o

ther

offi

cial

s to

con

side

r le

gal a

ctio

ns. “

I als

o di

rect

the

Reg

istra

r of t

his C

ourt

to fo

rwar

d co

pies

of t

he p

roce

edin

gs re

cord

ed in

the

Mag

istra

te's

Cou

rt to

the

Insp

ecto

r G

ener

al o

f Pol

ice

who

is h

ereb

y di

rect

ed to

con

side

r the

evi

denc

e re

cord

ed a

s inf

orm

atio

n of

the

com

mis

sion

of c

ogni

zabl

e of

fenc

es. H

e w

ill

take

nec

essa

ry s

teps

to c

ondu

ct p

rope

r inv

estig

atio

ns a

nd to

take

ste

ps a

ccor

ding

to la

w. T

he R

egis

trar i

s al

so d

irect

ed to

forw

ard

a co

py o

f th

e pr

ocee

ding

s with

this

judg

men

t to

the

Hon

oura

ble A

ttorn

ey-G

ener

al fo

r app

ropr

iate

act

ion

to b

e ta

ken

by h

im”

per S

.N. S

ilva

J in

Leed

a Vi

olet

and

Oth

ers v

. Vid

anap

athi

rana

, OIC

Pol

ice

Stat

ion,

Dic

kwel

la a

nd O

ther

s, [1

994]

3 S

ri LR

,377

.13

2.

Alth

ough

aw

ards

tend

not

to b

e de

posi

ted

or s

ecur

ed d

urin

g ap

peal

s, no

n pa

ymen

t of a

war

ds is

pun

isha

ble

unde

r con

tem

pt o

f cou

rt. L

eeda

Vi

olet

and

Oth

ers v

. Vid

anap

athi

rana

, OIC

Pol

ice

Stat

ion,

Dic

kwel

la a

nd O

ther

s, ib

id.

133.

In M

urin

Fer

nand

o v.

Sug

atha

dasa

, [19

97] 1

Sri

LR, 2

81. Y

apa

J de

clin

ed to

aw

ard

exem

plar

y co

sts

in re

latio

n to

one

of t

he re

spon

dent

s be

caus

e he

was

dea

d13

4.

Awar

enes

s am

ong

the

gene

ral p

ublic

of t

he H

abea

s Cor

pus r

emed

y is

low

. H

abea

s Cor

pus h

as ra

rely

pro

vide

d a

rem

edy

due

to e

xtra

ordi

nary

de

lays

in th

e ad

min

istra

tion

of ju

stic

e.

98

Inst

ruct

ions

to

com

man

ders

in

forc

e to

co-

oper

ate

with

the

C

ourts

. V.5

(iii)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(176

)19

97

Civ

il L

iabi

lity

Whe

re a

ny p

erso

n is

foun

d gu

ilty

for i

nvol

unta

rily

rem

ovin

g or

di

sapp

earin

g an

othe

r, th

e de

pend

ents

of t

he v

ictim

be

give

n th

e rig

ht to

inst

itute

civ

il pr

ocee

ding

s to

clai

m d

amag

es o

n th

e ba

sis

of th

e ord

er o

f the

Crim

inal

Cou

rt no

twith

stan

ding

the p

rovi

sion

s of

the

Pres

crip

tion

Ord

inan

ce.13

5 III

.3(ii

i)A

rig

ht o

f th

e de

pend

ents

of

a di

sapp

eare

d pe

rson

to in

stitu

te

civi

l pro

ceed

ings

for

the

reco

very

of

loss

es s

uffe

red

by r

easo

n of

dis

appe

aran

ce b

e re

cogn

ized

aga

inst

thos

e fo

und

resp

onsi

ble

for a

bduc

tion

or w

rong

ful c

onfi n

emen

t by

a Cou

rt of

Law

, whe

re

subs

eque

nt to

such

act

the

disa

ppea

ranc

e of

the

vict

im e

nsue

d.13

6 II

I.13

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(172

)

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (83

)

1997

2001

Legi

slat

ive

prov

isio

n be

mad

e en

ablin

g a

petit

ione

r w

ho h

as

obta

ined

a j

udic

ial

orde

r fo

r co

mpe

nsat

ion

on t

he b

asis

of

pers

onal

liab

ility

in H

abea

s Co

rpus

and

/or

fund

amen

tal r

ight

s ap

plic

atio

ns to

reco

ver t

he s

ame

in s

epar

ate

civi

l pro

ceed

ings

if

not p

aid

with

in a

stip

ulat

ed ti

me.

Thi

s lia

bilit

y of

the

perp

etra

tor

to b

e ex

tend

ed to

his

est

ate.

137 I

II.3

.(ii)

Sout

hern

Fin

al

(172

)19

97

135.

Not

impl

emen

ted.

13

6.

Not

impl

emen

ted.

137.

Not

impl

emen

ted.

99

Am

nest

yA

n am

nest

y be

giv

en to

witn

esse

s, in

clud

ing

perp

etra

tors

who

co

nfes

s to

par

ticip

atio

n in

hum

an r

ight

s vi

olat

ions

and

giv

e ev

iden

ce t

o th

e ci

rcum

stan

ces

incl

udin

g th

e or

ders

rec

eive

d,

plan

ning

for,

etc.

138 I

II.7

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (83

)20

01

Am

nest

y C

omm

ittee

The

nom

inat

ion

of a

spe

cial

com

mitt

ee t

o ad

vise

whe

ther

a

parti

cipa

nt d

eser

ves

amne

sty

in v

iew

of

his

full

disc

losu

re

(incl

usiv

e of

co

mm

and

stru

ctur

es).

Rep

orts

of

al

l th

ree

Dis

appe

aran

ces

Com

mis

sion

s to

be

mad

e av

aila

ble

to t

his

com

mitt

ee.13

9 III

.2(v

ii)Th

e Hum

an R

ight

s Com

mis

sion

be d

irect

ed to

set u

p a m

achi

nery

by

way

of a

Spe

cial

Com

mitt

ee o

f Em

inen

t Per

sons

to e

nter

tain

ap

plic

atio

ns f

or A

mne

sty,

and

rec

ord

thei

r ev

iden

ce o

f hu

man

rig

hts v

iola

tions

.140 I

II.8

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(172

)

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (83

)

1997

2001

Leg

al A

ssis

tanc

eA

Leg

al A

dvis

ory

(ass

ista

nce)

Bur

eau

be es

tabl

ishe

d to

ente

rtain

, pr

oces

s and

inst

itute

Hab

eas C

orpu

s App

licat

ions

; and

in re

spec

t of

retu

rned

det

aine

es.14

1 III

.3(i)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(172

)19

97

A L

egal

Adv

isor

y Se

rvic

e B

urea

u be

set

up

to p

rovi

de l

egal

as

sist

ance

to m

embe

rs o

f fam

ilies

of d

isap

pear

ed p

erso

ns a

nd in

ge

nera

l to

deal

with

and

take

app

ropr

iate

act

ion

in re

spec

t of t

he

prob

lem

s of a

ffect

ed fa

mili

es.14

2 I.1

2(ii)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(171

)19

97

138.

Not

impl

emen

ted.

139.

Not

impl

emen

ted.

140.

N

ot im

plem

ente

d.

141.

Not

impl

emen

ted.

142.

Not

impl

emen

ted.

100

A st

ate a

ided

lega

l aid

serv

ice f

or p

etiti

oner

s for

a w

rit o

f Hab

eas

Cor

pus

in th

is c

ateg

ory

of c

ases

of

disa

ppea

ranc

es w

ould

be

a pu

blic

ack

now

ledg

emen

t of t

he b

reak

dow

n of

law

and

ord

er th

at

enab

led

such

dis

appe

aran

ces t

o be

stag

ed w

ith im

puni

ty.14

3 V.1

Con

tribu

tions

from

stat

e fu

nds t

o le

gal a

id o

rgan

izat

ions

. V.5

(ii)

Lega

l ai

d or

gani

zatio

ns p

rovi

ding

the

ir se

rvic

es t

o H

abea

s Co

rpus

app

lican

ts b

e m

ade

reci

pien

ts o

f Sta

te G

rant

s. IV

.24

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(175

)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(176

)A

ll Is

land

, Fi

nal (

85)

1997

1997

2001

Spec

ial

Mec

hani

sms

Inde

pend

ent

Pros

ecut

orA

n of

fi ce

of a

n In

depe

nden

t Pr

osec

utor

to

be e

stab

lishe

d to

in

stitu

te p

rose

cutio

ns,

with

leg

isla

tive

safe

guar

ds t

o en

sure

in

depe

nden

ce.14

4 IV.

20

The

Hum

an R

ight

s C

omm

issi

on A

ct b

e am

ende

d to

pro

vide

for

an In

depe

nden

t Hum

an R

ight

s Pro

secu

tor.

The

Hum

an R

ight

s C

omm

issi

on A

ct b

e am

ende

d to

pro

vide

fo

r an

In

depe

nden

t H

uman

R

ight

s Pr

osec

utor

to

co

nduc

t pr

osec

utio

ns in

to co

mpl

aint

of h

uman

righ

ts v

iola

tions

in g

ener

al

and

disa

ppea

ranc

es in

par

ticul

ar. I

II.2

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(175

)

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (16

)A

ll Is

land

, Fi

nal (

83)

1997

1997

2010

143.

Alth

ough

no

spec

ifi c

lega

l aid

ser

vice

exi

sts

for t

he p

urpo

se o

f ass

istin

g pe

titio

ners

in H

abea

s C

orpu

s ca

ses

rela

ting

to d

isap

pear

ance

s, th

e st

ate-

run

Lega

l Aid

Com

mis

sion

doe

s ope

rate

a h

uman

righ

ts d

ivis

ion.

144.

Not

impl

emen

ted.

101

145.

The I

nspe

ctor

Gen

eral

of P

olic

e by

Circ

ular

No.

1187

/95

of 1

995

dire

cted

all s

ubor

dina

tes “

to su

spen

d th

e lai

d do

wn

proc

edur

e of d

estro

ying

…”

“…in

form

atio

n bo

oks,

tele

phon

e re

gist

ers,

pris

oner

s’ de

tent

ion

regi

ster

s, an

d ot

her d

ocum

ents

con

nect

ed w

ith a

rres

t, de

tent

ion,

etc

. cov

erin

g th

e pe

riod

01.0

1.19

88 to

dat

e.”

All

Isla

nd R

epor

t, 20

01, A

nnex

XIV

, p. 1

42. “

Ther

e ap

pear

s to

be

delib

erat

e at

tem

pts

by s

ome

Offi

cers

to

dest

roy

incr

imin

atin

g do

cum

enta

ry e

vide

nce

agai

nst c

erta

in p

olic

e of

fi cer

s.” A

ll Is

land

Rep

ort,

2001

, p.1

7-V.

146.

“The

effe

ctiv

enes

s of

the

rem

edy

of H

abea

s Co

rpus

bec

ame

ques

tiona

ble

how

ever

in v

iew

of

the

dela

y at

tend

ant o

n ob

tain

ing

relie

f. A

pe

rusa

l of t

he b

reak

-up

of th

e H

abea

s Cor

pus a

pplic

atio

ns fi

led

and

pend

ing,

(vid

e ch

art)

show

s tha

t 292

5 ca

ses h

ave

been

fi le

d be

twee

n 19

88

and

1997

. Of t

hose

272

hav

e no

t bee

n co

nclu

ded

as y

et, w

hile

mos

t of t

he a

pplic

atio

ns w

ere

disp

osed

of a

fter a

laps

e of

ove

r 5 y

ears

. In

mos

t of

the

area

s out

side

of t

he E

aste

rn P

rovi

nce

the

faci

lity

for H

abea

s Cor

pus A

pplic

atio

ns to

be

fi led

in th

e H

igh

Cou

rt w

as n

ot a

vaile

d of

. Th

is

faci

lity

mad

e it

easi

er fo

r pet

ition

ers t

o ha

ve a

cces

s to

the

Cou

rts to

loca

te a

bduc

ted

pers

ons.

How

ever

, Hab

eas C

orpu

s app

licat

ions

rece

ived

by

the

Hig

h C

ourt

of B

attic

aloa

app

ear t

o ha

ve b

een

deal

t with

mor

e ex

pedi

tious

ly, o

ut o

f 49

fi led

bet

wee

n 19

94 a

nd 1

997,

44

have

alre

ady

been

dis

pose

d of

.” A

ll Is

land

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

2001

, p. 2

7.14

7.

This

rec

omm

enda

tion

has

not b

een

impl

emen

ted.

In

Alo

eboe

toe

et a

l v S

urin

ame,

Jud

gmen

t of

Sept

embe

r 10

, 199

3, I

nter

-Am

. Ct.

H.R

. (S

er. C

) No.

15

– th

e In

ter-A

mer

ican

Cou

rt of

Hum

an R

ight

s or

dere

d th

e Su

rinam

e G

over

nmen

t to

prov

ide

vario

us fo

rms

of re

para

tion

to

the

fam

ilies

of

the

boat

men

kill

ed b

y Su

rinam

ese

sold

iers

. In

addi

tion

to a

war

ding

com

pens

atio

n fo

r th

e ac

tual

dea

ths

of th

e vi

ctim

s, th

e In

ter-A

mer

ican

Cou

rt of

Hum

an R

ight

s aw

arde

d “m

oral

” co

mpe

nsat

ion

to th

e vi

ctim

s’ pa

rent

s an

d al

so to

thei

r su

cces

sors

for

em

otio

nal

suffe

ring

endu

red

by th

e vi

ctim

s bef

ore

they

wer

e ki

lled,

the

Cou

rt sa

ying

that

: “it

can

be p

resu

med

that

the

pare

nts h

ave

suffe

red

mor

ally

as

a re

sult

of th

e cr

uel d

eath

of t

heir

offs

prin

g, fo

r it i

s ess

entia

lly h

uman

for a

ll pe

rson

s to

feel

pai

n at

the

torm

ent o

f the

ir ch

ildre

n.”

The

Cou

rt in

Alo

eboe

toe

furth

er h

eld

that

the

Surin

ame

Gov

ernm

ent w

as u

nder

an

oblig

atio

n to

pro

vide

edu

catio

n to

the

child

ren

of th

e vi

ctim

s and

to

enfo

rce

this

obl

igat

ion

the

Cou

rt or

dere

d th

e re

-ope

ning

of a

scho

ol a

t a m

edic

al d

ispe

nsar

y in

the

villa

ge w

here

the

maj

ority

of t

he v

ictim

s’ fa

mili

es re

side

d.

Rel

evan

t pol

ice

reco

rds

to b

e ha

nded

ove

r to

a H

uman

Rig

hts

Pros

ecut

or.14

5 III

.2(v

)So

uthe

rn, F

inal

(1

71)

1997

Mag

istra

te’s

C

ourt

– Sp

ecia

l D

ivis

ion

Spec

ial

divi

sion

of

the

Mag

istra

te’s

Cou

rt, C

olom

bo t

o be

es

tabl

ishe

d to

dea

l with

the 3

30 H

abea

s Cor

pus A

pplic

atio

ns st

ill

awai

ting

atte

ntio

n an

d ne

w n

otic

es to

go

out t

o pe

titio

ners

from

th

e C

ourt

of A

ppea

l in

resp

ect o

f the

se a

pplic

atio

ns. I

V.11

(iii)

Spec

ial

Div

isio

n of

Mag

istra

te’s

Cou

rt in

Col

ombo

to

be

desi

gnat

ed to

cle

ar b

ackl

og o

f H

abea

s Co

rpus

App

licat

ions

.146

IV.2

1

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(174

)

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (85

)

1997

2001

Ad

Hoc

C

omm

ittee

An

ad

hoc

com

mitt

ee

be

appo

inte

d to

stu

dy

and

mak

e re

com

men

datio

ns in

the l

ight

of th

e Jud

gmen

t of t

he In

ter-A

mer

ican

Co

urt o

f Hum

an R

ight

s in

Alo

eboe

toe

etc.

v. S

urin

ame.

147 I

II.5

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(172

)19

97

102

Gen

eral

Legi

slat

ive

pack

age

be p

rovi

ded

inco

rpor

atin

g th

e af

ores

aid

reco

mm

enda

tions

and t

he re

com

men

datio

ns w

ith re

gard

to re

liefs

ab

ove

as a

n ac

know

ledg

men

t on

the

part

of Y

our

Exce

llenc

y’s

Gov

ernm

ent o

f the

trau

ma

expe

rienc

ed b

y a

larg

e nu

mbe

r of o

ur

soci

ety

be it

the

ordi

nary

citi

zens

, mem

bers

of f

amili

es o

f arm

ed

serv

ices

or p

olic

e, m

embe

rs o

f fam

ilies

of s

uspe

cted

subv

ersi

ves

or m

embe

rs o

f fam

ilies

of p

oliti

cian

s. II

I.6

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(172

)19

97

103

PUN

ITIV

E M

EA

SUR

ES

CAT

EG

OR

YO

F R

EC

RE

CO

MM

EN

DAT

ION

(AS

STAT

ED

IN R

EPO

RT

)C

oI &

RE

POR

TY

EA

R

Failu

re to

A

dher

eFa

ilure

to a

bide

by

the

Reg

ulat

ions

to r

esul

t in

a di

scip

linar

y in

quiry

con

duct

ed b

y an

inq

uirin

g of

fi cer

fro

m o

utsi

de t

he

serv

ices

to w

hich

the

alle

ged

defa

ulte

r bel

ongs

. IV.

9(i)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(174

)19

97

Failu

re o

r re

fusa

l to

per

form

the

act

s en

visa

ged

abov

e (in

re

gula

tions

) per

se

be d

ecla

red

to b

e a

cogn

izab

le o

ffenc

e, a

nd

such

act

s to

be fo

llow

ed b

y pr

osec

utio

n. IV

.9(ii

i)Th

e fai

lure

or r

efus

al b

y th

e Pol

ice t

o re

cord

an ar

rest

, det

entio

n,

and

trans

fer o

r to

reco

rd c

ompl

aint

s of a

bduc

tion.

148

If fo

llow

ed

by a

n in

volu

ntar

y di

sapp

eara

nce,

be

decl

ared

a c

ogni

zabl

e of

fenc

e. IV

.14

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(174

)

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (84

)

1997

2001

Dis

cipl

inar

y A

ctio

nD

isci

plin

ary

proc

eedi

ngs b

e co

nduc

ted

agai

nst t

hose

offi

cers

for

brea

ches

of

Reg

ulat

ions

, with

the

sup

erio

rs t

hem

selv

es b

eing

m

ade

liabl

e fo

r no

n pe

rfor

man

ce o

f th

eir

dutie

s in

this

reg

ard.

IV

.16

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (84

)20

01

148.

Reg

ulat

ion

20 (

10)

impo

sed

a pe

nalty

of

up to

two

year

s im

pris

onm

ent a

nd a

fi ne

by

the

Hig

h C

ourt

for

the

offe

nce

of “

failu

re w

ithou

t re

ason

able

cau

se to

issu

e a

docu

men

t ack

now

ledg

ing

the

fact

of a

rres

t or w

ilful

om

issi

on to

mak

e an

ent

ry in

the

info

rmat

ion

book

” re

latin

g to

the

arre

st o

f a p

erso

n un

der R

egul

atio

n 20

(1).

[ER

199

5] T

his

is a

lso

an o

ffenc

e un

der E

R 2

005

whi

ch re

plac

ed [E

R 1

995]

; Reg

. 20(

10)

“Whe

re a

ny p

erso

n w

ithou

t rea

sona

ble

caus

e fa

ils to

issu

e a

docu

men

t ack

now

ledg

ing

the

fact

of

arre

st a

s re

quire

d by

par

agra

ph (

9) [

i.e

Reg

.20(

9)] o

r wilf

ully

om

its to

mak

e su

ch e

ntry

as

is re

ferr

ed to

in th

e pr

ovis

o to

that

par

agra

ph o

r to

repo

rt th

e fa

ct th

at th

e do

cum

ent w

as

not i

ssue

d an

d th

e re

ason

s the

refo

re [s

ic],

he sh

all b

e gu

ilty

of a

n of

fenc

e an

d up

on c

onvi

ctio

n af

ter t

rial b

efor

e th

e H

igh

Cou

rt be

liab

le to

a

term

of i

mpr

ison

men

t ext

endi

ng to

two

year

s and

a fi

ne.”

104

Con

sequ

ence

fo

r br

each

of

ru

les

by

disc

iplin

ary

inqu

iry,

susp

ensi

on a

nd/o

r ter

min

atio

n of

serv

ice.

VI.5

(i)A

fi nd

ing

at a

dis

cipl

inar

y in

quiry

of t

he v

iola

tion

of th

e rig

hts

of d

etai

nee

be m

ade

liabl

e fo

r su

spen

sion

or

term

inat

ion

from

se

rvic

e, lo

ss o

f pro

mot

ions

. IV

.17

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(177

)A

ll Is

land

, Fi

nal (

84)

1997

2001

The

non

com

plia

nce

incl

udin

g a

judi

cial

fi nd

ing

to b

e en

tere

d in

the

offi

cer’s

Ser

vice

Rec

ord,

and

be

take

n in

to a

ccou

nt

with

reg

ard

to p

rom

otio

ns,

incr

emen

ts a

nd o

ther

fea

ture

s of

ad

vanc

emen

t in

serv

ice.

IV.9

(ii)

The f

act o

f an

awar

d by

cour

t aga

inst

an o

ffi ce

r in

char

ge o

f cam

p/sta

tion

whi

ch h

as b

een

foun

d to

be

resp

onsib

le sh

ould

go

into

his

serv

ice

reco

rd a

nd th

ereb

y af

fect

car

eer p

rosp

ects.

V.4

.(iii)

The

Serv

ice

Rec

ords

of

offi c

ers

to i

nclu

de i

nsta

nces

whe

re

the

Supr

eme

Cou

rt ha

s fo

und

an o

ffi ce

r to

hav

e br

each

ed

fund

amen

tal r

ight

s of

per

sons

and

a fi

ndin

g of

resp

onsi

bilit

y in

a

Hab

eas

Corp

us P

etiti

on. (

Cur

rent

ly th

is is

not

don

e, s

o rig

hts

viol

atio

ns d

o no

t effe

ct p

rom

otio

ns, e

tc.)

IV.1

8

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(174

)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(176

)

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (85

)

1997

1997

2001

Mem

bers

of t

hese

For

ces u

nder

inve

stig

atio

n fo

r inv

olve

men

t in

case

s of

dis

appe

aran

ces

shou

ld b

e su

spen

ded

from

act

ive

duty

un

til d

isci

plin

ary

inqu

iries

are

com

plet

ed.

V.2(

v)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(175

)19

97

105

Hum

an r

ight

s re

cord

s of

mem

bers

of

arm

ed f

orce

s an

d th

e po

lice

shou

ld b

e ta

ken

into

acc

ount

in

the

cons

ider

atio

n of

pr

omot

ions

.149 V

.2(iv

)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(175

)19

97

Seve

re

disc

iplin

ary

puni

shm

ent

be

met

ed

to

gove

rnm

ent

offi c

ials

who

hav

e fa

iled

to ta

ke a

dequ

ate

mea

sure

s to

pre

vent

di

sapp

eara

nces

.150 V

.2(ii

)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(175

)19

97

Puni

shm

ent

Puni

shm

ent-

(a)

Impr

ison

men

t(b

) lo

ss o

f pro

mot

ions

(c)

futu

re p

rom

otio

ns a

nd a

dvan

cem

ent t

o be

affe

cted

(d)

rest

itutio

n to

com

plai

nant

whe

re p

erpe

trato

r ha

s be

en

unju

stly

enr

iche

d at

com

plai

nant

s’ ex

pens

e.(e

) co

mpe

nsat

ion

to b

e in

add

ition

to

puni

shm

ent

– no

t as

a

subs

titut

e. II

I.2(ix

)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(172

)19

97

149.

“As

at p

rese

nt, n

eith

er a

fi nd

ing

of th

e Su

prem

e C

ourt

that

an

Offi

cer i

s in

bre

ach

of th

e fu

ndam

enta

l rig

hts

of a

citi

zen,

nor

a fi

ndin

g of

re

spon

sibi

lity

agai

nst a

n of

fi cer

in a

Hab

eas

Corp

us A

pplic

atio

n, is

ent

ered

in h

is S

ervi

ce re

cord

.” A

ll Is

land

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

2001

, p.

25-5

.15

0.

Gov

ernm

ent

regu

latio

ns p

rovi

de f

or t

he c

ondu

ct o

f di

scip

linar

y pr

ocee

ding

s ag

ains

t pu

blic

ser

vant

s th

roug

h th

e Es

tabl

ishm

ent

Cod

e.

Acc

ordi

ng to

sour

ces w

ho h

ave

track

ed c

ases

of d

isap

pear

ance

s fro

m th

e pe

riod,

thes

e pr

ocee

ding

s hav

e no

t, be

en u

tiliz

ed in

the c

ase

of th

ose

resp

onsi

ble

for d

isap

pear

ance

s.

106

AR

RE

ST A

ND

DE

TE

NT

ION

CAT

EG

OR

YO

F R

EC

RE

CO

MM

EN

DAT

ION

(A

S ST

ATE

D IN

RE

POR

T)

CoI

&R

EPO

RT

YE

AR

Arr

est

Rec

ord

of a

rres

ts,

dete

ntio

ns,

and

trans

fer

to b

e m

aint

aine

d si

mul

tane

ousl

y w

ith th

e ev

ent.

IV.1

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(173

)19

97

2. D

uty

to in

form

-(i)

The

nea

rest

pol

ice

stat

ion

to b

e im

med

iate

ly in

form

ed.15

1

(ii)

Wee

kly

list

to b

e su

bmitt

ed t

o th

e D

istri

ct S

ecre

tary

by

arre

stin

g au

thor

ity w

ith p

artic

ular

s.152

(iii)

The

mag

istra

te t

o be

inf

orm

ed o

f th

e ar

rest

with

in 2

4 ho

urs.15

3

(iv)

Mag

istra

te t

o be

inf

orm

ed o

f an

y ch

ange

in

the

plac

e of

cu

stod

y in

clud

ing

any

trans

fer o

ut o

f the

Mag

istra

te’s

juris

dict

ion

or o

f a re

leas

e fr

om c

usto

dy.15

4

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(173

)19

97

151.

(i) In

term

s of t

hose

arre

sted

by an

ord

er o

f the

Def

ence

Sec

reta

ry (R

egul

atio

n 19

of t

he 2

005

Emer

genc

y (M

iscel

lane

ous P

rovi

sions

and

Pow

ers)

Re

gula

tions

as

amen

ded

[“ER

200

5”],

i.e P

reve

ntiv

e D

eten

tion)

ther

e is

no e

xpre

ss re

quire

men

t for

the

arre

sting

offi

cer t

o br

ing

the

arre

st to

th

e no

tice

of th

e ne

ares

t pol

ice

statio

n. H

owev

er su

ch p

erso

ns m

ay n

ot b

e de

tain

ed fo

r mor

e th

an th

ree

mon

ths a

nd m

ust b

e pr

oduc

ed b

efor

e a

Mag

istra

te n

ot la

ter t

han

thirt

y da

ys a

fter s

uch

arre

st (R

eg.2

1(1)

ER

2005

), [E

R 20

10].

Thou

gh c

erta

in c

hang

es w

ere

effe

cted

by

Am

endm

ent

Regu

latio

n of

Aug

ust 5

th 2

008,

thes

e ch

ange

s w

ere

done

aw

ay w

ith b

y A

men

dmen

t Reg

ulat

ion

of M

ay 2

nd 2

010.

In

term

s of

arre

sts u

nder

Re

gula

tion

20, (

i.e a

utho

rizat

ion

by th

e Pr

esid

ent t

o se

arch

/det

ain/

arre

st w

ithou

t war

rant

any

per

son

who

is c

omm

ittin

g, h

ave

com

mitt

ed o

r su

spec

ted

to b

e co

ncer

ned

in a

n of

fenc

e un

der t

he E

mer

genc

y Re

gula

tions

), pa

ragr

aph

2 la

ys d

own

that

a p

erso

n ha

s to

be

hand

ed o

ver t

o th

e ne

ares

t pol

ice s

tatio

n w

ithin

24

hour

s. In

addi

tion

Regu

latio

n 20

(8) o

f ER

2005

impo

ses a

dut

y on

an ar

resti

ng p

olic

e offi

cer t

o re

port

the a

rrest

to

the S

uper

inte

nden

t of P

olic

e of t

he D

ivisi

on o

r whe

re th

e arre

sting

offi

cer i

s a m

embe

r of t

he ar

med

forc

es, t

o re

port

the a

rrest

to th

e Com

man

ding

O

ffi ce

r in

the

area

with

in w

hich

the

arre

st w

as m

ade,

with

in tw

enty

four

hou

rs o

f the

arre

st. O

bser

vanc

e of

thes

e sa

fegu

ards

in p

ract

ise a

re in

do

ubt.

152.

No

prov

isio

n in

em

erge

ncy

law

.15

3.

In te

rms

of a

rres

ts u

nder

Reg

ulat

ion

20, t

here

is n

o re

quire

men

t to

be b

roug

ht b

efor

e a

mag

istra

te. I

n te

rms

of R

egul

atio

n 19

, the

det

aine

e m

ust b

e pr

oduc

ed b

efor

e a

Mag

istra

te w

ithin

thirt

y da

ys o

f the

arr

est.

[ER

200

5, R

egul

atio

n 21

(1)]

Am

endm

ent R

egul

atio

n of

May

2nd

201

0 br

ough

t in

a ne

w re

quire

men

t of n

otifi

catio

n of

arr

ests

to a

Mag

istra

te w

ithin

seve

nty

two

hour

s.15

4.

No

prov

isio

n in

em

erge

ncy

law

.

107

(v)

A w

ritte

n re

cord

of

such

inf

orm

atio

n to

be

mai

ntai

ned

at

plac

e of

det

entio

n/Po

lice

Stat

ion/

Dis

trict

Sec

reta

ry/M

agis

trate

’s

Cou

rt.15

5 IV.

2R

ecei

pts o

f arr

est –

A re

ceip

t of t

he A

rres

t to

be g

iven

by

arre

stin

g of

fi cer

to a

fam

ily m

embe

r or f

riend

of t

he p

erso

n ar

rest

ed/c

opy

of R

ecei

pt to

be

give

n to

det

aine

e156 I

V.3

The

arre

stin

g of

fi cer

to

give

a r

ecei

pt o

f ar

rest

inc

ludi

ng t

he

nam

e of

the

pers

on a

rres

ted,

dat

e, p

lace

and

the

nam

e an

d ra

nk

of o

ffi ce

r arr

estin

g to

a fa

mily

mem

ber o

r frie

nd, a

t the

tim

e of

ar

rest

. IV.

5

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(173

)

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (84

)

1997

2001

Spec

ify th

e si

tuat

ions

und

er w

hich

arr

ests

with

out w

arra

nts

can

be m

ade

and

who

m th

e ar

rest

can

be

mad

e by

.157 V

I.2(i)

So

uthe

rn, F

inal

(1

76)

1997

155.

No

prov

isio

n in

em

erge

ncy

law

for a

judi

cial

reco

rd o

f suc

h in

form

atio

n be

mai

ntai

ned.

156.

(i) R

egul

atio

n 20

(9)

impo

ses

on th

e ar

rest

ing

offi c

er a

dut

y to

issu

e to

the

spou

se, f

athe

r, m

othe

r or

any

oth

er c

lose

rel

ativ

e a

docu

men

t ac

know

ledg

ing

the

fact

of a

rres

t. Th

e pr

ovis

o to

this

par

agra

ph s

tate

s ho

wev

er th

at w

here

it is

not

pos

sibl

e fo

r an

arre

stin

g po

lice

offi c

er to

is

sue

such

a d

ocum

ent,

he m

ust m

ake

an e

ntry

in th

e in

form

atio

n bo

ok g

ivin

g re

ason

s why

it is

not

pos

sibl

e to

issu

e su

ch d

ocum

ents

and

in

the

case

of a

n ar

med

forc

es a

rres

ting

offi c

er, h

e m

ust r

epor

t to

the

offi c

er in

cha

rge

of th

e po

lice

stat

ion

the

reas

ons

why

it w

as n

ot p

ossi

ble

to is

sue

the

docu

men

ts, w

ho in

turn

wou

ld e

nter

that

info

rmat

ion

in th

e in

form

atio

n bo

ok.

[ER

200

5] (i

i) Th

e fo

rm o

f the

doc

umen

t to

be

spec

ifi ed

by

the

Secr

etar

y. [E

R 2

005,

Reg

. 20(

9)] R

efer

Pre

side

ntia

l Dire

ctio

ns to

Hea

ds o

f Arm

ed F

orce

s 19

97. T

he P

resi

dent

ial D

irect

ive

of 2

006

stat

es th

at th

e pe

rson

bei

ng a

rres

ted

shou

ld b

e al

low

ed to

mak

e co

ntac

t with

fam

ily o

r frie

nds

to in

form

them

of h

is w

here

abou

ts.,

Dire

ctio

ns is

sued

by

His

Exce

llenc

y th

e Pr

esid

ent,

Com

man

der-i

n-C

harg

e of

the A

rmed

For

ces a

nd M

inis

ter o

f Def

ence

, 200

6. h

ttp://

ww

w.

natio

nals

ecur

ity.lk

/fulln

ews.p

hp?i

d=54

73. D

irect

ive

issu

ed 7

th Ju

ly 2

006

and

re c

ircul

ated

by

Secr

etar

y, M

inis

try o

f Def

ence

in A

pril

2007

. 15

7.

The

pow

ers

avai

labl

e to

and

the

situa

tions

whe

rein

com

pete

nt o

ffi ce

rs c

an m

ake

an a

rrest

with

out w

arra

nt re

mai

ns v

ery

broa

d. A

ccor

ding

to

Regu

latio

n 20

(1),

“Any

pub

lic o

ffi ce

r, an

y m

embe

r of t

he S

ri La

nka A

rmy,

the

Sri L

anka

Nav

y or

the

Sri L

anka

Air

Forc

e or

any

oth

er p

erso

n au

thor

ized

by

the

Pres

iden

t to

act u

nder

this

regu

latio

n m

ay…

.any

per

son

who

is c

omm

ittin

g or

has

com

mitt

ed o

r who

m h

e ha

s a

reas

onab

le

grou

nd fo

r sus

pect

ing

to b

e co

ncer

ned

in, o

r to

be c

omm

ittin

g or

to h

ave

com

mitt

ed a

n of

fenc

e un

der a

ny e

mer

genc

y re

gula

tion…

” [E

R 2

005]

108

Arr

este

e to

be

info

rmed

at t

he ti

me

of a

rres

t of

the

reas

ons

of

arre

st.15

8 VI.2

(ii)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(176

)19

97

Rea

sons

be

reco

rded

by

the

arre

stin

g au

thor

ity a

s so

on a

s pr

actic

able

.159 V

I.2(ii

i)So

uthe

rn, F

inal

(1

76)

1997

Arr

este

e an

d ac

com

pany

ing

pers

ons

be in

form

ed o

f the

iden

tity

of th

e ar

rest

ing

offi c

er.16

0 VI.2

(iv)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(176

)19

97

The

deta

inee

to b

e pr

oduc

ed b

efor

e th

e M

agis

trate

with

in tw

enty

fo

ur h

ours

of t

he a

rres

t. V

I.3(v

iii)

The

duty

to p

rodu

ce b

efor

e th

e m

agis

trate

any

per

son

arre

sted

w

ithin

24

hour

s be

mad

e ap

plic

able

eve

n du

ring

the

oper

atio

n of

Em

erge

ncy

Reg

ulat

ions

.161 I

V.4

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(177

)A

ll Is

land

, Fi

nal (

84)

1997

2001

158.

Pres

iden

t Cha

ndrik

a K

umar

atun

ga in

her

cap

acity

of

Com

man

der

in C

harg

e of

the

Arm

ed F

orce

s an

d M

inis

ter

of D

efen

ce d

irect

ed th

e he

ads o

f arm

ed fo

rces

and

the

polic

e in

a se

t of d

irect

ions

issu

ed o

n Ju

ne 2

1 19

97 th

at re

ason

s for

arr

est b

e co

nvey

ed to

the

pers

on a

rres

ted.

D

irect

ions

issu

ed b

y H

er E

xcel

lenc

y th

e Pr

esid

ent,

Com

man

der-i

n-C

harg

e of

the A

rmed

For

ces a

nd M

inis

ter o

f Def

ence

, Jul

y 21

, 199

7, A

ll Is

land

Rep

ort,

2001

, Ann

ex X

VI,

p. 1

49. P

resi

dent

Mah

inda

Raj

apak

se is

sued

a di

rect

ive t

o he

ads o

f the

arm

ed fo

rces

and

the p

olic

e in

a set

of

dire

ctio

ns o

n 7

July

200

6 in

whi

ch it

was

laid

dow

n th

at th

e pe

rson

to b

e ar

rest

ed sh

ould

be

info

rmed

of t

he re

ason

for t

he a

rres

t. C

laus

e 3

of

the

Dire

ctiv

e, D

irect

ions

issu

ed b

y H

is Ex

celle

ncy

the

Pres

iden

t, Co

mm

ande

r-in-

Char

ge o

f the

Arm

ed F

orce

s and

Min

ister

of D

efen

ce, 2

006.

ht

tp://

ww

w.n

atio

nals

ecur

ity.lk

/fulln

ews.p

hp?i

d=54

73, D

irect

ive

issu

ed 7

th J

uly

2006

and

re c

ircul

ated

by

Secr

etar

y, M

inis

try o

f Def

ence

in

Apr

il 20

07.

159.

No

spec

ifi c

prov

isio

n ad

dres

sing

the

reco

rdin

g of

reas

ons b

y th

e ar

rest

ing

auth

ority

.16

0.

Alth

ough

ther

e is n

o re

quire

men

t in

the E

mer

genc

y R

egul

atio

ns, s

ee d

irect

ions

issu

ed b

y th

e Pre

side

nt in

June

199

7 ab

ove a

nd th

e Pre

side

ntia

l D

irect

ive

of 7

July

200

6, w

hich

stat

e th

at th

e pe

rson

mak

ing

the

arre

st o

r det

entio

n sh

ould

iden

tify

him

self

by n

ame

and

rank

to th

e pe

rson

or

rela

tive

or fr

iend

of t

he p

erso

n to

be

arre

sted

Ibi

d. n

.63.

161.

In c

ases

of a

rres

ts u

nder

Reg

ulat

ion

20, t

here

is n

o re

quire

men

t to

prod

uce

the

deta

inee

bef

ore

a M

agis

trate

. Acc

ordi

ng to

Reg

ulat

ion

21(1

), w

here

per

sons

are

arr

este

d or

det

aine

d un

der R

egul

atio

n 19

, the

det

aine

e m

ust b

e pr

oduc

ed b

efor

e a

mag

istra

te w

ithin

a re

ason

able

tim

e, a

nd

in a

ny e

vent

not

exc

eedi

ng th

irty

days

afte

r suc

h ar

rest

. [ER

200

5]

109

Insp

ecto

r G

ener

al o

f Po

lice

to b

e re

quire

d to

pro

vide

mon

thly

st

atis

tics o

f com

plia

nce.

IV.3

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (84

)20

01

A p

enal

ty fo

r non

-com

plia

nce,

incl

udin

g th

e ch

ain

of c

omm

and

resp

onsi

bilit

y fo

r suc

h no

n-co

mpl

ianc

e, b

e sp

ecifi

ed.16

2 IV.

2A

ll Is

land

, Fi

nal (

84)

2001

Det

entio

n4.

Det

entio

n -

(i)

to

be a

t aut

horiz

ed p

lace

s of d

eten

tion

only

.(ii

) A

rec

eipt

be

issu

ed t

o de

tain

ees

with

par

ticul

ars

of

dete

ntio

n.16

3

(iii)

A ri

ght t

o co

mm

unic

ate

with

rela

tives

be

reco

gniz

ed a

nd

be im

plem

ente

d.16

4

(iv)

Reg

iste

rs o

f de

tent

ion

to b

e m

aint

aine

d; i

nclu

ding

de

tent

ion

at te

mpo

rary

cam

ps.16

5

(v)

Par

ticul

ars o

f det

aine

es h

eld

at te

mpo

rary

cam

ps m

ust b

e en

tere

d in

the

mai

n A

rmy

Cam

p/Po

lice

statio

n as

wel

l.166

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(173

)19

97

162.

The

only

pen

alty

pro

vide

d fo

r non

com

plia

nce

in R

egul

atio

n 20

(10)

is a

pen

alty

of u

p to

two

year

s im

pris

onm

ent a

nd a

fi ne

by

the

Hig

h C

ourt

for t

he o

ffenc

e of

failu

re w

ithou

t rea

sona

ble

caus

e to

issu

e a

docu

men

t ack

now

ledg

ing

the

fact

of a

rres

t or w

ilful

om

issi

on to

mak

e an

ent

ry

in th

e in

form

atio

n bo

ok a

s the

cas

e m

ay b

e in

acc

orda

nce

with

Reg

ulat

ion

20(9

). [E

R 2

005]

163.

Acc

ordi

ng to

Reg

ulat

ions

19(

3) a

nd 2

1(2)

, det

entio

n m

ay b

e in

a p

lace

aut

horiz

ed b

y th

e In

spec

tor G

ener

al o

f Pol

ice.

[ER

200

5], [

ER 2

010]

164.

Reg

ulat

ion

20(9

) im

pose

s on

the

arr

estin

g of

fi cer

a d

uty

to i

ssue

to

the

spou

se, f

athe

r, m

othe

r, or

any

oth

er c

lose

rel

ativ

e, a

doc

umen

t ac

know

ledg

ing

the

fact

of a

rres

t. Th

e pr

ovis

o to

this

par

agra

ph st

ates

, how

ever

, tha

t whe

re it

is n

ot p

ossi

ble

for a

n ar

rest

ing

polic

e of

fi cer

to

issu

e su

ch a

doc

umen

t, he

mus

t mak

e an

ent

ry in

the

info

rmat

ion

book

giv

ing

reas

ons w

hy it

is n

ot p

ossi

ble

to is

sue

such

doc

umen

ts a

nd in

th

e ca

se o

f an

arm

ed fo

rces

arr

estin

g of

fi cer

, he

mus

t rep

ort t

o th

e of

fi cer

in c

harg

e of

the

polic

e st

atio

n th

e re

ason

s why

it w

as n

ot p

ossi

ble

to

issu

e th

e do

cum

ents

, who

in tu

rn w

ould

ent

er th

at in

form

atio

n in

the

info

rmat

ion

book

. [ER

200

5]16

5.

In re

latio

n to

bot

h fo

rms

of d

eten

tion,

the

IGP

may

, whe

n he

con

side

rs it

exp

edie

nt to

do

so, p

erm

it vi

sits

to a

nd c

orre

spon

denc

e to

suc

h pe

rson

in su

ch m

anne

r and

at s

uch

time

and

plac

e as

the

IGP

may

from

tim

e to

tim

e di

rect

. Reg

ulat

ions

19(

3)(b

) and

21

(2)(

b) [E

R 2

005]

, [ER

20

10]

166.

No

prov

isio

n.

110

(vi)

Offi

cers

-in-c

harg

e of

pla

ces o

f det

entio

n to

send

wee

kly

lists

to th

e Pr

ades

heey

a Sa

bha

Secr

etar

y; P

rade

shee

ya

Sabh

a Se

cret

ary

to m

aint

ain

a re

gist

er o

f sam

e.16

7

(vii)

Afo

resa

id p

rovi

sion

s to

be

elev

ated

to

cons

titut

iona

l rig

hts.16

8 IV.

4

Det

entio

n at

an

auth

oriz

ed p

lace

of d

eten

tion

only

. VI.3

(i)

Det

entio

n to

be

only

at a

n au

thor

ized

pla

ce o

f det

entio

n. IV

.6

Sout

hern

, Fi

nal (

177)

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (84

)

1997

2001

The

reas

on fo

r the

ord

er, a

nd m

axim

um p

erio

d of

det

entio

n to

be

reco

rded

in th

e D

eten

tion

Ord

er.16

9 VI.3

(v)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(177

)19

97

Det

entio

n to

be

in re

man

d cu

stod

y fr

om d

ate

of c

harg

e. V

I.3(v

i)So

uthe

rn, F

inal

(1

77)

1997

The

Secr

etar

y to

the

Min

istry

of

Def

ence

to is

sue

orde

rs f

or a

m

axim

um p

erio

d of

one

yea

r and

on

rene

wal

(if a

ny) b

e re

quire

d to

stat

e th

e gr

ound

s the

refo

re. V

I.3(ix

)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(177

)19

97

Mag

istra

te b

e em

pow

ered

to

requ

ire t

he S

ecre

tary

to

prov

ide

supp

lem

enta

ry in

form

atio

n re

gard

ing

the

Det

entio

n O

rder

whe

n in

quiri

ng in

to th

e ex

tens

ion

of th

e D

eten

tion

Ord

er.17

0 VI.3

(x)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(177

)20

01

167.

No

prov

isio

n.16

8.

No

prov

isio

n.16

9.

Acc

ordi

ng to

inte

rvie

ws w

ith la

wye

rs m

onito

ring

thes

e ca

ses d

eten

tion

orde

rs a

re n

ot b

eing

rele

ased

to d

etai

nees

. 17

0.

Acc

ordi

ng to

Reg

ulat

ion

19(1

0), a

Mag

istra

te h

as n

o rig

ht to

inqu

ire in

to th

e va

lidity

of d

eten

tion

orde

rs w

ith re

fere

nce

to p

ower

exe

rcis

ed

unde

r Reg

ulat

ion

19(1

); “A

n or

der u

nder

par

agra

ph (1

) of t

his r

egul

atio

n sh

all n

ot b

e cal

led

in q

uest

ion

in an

y co

urt o

n an

y gr

ound

wha

tsoe

ver.”

[E

R 2

005]

111

Mag

istra

tes

be e

mpo

wer

ed to

req

uire

the

Def

ence

Sec

reta

ry to

pr

ovid

e su

pple

men

tary

info

rmat

ion

whe

n se

ekin

g an

ext

ensi

on

of a

det

entio

n or

der.

IV.2

8

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (85

)19

97

A p

roce

dure

for r

ecor

ds to

be

mai

ntai

ned.

VI.3

(xi)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(177

)19

97

The

arre

st a

nd d

eten

tion

of p

erso

n m

ust

be n

otifi

ed t

o th

e H

uman

Rig

hts

Com

mis

sion

/Hum

an R

ight

s Ta

sk F

orce

, th

e lo

cal M

agis

trate

and

the

loca

l adm

inis

trativ

e se

rvic

e w

ithin

24

hour

s of

the

arre

st in

clud

ing

notic

e of

cha

nges

in th

e pl

ace

of

dete

ntio

n.17

1 VI.4

(i)

Any

mem

ber o

f the

Arm

ed F

orce

s and

the P

olic

e For

ce w

ho m

akes

an

arre

st or

ord

ers

a de

tent

ion

mus

t in

form

the

Hum

an R

ight

s Co

mm

issio

n of

such

arre

st or

det

entio

n w

ithin

48

hour

s. IV

.1

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(177

)

All

Isla

nd

Fina

l (84

)

1997

2001

The m

embe

rs of

the H

uman

Rig

hts T

ask f

orce

shou

ld be

perm

itted

ac

cess

to

the

arre

sted

per

son.

The

se a

nd o

ther

reg

ulat

ions

are

al

read

y in

the

Stat

ute

Boo

k bu

t thi

s will

not

be

muc

h he

lp u

nles

s th

ey a

re p

rope

rly e

nfor

ced.

NE

Fina

l (63

)19

97

171.

Hum

an R

ight

s Com

mis

sion

Act

No.

21

of 1

996,

Sec

tion

28 st

ates

that

(1) W

here

a pe

rson

is ar

rest

ed o

r det

aine

d un

der P

reve

ntio

n of

Ter

roris

m

(Tem

pora

ry P

rovi

sion

s) A

ct, N

o. 4

8 of

197

9 or

a re

gula

tion

mad

e un

der t

he P

ublic

Sec

urity

Ord

inan

ce (C

hapt

er 4

0), i

t sha

ll be

the

duty

of

the

pers

on m

akin

g su

ch a

rres

t or o

rder

of d

eten

tion,

as t

he c

ase

may

be

to fo

rthw

ith a

nd in

any

cas

e, n

ot la

ter t

han

forty

-eig

ht h

ours

from

the

time

of su

ch a

rres

t or d

eten

tion,

info

rm th

e C

omm

issi

on o

f suc

h ar

rest

or d

eten

tion

as th

e ca

se m

ay b

e, a

nd th

e pl

ace

at w

hich

the

pers

on so

ar

rest

ed o

r det

aine

d is

bei

ng h

eld

in c

usto

dy o

r det

entio

n. W

here

a p

erso

n so

hel

d in

cus

tody

or d

eten

tion

is re

leas

ed o

r tra

nsfe

rred

to a

noth

er

plac

e of

det

entio

n it

shal

l be

the

duty

of t

he p

erso

n m

akin

g th

e or

der f

or su

ch o

r tra

nsfe

r as t

he c

ase

may

be,

to in

form

the

Com

mis

sion

of s

uch

rele

ase

or tr

ansf

er, a

s th

e ca

se m

ay b

e, a

nd in

the

case

of a

tran

sfer

to in

form

the

Com

mis

sion

of t

he lo

catio

n of

the

new

pla

ce o

f det

entio

n.

The

48-h

our r

ule

of S

ectio

n 28

was

als

o co

nfi rm

ed b

y D

irect

ions

from

the

Pres

iden

t to

Hea

ds o

f Arm

ed F

orce

s an

d Po

lice,

199

7. F

R 2

010

also

impo

ses

a re

quire

men

t to

notif

y a

Mag

istra

te w

hen

prev

entiv

ely

deta

ined

, with

in s

even

ty tw

o ho

urs

of th

e de

tent

ion,

new

pro

viso

to

Reg

ulat

ion

19 1

(A).

112

Issu

e of

rece

ipts

to m

embe

rs o

f the

fam

ily o

f the

det

aine

e an

d/or

a p

erso

n el

ecte

d by

the

det

aine

e be

stri

ctly

mon

itore

d.17

2 V

I.4(ii

)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(177

)19

97

Reg

iste

r of

all

pers

ons

deta

ined

und

er e

mer

genc

y re

gula

tions

to

be

mai

ntai

ned

at th

e D

istri

ct S

ecre

tary

’s o

ffi ce

and

regu

larly

up

date

d.17

3 VI.4

(iii)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(177

)19

97

Mag

istra

te to

be

requ

ired

to v

isit

all p

lace

s of

det

entio

n on

ce a

m

onth

. A re

cord

of M

agis

trate

’s m

onth

ly v

isits

and

com

men

ts to

be

mai

ntai

ned

at th

e pl

ace

of d

eten

tion.

174

IV.5

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(173

)19

97

Mag

istra

te to

vis

it pl

aces

of d

eten

tion

ever

y m

onth

.175 I

V.10

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (84

)20

01

172.

Reg

ulat

ion

20(9

) im

pose

s on

the

arr

estin

g of

fi cer

a d

uty

to i

ssue

to

the

spou

se, f

athe

r, m

othe

r, or

any

oth

er c

lose

rel

ativ

e, a

doc

umen

t ac

know

ledg

ing

the

fact

of a

rres

t. Th

e pr

ovis

o to

this

par

agra

ph s

tate

s ho

wev

er, t

hat w

here

it is

not

pos

sibl

e fo

r an

arre

stin

g po

lice

offi c

er to

is

sue

such

a d

ocum

ent,

he m

ust m

ake

an e

ntry

in th

e in

form

atio

n bo

ok g

ivin

g re

ason

s why

it is

not

pos

sibl

e to

issu

e su

ch d

ocum

ents

and

in

the

case

of a

n ar

med

forc

es a

rres

ting

offi c

er, h

e m

ust r

epor

t to

the

offi c

er in

cha

rge

of th

e po

lice

stat

ion

the

reas

ons w

hy it

was

not

pos

sibl

e to

is

sue

the

docu

men

ts, w

ho in

turn

wou

ld e

nter

that

info

rmat

ion

in th

e in

form

atio

n bo

ok. [

ER 2

005]

.17

3.

Ther

e is

no

publ

icly

ava

ilabl

e co

mpr

ehen

sive

list

of a

ll de

tain

ed p

erso

ns. W

hile

in th

e pa

st, t

he H

uman

Rig

hts C

omm

issi

on d

id re

cord

det

ails

of

all

arre

sts,

sour

ces r

epor

t tha

t, at

pre

sent

, no

such

pra

ctic

e is

bei

ng fo

llow

ed.

174.

The

Pris

ons

Ord

inan

ce N

o.16

of 1

877

as a

men

ded

in 1

952,

Sec

tion

39 s

tate

s: (1

) Not

hing

in th

is O

rdin

ance

sha

ll be

dee

med

to a

brid

ge o

r af

fect

the

pow

er o

f a Ju

dge

of th

e Su

prem

e C

ourt,

a Ju

dge

of th

e C

ourt

of A

ppea

l or a

Judg

e of

a H

igh

Cou

rt to

vis

it an

y pr

ison

at a

ny ti

me

and

to h

old

ther

ein

any

insp

ectio

n, in

vest

igat

ion

or in

quiry

whi

ch h

e m

ay c

onsi

der n

eces

sary

., (2

) Any

Mem

ber o

f Par

liam

ent,

Dis

trict

Jud

ge o

r M

agis

trate

may

vis

it an

y pr

ison

, bet

wee

n th

e ho

urs o

f 5.3

0 a.

m. a

nd 5

.30

p.m

. on

any

day

for t

he p

urpo

se o

f ins

pect

ing

the

gene

ral c

ondi

tion

of th

e pr

ison

and

of t

he p

rison

ers t

here

in, a

nd m

ay re

cord

in th

e V

isito

rs' b

ook

any

obse

rvat

ions

or r

ecom

men

datio

ns w

hich

he

may

thin

k fi t

to

mak

e af

ter s

uch

insp

ectio

n.17

5.

Thus

, alth

ough

Mag

istra

tes d

o ha

ve th

e rig

ht to

vis

it pl

aces

of d

eten

tion

acco

rdin

g to

exi

stin

g la

w, t

hey

are

not c

ompe

lled

to d

o so

.

113

The

Pris

on R

ules

to a

pply

to a

ll de

tent

ions

.176 I

V.6

Pris

on R

ules

to b

e m

ade

appl

icab

le to

con

ditio

ns o

f de

tent

ion.

V

I.3(v

ii)

The

Pris

on R

ules

be

mad

e ap

plic

able

to a

ll de

tain

ees.

IV.1

1

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(173

)So

uthe

rn, F

inal

(1

77)

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (84

)

1997

1997

2001

Ade

quat

e pub

licity

be g

iven

to th

e aut

horiz

ed p

lace

s of d

eten

tion.

V

I.3.(i

i)

Ade

quat

e pub

licity

be g

iven

to th

e aut

horiz

ed p

lace

s of d

eten

tion.

IV

.7

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(177

)

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (84

)

1997

2001

Det

aine

e to

be

hand

ed o

ver t

o th

e pr

ison

aut

horit

ies

as s

oon

as

poss

ible

. VI.3

(iii)

Mem

bers

of a

rmed

forc

es to

han

d ov

er d

etai

nees

to th

e ne

ares

t po

lice

stat

ion.

VI.3

(iv)

An

arre

sted

per

son

to b

e pr

ompt

ly h

ande

d ov

er t

o cu

stod

ial

auth

oriti

es, v

iz th

e of

fi cer

in C

harg

e of

a P

olic

e St

atio

n or

the

pris

on a

utho

ritie

s. IV

.8

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(177

)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(177

)A

ll Is

land

, Fi

nal (

84)

1997

1997

2001

A c

hang

e of

the

plac

e of

det

entio

n to

be

prom

ptly

not

ifi ed

to th

e fa

mily

of t

he a

rres

ted

pers

on. I

V.9

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (84

)20

01

176.

Und

er R

egul

atio

n 19

and

21, t

he P

rison

s Ord

inan

ce, w

ith th

e exc

eptio

n of

Cha

pter

IX, a

pplie

s to

thos

e det

aine

es d

etai

ned

in a

pris

on es

tabl

ishe

d un

der t

he P

rison

s O

rdin

ance

. A p

rovi

so h

owev

er fo

und

in b

oth

Reg

ulat

ions

giv

es th

e IG

P th

e di

scre

tion

to d

ecid

e, w

here

exp

edie

nt, w

hich

ru

les u

nder

the

Pris

ons O

rdin

ance

app

ly a

nd w

hich

do

not a

pply

. [ER

200

5], [

ER 2

010]

.

114

All

reco

rds,

lists

and

reg

iste

rs t

o be

ava

ilabl

e fo

r pe

rusa

l by

la

wye

rs,

cour

ts,

and

pers

ons/

orga

niza

tions

with

a l

egiti

mat

e in

tere

st in

the

info

rmat

ion.

IV.7

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(173

)19

97

The

Stat

e its

elf t

o be

see

n to

be

aler

t to

the

pres

erva

tion

of th

e rig

hts

of t

he d

etai

nee

by w

ay o

f in

stitu

tion

of a

ctio

n ag

ains

t vi

olat

ors.

IV.1

3

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (84

)20

01

Una

utho

rised

C

amps

Una

utho

rised

det

entio

n ca

mps

to b

e di

sman

tled

imm

edia

tely

on

iden

tifi c

atio

n. V

I.7(i)

So

uthe

rn, F

inal

(1

77)

1997

Com

plai

nts

rega

rdin

g un

auth

oriz

ed d

eten

tion

cam

ps t

o be

in

vest

igat

ed b

y an

ind

epen

dent

com

mitt

ee a

ppoi

nted

for

tha

t pu

rpos

e. V

I.7(ii

)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(177

)19

97

Rel

ease

Rel

ease

mus

t be

thr

ough

cou

rts t

o th

e fa

mili

es,

and

fam

ily

mem

ber m

ust s

ign

the

reco

rd o

f rel

ease

. IV.

8(i)

The

Mag

istra

tes’

Cou

rts a

nd t

he P

rade

shiy

a Sa

bha

Secr

etar

y m

ust b

e in

form

ed o

f rel

ease

IV.8

(ii)

Rel

ease

fro

m d

eten

tion

to b

e th

roug

h C

ourts

or

to f

amili

es.

IV.1

2

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(174

)

Sout

hern

, Fi

nal (

174)

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (84

)

1997

1997

2001

115

Em

erge

ncy

Reg

ulat

ions

The

utili

zatio

n of

the

pow

ers

unde

r th

e st

ate

of e

mer

genc

y be

m

inim

ized

. VI.1

(i)

The

utili

zatio

n of

the

pow

ers

unde

r the

Em

erge

ncy

Reg

ulat

ions

be

min

imiz

ed.17

7 IV.

25

Sout

hern

, Fi

nal (

176)

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (85

)

1997

2001

A m

onth

ly s

crut

iny

of e

ach

Reg

ulat

ion

by a

com

mitt

ee o

f m

embe

rs o

f par

liam

ent t

o ta

ke p

lace

prio

r to

the

deba

te o

n th

e ex

tens

ion

of th

e em

erge

ncy.

178 V

I.1(ii

)

Parli

amen

t to

scr

utin

ize

each

Reg

ulat

ion

befo

re p

rom

ulga

tion

and

hum

an r

ight

s gr

oups

be

give

n th

e op

portu

nity

to

mak

e su

bmis

sion

s. IV

.26

Sout

hern

, Fi

nal (

176)

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (85

)

1997

2001

Con

tent

s of R

egul

atio

ns to

be

give

n w

ide

publ

icity

. VI.1

(iii)

Ade

quat

e pu

blic

ity b

e gi

ven

to th

e pr

ovis

ions

of t

he E

mer

genc

y R

egul

atio

ns. I

V.27

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(176

)A

ll Is

land

, Fi

nal (

85)

1997

2001

177.

Am

nest

y In

tern

atio

nal

mak

es t

he f

ollo

win

g re

com

men

datio

n in

Jun

e 20

09;

“Rev

ise

or r

epea

l an

y em

erge

ncy

legi

slat

ion

whi

ch v

iola

tes

inte

rnat

iona

l law

and

sta

ndar

ds a

nd, i

n pa

rticu

lar,

prov

ides

for o

r enc

oura

ges

impu

nity

for p

erpe

trato

rs o

f crim

es u

nder

inte

rnat

iona

l law

.”

Am

nest

y In

tern

atio

nal,

June

200

9, p

.51.

178.

The

deba

tes o

n Em

erge

ncy

Reg

ulat

ions

gen

eral

ly ta

ke th

e fo

rm o

f a g

ener

al d

ebat

e on

the

arm

ed c

onfl i

ct a

nd g

over

nmen

t pol

icy

in re

latio

n to

the

natio

nal q

uest

ion,

and

rare

ly in

volv

e ex

chan

ges r

elat

ing

to th

e su

bjec

t mat

ter o

f the

Reg

ulat

ions

.

116

All

the R

egul

atio

ns w

hich

are a

pplic

able

at a

give

n tim

e be m

ade

avai

labl

e in

one

pla

ce. V

I.1(iv

)So

uthe

rn, F

inal

(1

76)

1997

Reg

ulat

ions

to

be i

n cl

ear

lang

uage

and

dra

fted

unde

r th

e su

perv

isio

n of

the

Lega

l Dra

ftsm

an.

VI.1

.(v)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(176

)19

97

Emer

genc

y R

egul

atio

ns m

ust n

ot re

mov

e th

e ne

ed fo

r an

inqu

est

befo

re th

e di

spos

al o

f the

bod

ies o

f the

dec

ease

d.17

9 VI.6

(i)So

uthe

rn, F

inal

(1

77)

1997

The

bodi

es o

f the

dec

ease

d m

ust b

e re

turn

ed to

thei

r fam

ilies

.180

VI.6

(ii)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(177

)19

97

179.

Reg

ulat

ion

55 re

quire

d th

e IG

P or

the

DIG

, upo

n be

ing

issu

ed a

not

ice

of d

eath

due

to a

ctio

n ta

ken

in th

e co

urse

of p

erfo

rman

ce o

f dut

ies b

y ei

ther

pol

ice

or a

rmed

forc

es p

erso

nnel

, or w

here

a p

erso

n di

es in

pol

ice

or m

ilita

ry c

usto

dy. R

egul

atio

n 55

(b) p

rovi

ded

that

whe

re th

e bo

dy

is fo

und,

the

IGP

or D

IG m

ust f

orth

with

repo

rt su

ch fa

ct to

the

mag

istra

te, w

ho in

turn

shal

l ord

er th

at a

pos

t mor

tem

exa

min

atio

n of

the

body

be

hel

d un

der R

egul

atio

n 56

. [ER

200

5]. T

hese

Reg

ulat

ions

wer

e re

peal

ed b

y ER

201

0.18

0.

Acc

ordi

ng to

Reg

ulat

ion

56, “

The

Mag

istra

te s

hall

upon

the

rece

ipt o

f fac

ts b

y th

e IG

P or

DIG

und

er re

gula

tion

55 d

irect

the

gove

rnm

ent

Med

ical

Offi

cer t

o ho

ld a

pos

t mor

tem

and

mak

e or

der a

t the

con

clus

ion

of su

ch p

ost m

orte

m th

at th

e de

ad b

ody

be h

ande

d ov

er to

the

DIG

fo

r dis

posa

l. Th

e D

IG in

turn

can

han

d ov

er th

e bo

dy to

any

rela

tion

who

cla

ims

the

body

sub

ject

to c

ondi

tions

or r

estri

ctio

ns im

pose

d in

co

nsid

erat

ion

of n

atio

nal s

ecur

ity o

r pub

lic o

rder

, or o

ther

wis

e au

thor

ize

the

buria

l or c

rem

atio

n of

the

dead

bod

y in

acc

orda

nce

with

the

step

s he

may

dee

m n

eces

sary

in th

e ci

rcum

stan

ces.

[ER

200

5]. T

his R

egul

atio

n w

as re

peal

ed b

y ER

201

0.

117

CAT

EG

OR

YO

F R

EC

RE

CO

MM

EN

DAT

ION

(AS

STAT

ED

IN R

EPO

RT

)C

oI &

RE

POR

TY

EA

R

Ref

orm

s of

bot

h th

e la

w a

nd t

he a

dmin

istra

tion

of t

he l

aw,

requ

ired

to e

nabl

e sp

eed

of re

spon

se.

The

oppo

rtuni

ty to

invo

ke

this

juris

dict

ion

no so

oner

a si

tuat

ion

of u

nack

now

ledg

ed cu

stod

y ar

ises

is th

e fi r

st re

quis

ite. V

.3.(i

)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(175

)19

97

Judi

cial

Ref

orm

Enla

rgem

ent o

f the

Mag

istra

te’s

Cou

rt’s

Juris

dict

ion

in H

abea

s Co

rpus

App

licat

ions

as

wel

l as

rete

ntio

n of

pre

sent

pow

ers.18

1 IV

.11(

i)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(174

)19

97

LE

GA

L R

EFO

RM

181.

Arti

cle

141

of th

e C

onst

itutio

n of

the

Dem

ocra

tic S

ocia

list R

epub

lic o

f Sri

Lank

a, 1

978

vest

s in

the

Cou

rt of

App

eal t

he ju

risdi

ctio

n to

issu

e w

rits i

n th

e na

ture

of H

abea

s Cor

pus “

prov

ided

that

it sh

all b

e la

wfu

l for

the

Cou

rt of

App

eal t

o re

quire

the

body

of s

uch

pers

on to

be

brou

ght

up b

efor

e th

e m

ost c

onve

nien

t Cou

rt of

Firs

t Ins

tanc

e an

d to

dire

ct th

e ju

dge

of s

uch

cour

t to

inqu

ire in

to a

nd re

port

upon

the

acts

of t

he

alle

ged

impr

ison

men

t or d

eten

tion

and

to m

ake

such

pro

visi

on fo

r the

inte

rim c

usto

dy o

f the

bod

y pr

oduc

ed a

s to

such

cou

rt sh

all s

eem

righ

t; an

d th

e C

ourt

of A

ppea

l sha

ll up

on th

e re

ceip

t of s

uch

repo

rt, m

ake

orde

r to

disc

harg

e or

rem

and

the

pers

on s

o al

lege

d to

be

impr

ison

ed o

r de

tain

ed o

r ot

herw

ise

deal

with

suc

h pe

rson

acc

ordi

ng to

law

, and

the

Cou

rt of

Firs

t Ins

tanc

e sh

all c

onfo

rm to

, and

car

ry in

to im

med

iate

ef

fect

, the

ord

er so

pro

noun

ced

or m

ade

by th

e C

ourt

of A

ppea

l”. I

t mus

t be

note

d th

at u

nder

Arti

cle

154

P pa

ragr

aph

4 in

trodu

ced

by th

e 13

th

Am

endm

ent t

o th

e Con

stitu

tion

of th

e Dem

ocra

tic S

ocia

list R

epub

lic o

f Sri

Lank

a (19

78) c

ertifi

ed

on 1

4 N

ovem

ber 1

987,

the P

rovi

ncia

l Hig

h C

ourts

hav

e ju

risdi

ctio

n to

“is

sue

acco

rdin

g to

law

, ord

ers i

n th

e na

ture

of H

abea

s Cor

pus i

n re

spec

t of p

erso

ns il

lega

lly d

etai

ned

with

in th

e Pr

ovin

ce…

” Th

e or

igin

al ju

risdi

ctio

n to

rece

ive

petit

ions

and

affi

davi

ts a

nd to

dec

ide

habe

as c

ases

rem

ains

with

the

Cou

rt of

App

eal a

nd th

e Pr

ovin

cial

Hig

h C

ourt.

118

Enla

rgem

ent o

f the

Mag

istra

te C

ourt’

s ju

risdi

ctio

n to

em

pow

er

the

Mag

istra

te t

o re

ceiv

e th

e af

fi dav

its o

f th

e pe

titio

ner

and

his

witn

esse

s, to

reg

iste

r th

e pe

titio

n an

d fo

rwar

d to

the

Hig

h C

ourt

[or

the

Cou

rt of

App

eal

as t

he c

ase

may

be]

, pl

us t

he

empo

wer

men

t of

the

Mag

istra

te t

o en

terta

in t

he p

etiti

oner

’s

appl

icat

ion

that

he

(the

Mag

istra

te)

visi

t th

e pl

ace

of a

llege

d un

ackn

owle

dged

det

entio

n.18

2 V.3

.(ii)

Sout

hern

, Fi

nal (

176)

1997

The

juris

dict

ion

of M

agis

trate

s be

enl

arge

d to

ena

ble

them

to

rece

ive

petit

ions

and

affi

davi

ts in

Hab

eas

Corp

us A

pplic

atio

n,

and

to v

isit

alle

ged

plac

es o

f de

tent

ion,

whi

le th

e H

igh

Cou

rt to

con

tinue

with

jur

isdi

ctio

n to

dec

lare

res

pons

ibili

ty a

nd

com

pens

atio

n. IV

.20

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (85

)20

01

Con

stitu

tiona

l R

efor

mA

rticl

e 126

(2) o

f the

Con

stitu

tion b

e am

ende

d to e

nabl

e pet

ition

ers

to o

verc

ome

the

prob

lem

s of d

elay

and

locu

s sta

ndi.18

3 III.4

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(172

)19

97

182.

Acc

ordi

ng to

Sec

tion

39 o

f the

Pris

ons O

rdin

ance

, as a

men

ded

in 1

952:

(1) N

othi

ng in

this

Ord

inan

ce sh

all b

e de

emed

to a

brid

ge o

r affe

ct th

e po

wer

of a

Judg

e of

the

Supr

eme

Cou

rt, a

Judg

e of

the

Cou

rt of

App

eal o

r a Ju

dge

of a

Hig

h C

ourt

to v

isit

any

pris

on a

t any

tim

e an

d to

hol

d th

erei

n an

y in

spec

tion,

inve

stig

atio

n or

inqu

iry w

hich

he m

ay co

nsid

er n

eces

sary

. (2)

Any

Mem

ber o

f Par

liam

ent,

Dis

trict

Judg

e or M

agis

trate

m

ay v

isit

any

pris

on, b

etw

een

the

hour

s of 5

.30

a.m

. and

5.3

0 p.

m. o

n an

y da

y fo

r the

pur

pose

of i

nspe

ctin

g th

e ge

nera

l con

ditio

n of

the

pris

on

and

of th

e pr

ison

ers t

here

in, a

nd m

ay re

cord

in th

e V

isito

rs' b

ook

any

obse

rvat

ions

or r

ecom

men

datio

ns w

hich

he

may

thin

k fi t

to m

ake

afte

r su

ch in

spec

tion.

Thu

s, m

agis

trate

s do

have

the

right

to v

isit

the

plac

e of

det

entio

n ac

cord

ing

to e

xist

ing

law

, but

re n

ot c

ompe

lled

to d

o so

.18

3.

Acc

ordi

ng to

Arti

cle

126(

2) o

f the

Con

stitu

tion,

“W

here

any

per

son

alle

ges t

hat a

ny su

ch fu

ndam

enta

l rig

ht o

r lan

guag

e rig

ht re

latin

g to

such

pe

rson

has

bee

n in

frin

ged

or is

abo

ut to

be

infr

inge

d by

exe

cutiv

e or

adm

inis

trativ

e ac

tion,

he

may

him

self

or b

y an

atto

rney

-at-l

aw o

n hi

s be

half,

with

in o

ne m

onth

ther

eof,

in a

ccor

danc

e w

ith su

ch ru

les o

f cou

rt as

may

be

in fo

rce,

app

ly to

the

Supr

eme

Cou

rt by

way

of p

etiti

on in

w

ritin

g ad

dres

sed

to su

ch C

ourt

pray

ing

for r

elie

f or r

edre

ss in

resp

ect o

f suc

h in

frin

gem

ent.”

119

Arti

cle

17 a

nd 1

26 o

f th

e C

onst

itutio

n be

am

ende

d en

larg

ing

the

scop

e of

locu

s st

andi

in fu

ndam

enta

l Rig

hts

appl

icat

ions

.184

III.1

4

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (83

)20

01

Ret

urne

d de

tain

ees

be p

erm

itted

to m

ake

appl

icat

ions

, des

pite

th

e la

pse

of ti

me,

in te

rms

of A

rticl

e 11

and

Arti

cle

13 o

f th

e C

onst

itutio

n, th

roug

h th

e Le

gal A

dvis

ory

(Ass

ista

nce)

Ser

vice

B

urea

u.18

5 III

.15

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (83

)20

01

Prin

cipl

e 34

of t

he U

N B

ody

of P

rinci

ples

for t

he P

rote

ctio

n of

al

l Pe

rson

s un

der

any

form

of

Det

entio

n or

Im

pris

onm

ent

be

inco

rpor

ated

in th

e C

onst

itutio

n. IV

. 18

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(175

)19

97

Con

stitu

tiona

l rig

ht t

o be

dec

lare

d in

any

per

son

to p

etiti

on

the

Supr

eme

Cou

rt th

roug

h H

uman

Rig

hts

Task

For

ce (

HRT

F)

rega

rdin

g un

auth

oriz

ed p

lace

s of d

eten

tion.

186 I

V.17

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(175

)19

97

Law

Ref

orm

Legi

slat

ive

mea

sure

s be

ta

ken

to

addr

ess

the

fore

goin

g is

sues

[w

ith r

egar

d to

rel

ief]

if

they

can

not

be d

ealt

with

by

adm

inis

trativ

e ac

tion.

I.12

(i)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(171

)19

97

184.

The

Supr

eme

Cou

rt ho

wev

er h

as e

xten

ded

locu

s sta

ndi t

o de

pend

ants

and

law

ful h

eirs

of v

ictim

s of

cus

todi

al d

eath

s in

the

case

s of

Sriy

ani

Silv

a v.

Idda

mal

goda

, OIC

Pai

yaga

la [2

003]

1 S

ri LR

14

and

Lam

a H

ewag

e La

l, Ra

ni F

erna

ndo

and

Oth

ers v

. OIC

See

duw

a [2

005]

1 S

ri LR

14

0.18

5.

The

Supr

eme

Cou

rt us

ed th

e co

ncep

t of ‘

cont

inui

ng in

frin

gem

ent’

in th

e ca

se o

f Sas

anas

iriti

ssa

Ther

a an

d O

ther

s v.

de S

ilva

and

Oth

ers

[198

9] 2

Sri

LR 3

56, t

o gr

ant r

elie

f to

a pe

rson

who

fi le

d a

Fund

amen

tal R

ight

s pet

ition

afte

r one

mon

th fr

om th

e da

te o

f the

ord

er fo

r arr

est

had

laps

ed, a

lthou

gh o

ne m

onth

had

not

laps

ed fr

om th

e da

te o

f rel

ease

.18

6.

Nei

ther

the

HRT

F no

r its

succ

esso

r, th

e N

atio

nal H

uman

Rig

hts C

omm

issi

on h

ave/

had

stan

ding

to p

etiti

on th

e Su

prem

e C

ourt.

The

rele

vant

ru

les t

o be

pre

scrib

ed b

y C

ourt

in th

is re

spec

t hav

e no

t bee

n pr

escr

ibed

.

120

Hum

an R

ight

s C

omm

issi

on t

o be

em

pow

ered

to

deal

with

co

mpl

aint

s aga

inst

Pol

ice/

Arm

y pe

rson

nel.

IV. 1

9So

uthe

rn, F

inal

(1

75)

1997

It is

reco

mm

ende

d th

at th

e po

wer

to is

sue

war

rant

s of a

rres

t, et

c.

unde

r sec

tion

11(4

) of t

he S

peci

al P

resi

dent

ial C

omm

issi

on L

aw

No.

07

or 1

978

be g

iven

to th

e Com

mis

sion

s app

oint

ed u

nder

the

Com

mis

sion

s of I

nqui

ry A

ct p

robi

ng d

isap

pear

ance

s.

Cen

tral,

Inte

rim 2

(8)

Oct

. 199

5

Rap

e/se

xual

ass

ault

in c

usto

dy t

o be

rec

ogni

zed

as t

ortu

re;

reve

rsal

of

the

burd

en o

f pr

oof

in c

ases

of

cust

odia

l se

xual

ab

use;

the

awar

d of

pun

itive

dam

ages

follo

win

g co

nvic

tion

for

cust

odia

l sex

ual a

buse

II.1

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(171

)19

97

Diffi

cul

ties

enco

unte

red

in s

ecur

ing

deat

h ce

rtifi c

ates

in re

spec

t of

dis

appe

ared

per

sons

be

addr

esse

d by

suita

ble

amen

dmen

ts to

th

e R

egis

tratio

n of

Dea

ths

of P

erso

ns (

Tem

pora

ry P

rovi

sion

s)

Act

, No.

2 o

f 199

5.18

7 I.8

(i)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(170

)19

97

187.

Follo

win

g pr

evio

us le

gisl

atio

n, P

arlia

men

t ena

cted

a R

egis

tratio

n of

Dea

ths

(Tem

pora

ry P

rovi

sion

s) A

ct N

o 17

of 2

005

in J

une

2005

. The

A

ct re

tain

s, in

Sec

tion

2(2)

, the

nee

d fo

r the

app

licat

ion

for d

eath

cer

tifi c

ate

to b

e fu

rnis

hed

to e

ither

the

Reg

istra

r Gen

eral

or t

he D

istri

ct

Reg

istra

r of B

irths

and

Dea

ths

of th

e di

stric

t in

whi

ch s

uch

mis

sing

per

son

was

last

resi

ding

. Mor

eove

r, Se

ctio

n 3

reta

ins

the

need

for t

he

Gra

ma N

iladh

ari’s

repo

rt to

be f

rom

the G

ram

a Nila

dhar

i Div

isio

n in

whi

ch th

e per

son

who

se d

eath

is so

ught

to b

e reg

iste

red

was

last

resi

dent

or

had

his

per

man

ent r

esid

ence

. As s

uch,

dis

plac

ed fa

mili

es o

f vic

tims c

ontin

ue to

hav

e di

ffi cu

lties

pro

curin

g ne

cess

ary

certi

fi cat

es. T

he A

ct

appe

ars t

o ha

ve la

psed

in 2

008.

How

ever

, sim

ilar l

egis

latio

n is

in th

e pr

oces

s of b

eing

dra

fted

at th

e tim

e of

this

pub

licat

ion.

121

CAT

EG

OR

YO

F R

EC

RE

CO

MM

EN

DAT

ION

(AS

STAT

ED

IN R

EPO

RT

)C

oI &

RE

POR

TY

EA

R

The

reco

mm

enda

tions

on

relie

f m

ade

by e

arlie

r Pr

esid

entia

l C

omm

issi

ons o

f Inq

uiry

be

endo

rsed

. V.1

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (86

)20

01

The

sche

mes

of r

elie

f rec

omm

ende

d to

ben

efi t

affe

cted

fam

ilies

in

all

parts

of t

he c

ount

ry w

ithou

t exc

eptio

n.18

8 V.3

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (86

)20

01

A t

ax o

f 2%

be

colle

cted

by

budg

etar

y pr

ovis

ion

on t

he l

ine

of t

he D

efen

ce L

evy

to e

nabl

e im

plem

enta

tion

of t

he r

elie

f m

easu

res r

ecom

men

ded.

V.5

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (86

)20

01

RE

LIE

F A

ND

RE

HA

BIL

ITAT

ION

188.

“Ove

rwhe

lmin

gly,

reco

mm

enda

tions

[of S

ri La

nka’

s ad

hoc

com

mis

sion

s] h

ave

not b

een

impl

emen

ted.

Thi

s ra

ises

ser

ious

que

stio

ns a

bout

po

litic

al w

ill. D

oes t

he p

oliti

cal w

ill e

xist

to a

ddre

ss g

rave

vio

latio

ns o

f hum

an ri

ghts

? The

ans

wer

, whe

n on

e ex

amin

es th

e re

com

men

datio

ns

and

thei

r non

-impl

emen

tatio

n, is

a re

soun

ding

no.

Aga

in, t

he m

ost t

ellin

g ex

ampl

e is

the

num

erou

s com

mis

sion

s and

mec

hani

sms c

reat

ed to

in

quire

into

dis

appe

aran

ces.

Des

pite

thes

e m

echa

nism

s, an

d th

e hu

ndre

ds o

f det

aile

d an

d fa

r rea

chin

g re

com

men

datio

ns th

at h

ave

been

mad

e re

peat

edly

to su

cces

sive

gov

ernm

ents

, dis

appe

aran

ces h

ave

re-e

mer

ged

as a

per

sist

ent f

eatu

re in

the

post

-cea

sefi r

e po

litic

al la

ndsc

ape.

”, L

aw

& S

ocie

ty T

rust

, (LS

T) u

npub

lishe

d co

ncep

t pap

er, P

resi

dent

ial C

omm

issi

ons

of I

nqui

ry, C

ivil

and

Polit

ical

Pro

gram

me

of L

ST, A

ugus

t 20

07.

122

Rec

onci

liatio

n A

WA

LL O

F RE

CON

CILI

ATIO

N b

e con

struc

ted

with

the n

ames

of

the d

isapp

eare

d pe

rson

s as a

mon

umen

t to

the D

isapp

eare

d.18

9 V.4

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (86

)20

01

The

reco

mm

enda

tions

be

acte

d up

on a

s pa

rt of

a r

epar

atio

n pa

ckag

e to

tho

se a

ffect

ed f

amili

es t

o he

lp i

n th

e pr

oces

s of

na

tiona

l hea

ling

and

reco

ncili

atio

n. V

.18

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (87

)20

01

Com

pens

atio

nEx

pedi

tious

pa

ymen

t of

fa

ir &

ad

equa

te

com

pens

atio

n to

de

pend

ents

of d

isapp

eare

d pe

rson

s w

ithin

a ti

me

fram

e in

all

the

distr

icts.

Suc

h pa

ymen

t sho

uld

cove

r dep

ende

nts o

f em

ploy

ees o

f th

e pu

blic

sec

tor,

corp

orat

ions

and

oth

er s

tate

-ow

ned

insti

tutio

ns.

The i

dea o

f int

rodu

cing

a ne

w ta

x sim

ilar t

o th

e Def

ence

Lev

y m

ay

be co

nsid

ered

in o

rder

to g

ener

ate f

unds

for t

his p

urpo

se.19

0 I.1

(i)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(169

)19

97

189.

A M

onum

ent f

or th

e D

isapp

eare

d-A

gain

st Ev

ery

Sing

le D

isapp

eara

nce

was

cre

ated

by

Cha

ndra

gupt

a Th

enuw

ara

unde

r th

e gu

idan

ce o

f K

alap

e Api

and

the A

sian

Hum

an R

ight

s Com

mis

sion

in R

addo

low

a, S

eedu

wa,

at t

he si

te w

here

Ran

jith

Her

ath

and

his f

riend

M.L

ione

l wer

e ki

lled

and

burn

t on

Oct

ober

27t

h 19

89. T

he F

riend

s an

d R

elat

ives

of t

he D

isap

pear

ed h

ave

held

a c

omm

emor

ativ

e se

rvic

e at

the

mon

umen

t on

Oct

ober

27t

h an

nual

ly s

ince

the

year

200

0. T

he m

onum

ent w

as o

ffi ci

ally

unv

eile

d on

04

Febr

uary

200

0. O

ver 1

000

mis

sing

per

sons

are

re

gist

ered

with

Frie

nds

and

Rel

ativ

es o

f th

e D

isap

pear

ed. S

ee S

RI L

AN

KA

: Com

mem

orat

ing

Day

of

the

Disa

ppea

red

in S

ri La

nka,

By

Dus

hiya

nthi

ni K

anag

asab

apat

hipi

llai,

Asi

an H

uman

Rig

hts C

omm

issi

on, 3

1 O

ctob

er 2

006,

ava

ilabl

e at

http

://w

ww

.ahr

chk.

net/a

hrc-

in-n

ews/

mai

nfi le

.php

/200

6ahr

cinn

ews/

923/

. A

sta

te s

pons

ored

mon

umen

t for

the

disa

ppea

red

child

ren

of E

mbi

lipiti

ya w

as u

nvei

led

in D

ecem

ber

1999

, and

was

cal

led

the

“Shr

ine

of th

e In

noce

nts”

. Dr.

Sasa

nka

Pere

ra a

sser

ts th

at th

e pr

ojec

t cos

t ove

r si

x m

illio

n Sr

i Lan

kan

Rup

ees

and

was

spo

nsor

ed b

y th

e St

ate

and

co-o

rdin

ated

by

an o

rgan

izat

ion

calle

d th

e Su

du N

elum

Mov

emen

t. It

is lo

cate

d w

ithin

a k

ilom

etre

of

Parli

amen

t, on

the

Col

olm

bo-P

arlia

men

t mai

n ro

ad. P

erer

a, S

asan

ka, P

ublic

Spa

ce a

nd M

onum

ents:

Pol

itics

of S

anct

ione

d an

d Co

ntes

ted

Mem

ory,

Sou

th A

sia

Jour

nal o

f Cul

ture

, Vol

. 1, 2

007,

ava

ilabl

e at

http

://co

lom

boin

stitu

te.o

rg/w

p-co

nten

t/upl

oads

/200

9/03

/sas

anka

-per

era-

essa

y-sa

jc-v

ol-1

-200

7.pd

f. Its

pre

sent

stat

e of

mai

nten

ance

leav

es m

uch

to b

e de

sire

d.19

0.

Reh

abili

tatio

n of

Per

sons

, Pro

perti

es a

nd I

ndus

tries

Aut

horit

y [h

erei

nafte

r re

ferr

ed to

as

REP

PIA

] op

erat

es a

sch

eme

whe

reby

, onc

e th

e fa

mili

es o

f vic

tims

are

able

to o

btai

n a

deat

h ce

rtifi c

ate

unde

r the

term

s of

the

Reg

istra

tion

of D

eath

s (T

empo

rary

Pro

visi

ons)

Act

s, th

ese

fam

ilies

will

be

com

pens

ated

und

er th

e M

ost A

ffect

ed P

erso

ns (

MA

P) s

chem

e. T

he M

AP’

s sc

hem

e pr

ovid

es f

or c

ompe

nsat

ion

for

deat

h an

d in

jurie

s in

the

case

of t

erro

rist a

ctiv

ity a

nd c

omm

unal

dis

turb

ance

, nat

ural

dis

aste

rs e

tc w

ith m

issi

ng p

erso

ns b

eing

sub

sum

ed u

nder

the

123

Legi

slat

ive

prov

isio

n be

mad

e fo

r exe

mpt

ing

wha

teve

r am

ount

pa

id a

s co

mpe

nsat

ion

from

bei

ng m

ade

the

subj

ect m

atte

r of a

ci

vil c

laim

and

seiz

ure.

I.1(

iii)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(169

)19

97

cate

gory

of ‘

deat

h’ a

fter t

he d

eath

cer

tifi c

ate

has

been

obt

aine

d. R

EPPI

A d

id a

t one

tim

e op

erat

e a

sepa

rate

sch

eme

to p

ay c

ompe

nsat

ion

to

fam

ilies

of m

issi

ng p

erso

ns, b

ut th

is h

as, r

epor

tedl

y, b

een

disc

ontin

ued.

The

cur

rent

MA

P sc

hem

e pr

ovid

es a

max

imum

of R

s. 50

,000

and

R

s. 15

0,00

0 [to

pub

lic s

erva

nts

by v

irtue

of P

ublic

Adm

inis

tratio

n C

ircul

ar N

o.21

/85]

to b

e pa

id to

the

gene

ral p

ublic

and

pub

lic s

erva

nts,

resp

ectiv

ely.

At o

ne ti

me,

ther

e w

as a

lso

a co

ncur

rent

sch

eme

adm

inis

tere

d by

the

Reh

abili

tatio

n an

d R

eset

tlem

ent A

utho

rity

of th

e N

orth

(R

RA

N),

whe

reby

com

pens

atio

n pa

id to

dep

ende

nts o

f per

sons

kill

ed d

ue to

terr

oris

t act

iviti

es w

as a

max

imum

of R

s. 10

0,00

0 [C

abin

et P

aper

01

/178

9/02

6/00

6.]

‘T

he M

inis

try o

f Reh

abili

tatio

n us

ed to

pay

Rs.

50 0

00 fo

r a fa

mily

in th

e ev

ent o

f the

vio

lent

dea

th o

f a b

read

win

ner.

This

am

ount

was

rais

ed

to R

s. 10

0,00

0 by

a c

abin

et d

ecis

ion

of 2

4th

Oct

ober

200

1, b

ased

on

a pa

per p

rese

nted

by

Dou

glas

Dev

anan

da th

en M

inis

ter o

f Dev

elop

men

t, R

ehab

ilita

tion

and

Rec

onst

ruct

ion

for t

he N

orth

, and

Tam

il A

ffairs

, Nor

th a

nd E

ast (

see A

ppen

dix

for d

etai

ls).

Dire

ctio

n w

as th

en g

iven

that

al

l GA

s in

the

Nor

th-E

ast s

houl

d co

mpl

y w

ith it

. But

a c

ircul

ar w

as a

ppar

ently

not

issu

ed a

nd s

oon

afte

rwar

ds D

evan

anda

cea

sed

to b

e a

Min

iste

r. In

quiri

es m

ade

by u

s re

veal

ed th

at th

e Ja

ffna

Kac

heri

has

been

pay

ing

Rs.

100,

000

sinc

e at

leas

t Jan

uary

200

6, a

fter D

evan

anda

w

as b

ack

as a

min

iste

r, bu

t the

Tam

ils in

the

East

wer

e en

title

d to

onl

y R

s. 50

,000

and

wer

e ex

perie

ncin

g al

mos

t infi

nite

del

ays

even

for

th

is re

duce

d su

m. W

ith in

fl atio

n ru

nnin

g at

ove

r 10

perc

ent,

and

now

at 2

0 pe

rcen

t, w

ith th

e G

over

nmen

t prin

ting

mon

ey to

pay

for t

he w

ar,

the

Rs.

100,

000

for d

eath

env

isag

ed in

200

1 w

ould

be

wor

th h

alf t

hat a

mou

nt to

day,

but

how

the

syst

em h

as o

pera

ted

tells

us

a go

od d

eal.

Thou

gh p

asse

d by

the

cabi

net,

rece

ivin

g co

mpe

nsat

ion

toda

y is

larg

ely

guid

ed b

y po

litic

al p

atro

nage

. UTH

R(J

) In

form

atio

n B

ulle

tin N

o.

45, D

ate

of R

elea

se: 2

7th

Mar

ch 2

007,

http

://w

ww

.uth

r.org

/bul

letin

s/B

ul45

.htm

]. A

pplic

atio

ns fr

om th

e N

orth

hav

e no

w b

een

subs

umed

un

der R

EPPI

A h

owev

er. I

n M

ay 1

999

a sp

ecia

l “U

nit f

or th

e C

larifi

cat

ion

of C

ases

of A

llege

d Fo

rced

or I

nvol

unta

ry D

isap

pear

ance

s”, w

hich

ha

s be

en s

et u

p by

the

Cab

inet

of M

inis

ters

as

part

of th

e R

ehab

ilita

tion

of P

erso

ns, P

rope

rties

and

Indu

strie

s Aut

horit

y (R

EPPI

A),

star

ted

to o

pera

te a

spe

cial

com

pute

r pro

gram

me

rela

ting

to a

ll ca

ses

of d

isap

pear

ance

s su

bmitt

ed b

y th

e W

orki

ng G

roup

to th

e G

over

nmen

t of S

ri La

nka.

REP

PIA

was

est

ablis

hed

by a

n A

ct o

f Par

liam

ent N

o.29

of 1

987,

und

er th

e M

inis

try o

f Re-

settl

emen

t and

Dis

aste

r Rel

ief S

ervi

ces.

Its

man

date

is th

e re

habi

litat

ion

and

rese

ttlem

ent o

f per

sons

and

pro

perti

es a

ffect

ed b

y th

e w

ar. W

ritin

g in

200

7 ( w

ith re

gard

to th

e ye

ar 2

006)

Sh

yam

ala

Gom

ez s

tate

s th

at u

nder

the

Uni

fi ed

Ass

ista

nce

Sche

me

of R

EPPI

A, i

t pro

vide

s co

mpe

nsat

ion

to in

tern

ally

dis

plac

ed p

erso

ns o

f R

s.100

,000

to n

on-g

over

nmen

t ser

vant

s an

d R

s.150

,000

to g

over

nmen

t ser

vant

s to

rebu

ild th

eir h

omes

. She

als

o st

ates

that

the

Nor

th E

ast

Hou

sing

Rec

onst

ruct

ion

Sche

me(

NEH

RP)

is to

reco

nstru

ct 4

6,00

0 ho

uses

in th

e N

orth

and

Eas

t ove

r a fo

ur y

ear p

erio

d. H

ousi

ng a

ssis

tanc

e co

nsis

ts o

f R

s.110

,000

for

eac

h fa

mily

with

a m

onth

ly in

com

e be

low

Rs.2

500.

See

Gom

ez, S

hyam

ala,

Pos

t Tsu

nam

i Hou

sing

Righ

ts, S

ri La

nka

Stat

e of

Hum

an R

ight

s 200

7, L

aw &

Soc

iety

Tru

st, a

t p.3

93.

124

The

fi nan

cial

con

strai

nts

of t

he S

tate

had

bee

n ta

ken

into

co

nsid

erat

ion

whe

n re

com

men

ding

re

lief

to

thos

e af

fect

ed.

Com

pens

atio

n to

be

paid

in

term

s of

the

rel

evan

t Ci

rcul

ars

of

the

Reha

bilit

atio

n M

inist

ry a

nd P

ublic

Adm

inist

ratio

n M

inist

ry,

with

out a

dist

inct

ion

bein

g m

ade b

etw

een

Stat

e offi

cer a

nd m

embe

r of

the P

ublic

in re

spec

t of s

uch

pers

ons d

isapp

eara

nce.19

1 (g)

Cen

tral,

Fina

l (1

4)19

97

As

far

as c

ompe

nsat

ion

is c

once

rned

we

have

to is

sue

a no

te

of c

autio

n. S

ome

of th

ese

com

plai

nant

s ha

ve a

lread

y ob

tain

ed

com

pens

atio

n th

roug

h th

e M

inis

try o

f R

ehab

ilita

tion.

St

eps

have

bee

n ta

ken

to e

nsur

e th

at th

ere

is n

o do

uble

pay

men

t.

NE

Fina

l (63

)19

97

The

basi

c co

mpe

nsat

ion

to th

e af

fect

ed fa

mili

es o

f dis

appe

ared

pe

rson

s, to

be

paid

to

all

affe

cted

fam

ilies

irr

espe

ctiv

e of

ca

tego

rizat

ion

as te

rror

ist o

r not

.192 V

.6

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (86

)20

01

Any

den

ial o

f co

mpe

nsat

ion

to b

e on

ly if

a C

ourt

of L

aw h

as

decl

ared

a d

isap

pear

ed p

erso

n as

a t

erro

rist.

The

D

ivis

iona

l Se

cret

arie

s to

be in

form

ed o

f thi

s, th

ough

it is

reco

mm

ende

d th

at

even

such

segr

egat

ion

shou

ld c

ease

to o

pera

te fo

rthw

ith. V

.7

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (86

)20

01

191.

Cur

rent

pos

ition

rega

rdin

g th

is re

com

men

datio

n re

mai

ns u

ncle

ar.

192.

“The

pra

ctic

e of

Sri

Lank

a si

nce

1994

has

bee

n to

acc

ord

relie

f to

vict

ims i

rres

pect

ive

of w

heth

er th

e pe

rpet

rato

r was

an

arm

ed g

roup

of t

he

Stat

e.”[

All

Isla

nd C

omm

issi

on R

epor

t, p.

13, F

N. 1

0] P

rior t

o th

at ti

me,

the

Gov

ernm

ent p

aid

com

pens

atio

n on

ly fo

r vic

tims

of “

terr

oris

t”

activ

ities

. At o

ne p

oint

of t

ime

ther

e ha

d be

en a

cab

inet

dec

isio

n re

quiri

ng th

at R

EPPI

A a

sk fo

r a p

olic

e re

port

acco

mpa

nyin

g th

e ap

plic

atio

n fo

r com

pens

atio

n, to

the

effe

ct th

at th

e ap

plic

ant h

as n

ot b

een

cate

goris

ed a

s a

terr

oris

t. R

epor

tedl

y, h

owev

er, t

his

is n

ot b

eing

follo

wed

at

pres

ent.

The D

irect

or o

f Est

ablis

hmen

ts, t

hrou

gh le

tter n

umbe

red

IV/2

/3/0

9/H

(1),

has a

lso

clar

ifi ed

that

no

pers

on ca

n be

den

ied

com

pens

atio

n fo

r alle

ged

terr

oris

t act

ivity

unl

ess s

/he

has b

een

conv

icte

d in

a c

ourt

of la

w. I

n al

l oth

er c

ircum

stan

ces c

ompe

nsat

ion

mus

t be

paid

to fa

mili

es

of d

isap

pear

ed p

erso

ns ir

resp

ectiv

e of

alle

ged

links

to te

rror

ist a

ctiv

ities

. Org

aniz

atio

n of

Par

ents

and

Fam

ily M

embe

rs o

f the

Dis

appe

ared

, et

. al,

A Co

ncise

Rep

ort a

bout

Enf

orce

d D

isapp

eara

nces

in S

ri La

nka

subm

itted

to th

e U

nite

d N

atio

ns H

uman

Rig

hts

Com

miss

ion

thro

ugh

the

75th

Ses

sion

of th

e U

nite

d N

atio

ns W

orki

ng G

roup

on

Enfo

rced

Disa

ppea

ranc

es (2

005)

.

125

The

fi ndi

ng o

f a

Dis

appe

aran

ce C

omm

issi

on t

o be

tak

en a

s ad

equa

te p

roof

for t

he g

rant

of p

ensi

ons o

r oth

er b

enefi

ts d

ue to

af

fect

ed fa

mili

es o

f dis

appe

ared

per

sons

.193 V

.8

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (86

)20

01

A r

ealis

tic t

ime

fram

e be

fi x

ed t

o co

mpl

ete

the

paym

ent

of

com

pens

atio

n to

all

thos

e en

title

d in

eve

ry d

istri

ct. V

.9A

ll Is

land

, Fi

nal (

86)

2001

Prop

erty

A s

chem

e to

pro

vide

mon

etar

y as

sist

ance

to a

ffect

ed f

amili

es

who

had

suf

fere

d lo

ss a

nd d

amag

e to

pro

perty

be

initi

ated

. A

for

um b

e cr

eate

d to

rec

eive

com

plai

nts

of s

ucce

ssor

s of

di

sapp

eare

d pe

rson

s.194 I

.1(ii

)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(169

)19

97

193.

Sect

ion

8 of

the

2005

Reg

istra

tion

of D

eath

s (Te

mpo

rary

Pro

visi

ons)

Act

dis

pens

es w

ith th

e ne

ed fo

r a G

ram

a N

iladh

ari r

epor

t to

acco

mpa

ny

a C

omm

issi

on c

ertifi

cat

e. S

ec 8

: “

(1)W

here

a C

omm

issi

on a

ppoi

nted

und

er th

e C

omm

issi

ons

of I

nqui

ry A

ct (

Cha

pter

393

) or

a S

peci

al

Pres

iden

tial C

omm

issi

on o

f In

quiry

est

ablis

hed

unde

r th

e Sp

ecia

l Pre

side

ntia

l Com

mis

sion

s La

w, N

o. 7

of

1978

fi nd

s th

at a

per

son

has

disa

ppea

red

or is

mis

sing

, the

nex

t of k

in o

f tha

t per

son

may

, app

ly to

the

Reg

istra

r-Gen

eral

or t

o th

e D

istri

ct R

egis

trar o

f Birt

hs a

nd D

eath

s of

the

dist

rict i

n w

hich

that

per

son

was

last

resi

ding

or h

ad h

is p

erm

anen

t res

iden

ce, s

ubst

antia

lly in

the

Form

set o

ut in

the

Sche

dule

to th

is

Act

, to

regi

ster

the

deat

h of

that

per

son

unde

r the

Birt

hs a

nd D

eath

s Reg

istra

tion

Act

(Cha

pter

110

) and

to h

ave

issu

ed to

him

, a C

ertifi

cat

e of

D

eath

in re

spec

t of t

he d

eath

of t

hat p

erso

n. E

very

such

app

licat

ion

shal

l be

acco

mpa

nied

by

an a

ffi da

vit o

f the

app

lican

t in

term

s of s

ectio

n 3

and

a ce

rtifi e

d co

py o

f the

fi nd

ings

of t

he C

omm

issi

on o

f Inq

uiry

or S

peci

al P

resi

dent

ial C

omm

issi

on o

f Inq

uiry

, as t

he c

ase

may

be,

rela

ting

to th

e de

ath

of su

ch p

erso

n. (2

) Upo

n re

ceip

t of a

n ap

plic

atio

n un

der s

ubse

ctio

n (1

), th

e D

istri

ct R

egis

trar s

hall,

not

with

stan

ding

any

thin

g to

co

ntra

ry in

the

prec

edin

g pr

ovis

ions

of t

his A

ct, f

orth

with

sen

d to

the

Reg

istra

r-Gen

eral

a R

epor

t und

er h

is h

and,

set

ting

out t

he p

artic

ular

s of

the

deat

h re

quire

d to

be

regi

ster

ed u

nder

the

Birt

hs a

nd D

eath

s R

egis

tratio

n A

ct (C

hapt

er 1

10) a

s he

has

bee

n ab

le to

asc

erta

in fr

om th

e ap

plic

atio

n an

d th

e acc

ompa

nyin

g af

fi dav

it an

d fi n

ding

. (4)

Upo

n re

ceip

t of a

n or

der u

nder

subs

ectio

n (3

) dire

ctin

g hi

m to

ente

r the

par

ticul

ars

rela

ting

to th

e re

leva

nt d

eath

in th

e R

egis

ter o

f Dea

ths

mai

ntai

ned

by h

im u

nder

the

Birt

hs a

nd D

eath

s R

egis

tratio

n A

ct (C

hapt

er 1

10),

the

Reg

istra

r sha

ll fo

rthw

ith e

nter

such

par

ticul

ars i

n su

ch re

gist

er a

nd si

gn th

e re

gist

er in

the

appr

opria

te p

lace

.(5) W

here

the

appl

icat

ion

unde

r su

bsec

tion

(1) i

s mad

e to

the

Reg

istra

r-Gen

eral

, the

pro

visi

ons o

f sub

sect

ions

(2) a

nd (5

) sha

ll m

utat

is m

utan

dis (

with

the

nece

ssar

y ch

ange

s ha

ving

bee

n m

ade)

app

ly a

s if t

he re

fere

nce

in th

ose

sect

ions

to th

e D

istri

ct R

egis

trar i

s a re

fere

nce

to th

e R

egis

trar-G

ener

al..

194.

REP

PIA

als

o pr

ovid

es c

ompe

nsat

ion

for p

rope

rty lo

ss. T

his i

s cal

cula

ted

at 1

/5th

the

valu

e of

the

prop

erty

up

to a

max

imum

of R

s. 10

0,00

0.

126

A sw

ift re

med

y fo

r the

hom

eles

snes

s by

settl

ing

such

fam

ilies

on

stat

e-ow

ned

land

, pre

fera

bly

in th

e ar

ea o

f the

ir re

side

nce

prio

r to

the

disp

lace

men

t, an

d th

e pr

ovis

ion

of fi

nanc

ial a

ssis

tanc

e in

th

e co

nstru

ctio

n of

a h

ouse

.195 I

.2(i)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(169

)19

97

The a

lloca

tion

of st

ate l

and

for c

ultiv

atio

n –

the p

erm

it to

the l

and

and

hous

e to

be

in th

e na

me

of th

e fe

mal

e he

ad o

f ho

useh

old.

I.2

(ii)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(169

)19

97

A s

tate

-land

s al

iena

tion

sche

me

to r

egul

ariz

e th

e un

auth

oriz

ed

occu

patio

n of

stat

e la

nds b

y m

embe

rs o

f fam

ilies

of d

isap

pear

ed

pers

ons.

Thos

e w

ho h

ave

been

dis

poss

esse

d be

res

tore

d to

po

sses

sion

of

the

land

s in

que

stio

n or

be

give

n al

tern

ate

land

s af

ter d

ue in

quiry

.196 I

.3(i)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(169

)19

97

A f

orum

be

crea

ted

to r

ecei

ve c

ompl

aint

s of

suc

cess

ors

of

disa

ppea

red

“And

e”19

7 cu

ltiva

tors

with

a v

iew

to

rest

orin

g to

th

em th

eir r

ight

s an

d a

sche

me

to re

-loca

te a

ffect

ed fa

mili

es o

f di

sapp

eare

d “A

nde”

cul

tivat

ors

who

hav

e be

en “

cons

truct

ivel

y di

spos

sess

ed”

in c

onse

quen

ce o

f gov

ernm

ent p

roje

cts.19

8 I.3

(ii)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(169

)19

97

195.

Fam

ilies

of

the

disa

ppea

red

have

not

bee

n pu

t dow

n as

a s

peci

al c

ateg

ory

in h

ousi

ng a

id s

chem

es im

plem

ente

d by

the

Nat

iona

l Hou

sing

D

evel

opm

ent A

utho

rity

(NH

DA

). 19

6.

Fam

ilies

of d

isap

pear

ed p

erso

ns d

o no

t con

stitu

te a

spec

ial c

ateg

ory

in la

nd a

liena

tion

sche

mes

.19

7.

The

And

e sy

stem

dat

es b

ack

to th

e tim

es o

f anc

ient

kin

gdom

s of S

ri La

nka,

whe

re a

tena

nt c

ultiv

ated

the

land

whi

ch w

as h

eld

or o

wne

d by

an

othe

r, an

d w

here

the

tena

nt p

aid

a pa

rt of

the

proc

eeds

of t

he c

rop

to th

e ow

ner.

See

Pier

is, K

amal

ika,

Lan

ds in

Med

ieva

l Sri

Lank

a, T

he

Isla

nd, a

vaila

ble

at h

ttp://

ww

w.is

land

.lk/2

008/

12/1

3/sa

tmag

3.ht

ml,

acce

ssed

on

14/9

/200

9.19

8.

Not

impl

emen

ted.

127

Thou

gh p

rovi

ding

relie

f to

thos

e w

hose

pro

perty

was

dam

aged

pr

ior t

o or

afte

r the

rem

oval

and

/or d

isap

pear

ance

of a

per

son,

do

es n

ot c

ome

with

in t

he m

anda

te o

f th

is C

omm

issi

on,

it is

re

com

men

ded

that

suc

h da

mag

e be

ass

esse

d, b

y th

e Va

luat

ion

Dep

artm

ent a

nd su

itabl

e re

dres

s be

gran

ted

to th

em.19

9 (k)

Cen

tral,

Fina

l (1

4)19

97

Em

ploy

men

tSu

bjec

t to

con

side

ratio

n of

the

im

plic

atio

n of

con

stitu

tiona

l pr

ovis

ions

, pa

rticu

larly

A

rticl

e 12

of

th

e C

onst

itutio

n,

unem

ploy

ed y

outh

of

affe

cted

fam

ilies

be

cons

ider

ed o

n a

prio

rity

basi

s fo

r re

crui

tmen

t in

gov

ernm

ent

empl

oym

ent.20

0

I.4(i)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(169

)19

97

The

rele

vant

Min

istri

es a

nd/o

r Pro

vinc

ial M

inis

tries

to c

onsi

der

appl

icat

ions

for t

rans

fers

by

wid

owed

mot

hers

to w

ork

at p

lace

s in

clo

se p

roxi

mity

to th

eir h

omes

. I.4

(ii)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(169

)19

97

A ri

ght t

o se

ek re

inst

atem

ent o

r com

pens

atio

n in

lieu

ther

eof b

e gi

ven

to th

e ne

xt o

f kin

(who

had

bee

n en

gage

d in

asc

erta

inin

g th

e w

here

abou

ts)

of d

isap

pear

ed p

erso

ns w

hose

em

ploy

men

t ha

d be

en te

rmin

ated

on

the

grou

nd o

f vac

atio

n of

pos

t. I.4

(iii)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(170

)

199.

Not

impl

emen

ted.

200.

Cer

tain

Pub

lic A

dmin

istra

tion

Circ

ular

s pro

vide

d at

one

tim

e fo

r con

cess

iona

ry m

arks

to b

e gi

ven

to ‘t

erro

rist-a

ffect

ed fa

mili

es’ w

hen

sitti

ng

exam

inat

ions

for t

he re

crui

tmen

t to

the p

ublic

sect

or . T

his p

olic

y w

as re

voke

d, h

owev

er, b

y PA

Circ

ular

28/

95 o

f 29.

09.9

5. T

he ci

rcul

ar st

ates

th

at ‘t

he c

once

ssio

n gr

ante

d fo

r the

fam

ilies

sub

ject

ed to

the

loss

of l

ives

and

pro

perty

of t

he v

ictim

s of

terr

oris

m w

ill h

erea

fter b

e co

nfi n

ed

to th

e co

mpe

nsat

ion

and

othe

r rel

ief g

rant

ed b

y th

e M

inis

try o

f Reh

abili

tatio

n. T

he p

rovi

sion

of r

elie

f mar

ks fo

r suc

h fa

mili

es a

s pe

r Pub

lic

Adm

inis

tratio

n C

ircul

ar N

o. 1

7/92

will

no

long

er b

e ap

plic

able

’. In

any

eve

nt th

ese

circ

ular

s di

d no

t app

ear t

o co

ver f

amili

es a

ffect

ed b

y vi

olen

ce n

ot a

ttrib

utab

le to

terr

oris

t act

iviti

es.

128

Mem

bers

of

af

fect

ed

fi she

r fa

mili

es

be

give

n as

sist

ance

th

roug

h ex

istin

g se

lf-em

ploy

men

t sch

emes

and

oth

er f

orm

s of

as

sist

ance

.201 I

.4(iv

)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(170

)19

97

We

reco

mm

end

at le

ast o

ne p

erso

n in

such

fam

ilies

who

has

the

min

imum

qua

lifi c

atio

ns b

e gi

ven

empl

oym

ent e

ither

in th

e St

ate

Sect

or o

r in

the

Priv

ate

Sect

or.

NE

Fina

l (64

)19

97

Em

olum

ents

The

empl

oyer

s of

dis

appe

ared

per

sons

be

requ

ired

to r

elea

se

empl

oym

ent

emol

umen

ts l

ying

to

the

cred

it of

dis

appe

ared

pe

rson

s to

the

heirs

on

furn

ishi

ng p

roof

of d

isap

pear

ance

. I.6

(i)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(170

)19

97

Dep

enda

nts o

f all

publ

ic se

rvan

ts, e

mpl

oyee

s of s

emi G

over

nmen

t bo

dies

, St

atut

ory

Cor

pora

tions

, w

ho h

ave

disa

ppea

red

mus

t be

pai

d th

e sa

larie

s of

the

disa

ppea

red

till t

hey

reac

h th

e ag

e of

ret

irem

ent a

nd th

erea

fter

they

mus

t be

entit

led

for

pens

ion.

N

o di

stin

ctio

n m

ust b

e dr

awn

amon

g pe

rman

ent,

pens

iona

ble,

ca

sual

, tem

pora

ry e

mpl

oyee

s etc

.(1)

NE

Fina

l (64

)19

97

Dep

ende

nt fa

mily

mem

bers

who

are

not

cau

ght u

p in

the

abov

e ca

tego

ry m

ust

be b

roug

ht u

nder

an

effe

ctiv

e an

d m

eani

ngfu

l so

cial

secu

rity

syst

em.(2

)

NE

Fina

l (64

)19

97

Ban

k L

oans

Step

s to

ensu

re re

lief f

or m

embe

rs o

f affe

cted

fam

ilies

in re

spec

t of

repa

ymen

t of b

ank

loan

s.202 (

I.6iii

)So

uthe

rn, F

inal

(1

70)

1997

201.

Fam

ilies

of t

he d

isap

pear

ed d

o no

t con

stitu

te a

spec

ial c

ateg

ory

in th

e M

inis

try’s

sche

mes

.20

2.

Fam

ily m

embe

rs a

re n

ot p

rovi

ded

any

relie

f for

loan

s.

129

Publ

ic R

elie

fSc

hem

es t

o pr

ovid

e pu

blic

rel

ief

loan

s to

ind

igen

t fa

mili

es.

I.7(i)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(170

)19

97

A s

chem

e be

arr

ange

d to

mai

ntai

n m

enta

lly o

r ph

ysic

ally

ha

ndic

appe

d m

embe

rs o

f dev

asta

ted

indi

gent

fam

ilies

. I.7

(ii)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(170

)19

97

Chi

ldre

nA

sch

olar

ship

pro

gram

me

be in

trodu

ced

to m

eet t

he n

eeds

of

scho

ol c

hild

ren

of th

e fa

mili

es o

f the

dis

appe

ared

per

sons

. Thi

s co

uld

be i

nteg

rate

d in

to t

he m

any

scho

lars

hip

prog

ram

mes

ad

min

iste

red

by th

e M

inis

try o

f Edu

catio

n. I.

10(i)

Chi

ldre

n of

per

sons

rem

oved

and

/or d

isap

pear

ed to

be

awar

ded

scho

lars

hips

to a

ssis

t the

m in

thei

r edu

catio

n. (

h)

A s

chol

arsh

ip p

rogr

am b

e in

itiat

ed f

or c

hild

ren

of a

ffect

ed

fam

ilies

on

the

lines

of

the

sche

me

for

child

ren

of m

issi

ng

sold

iers

. V.1

0

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(170

)

Cen

tral F

inal

(1

4)

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (86

)

1997

1997

2001

Psyc

holo

gica

l tra

uma

of c

hild

ren

(som

e w

ere

eye-

witn

esse

s to

th

e vi

olen

ce p

ract

iced

on

the

pare

nts)

nee

ds t

o be

add

ress

ed.

I.10(

ii)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(170

)19

97

The

Com

mis

sion

was

abl

e to

iden

tify

mal

nutri

tion

amon

g th

e ch

ildre

n of

the

dis

appe

ared

. The

exi

stin

g pr

ogra

mm

e of

fi g

ht

agai

nst m

alnu

tritio

n sh

ould

be

exte

nded

to th

em a

s wel

l.

NE

Fina

l (64

)19

97

Self-

empo

wer

men

t/ Vo

catio

nal

Trai

ning

Ass

ista

nce/

train

ing

on h

ome

base

d se

lf em

ploy

men

t for

wom

en;

advi

ce, t

rain

ing

and

coun

selli

ng o

n sa

ving

s to

be p

rovi

ded.

II.4

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(171

)19

97

130

Form

ulat

ion

of d

evel

opm

ent

plan

s bo

th a

t th

e ce

ntre

and

pe

riphe

ry ta

king

into

acco

unt t

he p

heno

men

on o

f fem

ale-

head

ed

fam

ilies

.203 I

I.5

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(171

)19

97

The

spec

ial

need

s of

voc

atio

nal

train

ing,

em

ploy

men

t an

d fi n

anci

al a

ssis

tanc

e of

fem

ale-

head

ed f

amili

es to

be

addr

esse

d th

roug

h th

e ap

prop

riate

bod

y, e

.g. t

he N

atio

nal C

omm

issi

on o

n W

omen

or a

Spe

cial

Com

mitt

ee se

t up

for t

hat p

urpo

se. I

I.6

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(171

)19

97

Voca

tiona

l tra

inin

g be

pro

vide

d to

mem

bers

of a

ffect

ed fa

mili

es

and

they

be

acco

mm

odat

ed w

ithin

the

exis

ting

train

ing

sche

mes

pr

ovid

ed b

y th

e go

vern

men

t. I.5

(i)W

here

peo

ple

do n

ot p

osse

ss m

inim

um q

ualifi

cat

ions

the

y sh

ould

be

give

n vo

catio

nal t

rain

ing

at S

tate

exp

ense

to e

nsur

e th

at o

ne p

erso

n in

the

fam

ily is

em

ploy

able

.Th

e fo

rmul

atio

n of

a c

ompr

ehen

sive

sch

eme

of v

ocat

iona

l tra

inin

g fo

r nee

dy m

embe

rs o

f affe

cted

fam

ilies

. V.1

1

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(170

)

NE

Fina

l (64

)

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (86

)

1997

1997

2001

The

divi

sion

al s

ecre

tarie

s be

ent

rust

ed t

he r

espo

nsib

ility

of

iden

tifyi

ng an

d rep

ortin

g to t

he M

inis

try of

Pub

lic A

dmin

istra

tion

and

the M

inis

try o

f Reh

abili

tatio

n, th

e kin

d of

voc

atio

nal t

rain

ing

need

ed fo

r affe

cted

fam

ilies

.V.1

7

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (87

)20

01

203.

Whi

le th

ere a

re n

o sp

ecifi

c pro

gram

mes

in p

lace

targ

etin

g w

omen

of f

amili

es o

f the

dis

appe

ared

, the

Wom

en’s

Bur

eau

does

hav

e a p

rogr

amm

e to

edu

cate

and

em

pow

er fe

mal

e-he

aded

hou

seho

lds i

n ge

nera

l. Th

ese

wom

en a

re p

rovi

ded

with

the

know

ledg

e re

quire

d fo

r the

impr

ovem

ent

of th

e fa

mily

eco

nom

y. S

peci

al a

ttent

ion

is p

aid

to th

ose

wom

en w

ho a

re u

nabl

e to

ent

er th

e se

lf-em

ploy

men

t fi e

ld d

ue to

var

ious

diffi

cul

ties

and

they

are

pro

vide

d w

ith c

redi

t ass

ista

nce.

Apa

rt fr

om th

is th

e B

urea

u co

nduc

ts p

over

ty re

duct

ion

prog

ram

mes

for r

ural

wom

en, p

rovi

ding

th

em w

ith tr

aini

ng a

nd w

ith c

redi

t fac

ilitie

s, M

inis

try o

f Chi

ld D

evel

opm

ent a

nd W

omen

’s E

mpo

wer

men

t Pro

gres

s Rep

ort 2

006.

131

Adv

ice,

tra

inin

g an

d co

unse

lling

on

savi

ngs

to b

e pr

ovid

ed.

I.5(ii

)So

uthe

rn, F

inal

(1

70)

1997

Em

otio

nal

Reh

abili

tatio

nA

cou

nsel

ling

serv

ice

be s

et-u

p fo

r th

e pu

rpos

e of

em

otio

nal

reha

bilit

atio

n of

mem

bers

of a

ffect

ed fa

mili

es.20

4 I.9

(i)So

uthe

rn,

Fina

l (17

0)19

97

Equi

p th

e co

mm

unity

to

assi

st i

n em

otio

nal

reha

bilit

atio

n.

A s

chem

e fo

r th

e se

nsiti

zatio

n of

per

sonn

el a

ttach

ed t

o th

e ed

ucat

iona

l, he

alth

, ru

ral

deve

lopm

ent

and

othe

r se

rvic

es b

e in

itiat

ed.20

5 I.9

(ii)

The

educ

atio

nal

and

heal

th s

ervi

ces

to p

lan

out

and

put

in

oper

atio

n a

sche

me

for t

he se

nsiti

zatio

n of

all

thei

r per

sonn

el to

th

e ne

ed to

pro

vide

cou

nsel

ling

serv

ices

to m

embe

rs o

f affe

cted

fa

mili

es,

with

the

fi n

anci

al a

ssis

tanc

e an

d co

-ord

inat

ion

of

NG

Os.

V.12

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(170

)

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (86

)

1997

2001

Cou

nsel

ling

serv

ices

be

mad

e av

aila

ble

to th

e vi

ctim

s of s

exua

l ab

use

both

whi

le th

ey a

re in

cus

tody

and

afte

r the

y ar

e re

leas

ed.

II.3

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(171

)19

97

Dea

th

Cer

tifi c

ates

A P

ublic

Adm

inis

tratio

n C

ircul

ar b

e is

sued

to

the

dist

rict

regi

stra

rs o

f m

arria

ges

and

deat

hs r

egar

ding

the

ir po

wer

s to

is

sue

deat

h ce

rtifi c

ates

. I.8

(ii)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(170

)19

97

204.

The

Min

istry

of

Hea

lth e

stab

lishe

d its

Men

tal

Hea

lth P

rogr

amm

e in

200

2. T

he a

im o

f th

e pr

ogra

mm

e is

to

mov

e aw

ay f

rom

mer

ely

a ps

ychi

atry

-orie

nted

app

roac

h to

that

whi

ch in

corp

orat

es a

psy

cho-

soci

al a

ppro

ach.

Thi

s w

ould

incl

ude

traum

a co

unse

lling

. The

pro

gram

me

does

not

targ

et w

omen

spec

ifi ca

lly, o

r any

oth

er p

artic

ular

gro

up.

205.

The

psyc

ho-s

ocia

l int

erve

ntio

n un

it of

the

Min

istry

of E

duca

tion

does

not

pro

vide

trai

ning

or s

ensi

tisat

ion

for t

raum

a in

terv

entio

n, w

hich

is

wha

t wou

ld b

e re

quire

d by

fam

ilies

of v

ictim

s. It

deal

s mor

e w

ith p

rovi

ding

trai

ning

/ sen

sitis

atio

n fo

r gen

eral

cou

nsel

ling

in sc

hool

s.

132

Dea

th c

ertifi

cat

es to

be

issu

ed to

all

who

se d

isap

pear

ance

had

be

en c

onfi r

med

by

the

Com

mis

sion

, dis

pens

ing

with

the

need

fo

r a c

ertifi

cat

e fr

om th

e G

ram

a N

iladh

aris

.206 (

i)

Cen

tral,

Fina

l (1

4)19

97

Even

thou

gh G

over

nmen

t had

mad

e it p

ossi

ble f

or th

em to

hav

e a

pers

on re

gist

ered

as d

ead

if he

had

not

bee

n se

en fo

r ove

r a y

ear,

this

had

not

bee

n br

ough

t to

the

notic

e of

the

fam

ily m

embe

rs

of t

he d

isap

pear

ed.

It is

rec

omm

ende

d th

at a

ctio

n sh

ould

be

take

n at

the

leve

l of t

he D

ivis

iona

l Adm

inis

tratio

n, to

mak

e th

is

deve

lopm

ent,

wel

l kno

wn.

Publ

icity

be

give

n to

the

Reg

istra

tion

of D

eath

s (T

empo

rary

Pr

ovis

ions

) Act

no.

58

of 1

998

thro

ugh

the

med

ia a

nd G

ram

a N

iladh

arie

s. V.

15

NE

Fina

l (64

)

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (87

)

1997

2001

Insu

ranc

eSt

eps

to e

nsur

e th

e re

leas

e of

mon

ey i

n ba

nk a

ccou

nts

and

mon

eys d

ue o

n lif

e ins

uran

ce p

olic

ies t

o th

e hei

rs o

f dis

appe

ared

pe

rson

s.207 (

I.6ii)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(170

)19

97

206.

Thre

e Re

gistr

atio

n of

Dea

ths (

Tem

pora

ry P

rovi

sions

) Act

s hav

e be

en e

nact

ed in

199

5, 1

998

and

2005

resp

ectiv

ely.

The

se A

cts w

ere

enac

ted

to

addr

ess t

he p

ract

ical

diffi

cul

ties i

mpe

ding

the

regi

strat

ion

of d

eath

s whi

ch o

ccur

red

durin

g th

e co

urse

of t

he ‘c

ivil

distu

rban

ces t

hat t

ook

plac

e du

e to

terro

rist a

nd s

ubve

rsiv

e ac

tiviti

es in

Sri

Lank

a’. T

he 2

005

Act

pro

vide

s fo

r an

appl

icat

ion

for a

dea

th c

ertifi

cat

e to

be

mad

e ‘w

here

any

pe

rson

is re

porte

d m

issin

g an

d pr

esum

ed to

be

dead

as h

e ha

s not

bee

n he

ard

of fo

r a p

erio

d ex

ceed

ing

one

year

by

thos

e w

ho w

ould

nat

ural

ly

have

hea

rd o

f him

had

he b

een

aliv

e and

his

disa

ppea

ranc

e is a

ttrib

utab

le to

any

terro

rist o

r sub

vers

ive a

ctiv

ity o

r civ

il co

mm

otio

n w

hich

has

bee

n ta

king

pla

ce w

ithin

Sri

Lank

a’.

Whi

le o

rigin

ally

the A

ct o

f 199

5 on

ly p

rovi

ded

for c

ertifi

cat

es to

be

issue

d w

hen

acco

mpa

nied

by

a re

port

from

a

Gra

ma

Nila

dhar

i, th

e 19

98 a

nd 2

005

Act

s add

to th

is by

pro

vidi

ng fo

r iss

uanc

e of

cer

tifi c

ates

on

the

fi ndi

ngs o

f a C

omm

issio

n of

Inqu

iry.

207.

Onc

e a

Dea

th C

ertifi

cat

e ha

s bee

n ob

tain

ed, t

here

is, r

epor

tedl

y, n

o pr

oble

m c

olle

ctin

g on

the

insu

ranc

e.

133

Whe

re th

ere

is e

vide

nce

of u

nlaw

ful d

eten

tion

or d

isap

pear

ance

, th

e ins

uran

ce co

mpa

nies

be di

rect

ed to

take

cogn

izan

ce of

this

fact

an

d no

t to

treat

the p

olic

y as

hav

ing

laps

ed b

ut to

giv

e the

ben

efi t

of th

e po

licy

to th

e he

irs o

f the

dis

appe

ared

per

sons

.V.1

3

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (86

)20

01

Whe

re th

e fi n

ding

s of t

he D

isap

pear

ance

Com

mis

sion

or a

dea

th

certi

fi ate

is is

sued

and

whe

re th

e de

ath

or d

isap

pear

ance

is p

rior

to d

ue d

ate o

f pre

miu

m, t

he in

sura

nce p

olic

y be

trea

ted

as h

avin

g no

t lap

sed.

V.14

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (87

)20

01

Spec

ial

Mec

hani

sms

Adv

isor

y Se

rvic

es

Bur

eau

Citi

zens

adv

isor

y bu

reau

s to

be se

t up

at d

istri

ct le

vel.

IV.1

4

An

advi

sory

ser

vice

s bu

reau

on

the

lines

of

the

Citi

zen’

s A

dvis

ory

Serv

ices

Bur

eau

set u

p in

Lon

don

durin

g W

WII

be

set u

p to

ass

ist d

epen

dent

s of d

isap

pear

ed p

erso

ns in

pro

cedu

res

they

hav

e to

follo

w to

obt

ain

relie

f etc

.V.1

6

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(174

)A

ll Is

land

, Fi

nal (

87)

1997

2001

Mon

itorin

g C

omm

ittee

A c

omm

ittee

be

appo

inte

d to

mon

itor t

he im

plem

enta

tion

of th

e af

orem

entio

ned

reco

mm

enda

tions

. I.1

2(iii

)So

uthe

rn, F

inal

(1

71)

1997

134

CAT

EG

OR

Y

OF

RE

CR

EC

OM

ME

ND

ATIO

N

(AS

STAT

ED

IN R

EPO

RT

)C

oI &

RE

POR

TY

EA

R

The

Hum

an R

ight

s C

omm

issi

on s

houl

d be

requ

este

d to

adv

ise

the

gove

rnm

ent

“in

form

ulat

ing

legi

slat

ion,

ad

min

istra

tive

dire

ctiv

e an

d pr

oced

ures

” fo

r the

pro

tect

ion

of th

e fu

ndam

enta

l rig

hts o

f the

Ret

urne

d D

etai

nees

as a

cat

egor

y.20

8 I.1

1(i)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(171

)19

97

It is

ver

y ne

cess

ary

to p

rovi

de a

dequ

ate

relie

f to

thos

e w

ho w

ere

rem

oved

, tor

ture

d an

d es

cape

d de

ath.

M

any

of th

ose

pers

ons

had

suffe

red

both

men

tally

and

phy

sica

lly. I

t is

reco

mm

ende

d th

at th

ey b

e re

habi

litat

ed a

nd if

nec

essa

ry re

ferr

ed to

Psy

chia

tric

Clin

ics;

the

assi

stan

ce o

f non

gov

ernm

enta

l org

anis

atio

ns c

ould

be

soug

ht in

this

rega

rd. (

j)

Cen

tral,

Fina

l (1

4)19

97

A

TRU

ST

for

the

reha

bilit

atio

n of

pe

rson

s af

fect

ed

by

disa

ppea

ranc

es b

e se

t up

und

er a

Boa

rd o

f Tr

uste

es a

nd t

he

Inla

nd R

even

ue L

aw b

e am

ende

d to

rem

ove

the

ceili

ng o

n co

ntrib

utio

ns to

char

ity to

qua

lify

for t

ax ex

empt

ions

to fa

cilit

ate

cont

ribut

ions

to th

is T

rust

. V.2

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (86

)20

01

RE

TU

RN

ED

DE

TAIN

EE

S

208.

“In

2007

, the

HR

C’s

non

-com

plia

nce

with

the

Paris

Prin

cipl

es (R

elat

ing

to th

e St

atus

and

Fun

ctio

ning

of t

he N

atio

nal I

nstit

utio

ns fo

r the

Pr

otec

tion

and

Prom

otio

n of

Hum

an R

ight

s) l

ed t

o it

s d

owng

radi

ng f

rom

Sta

tus

‘A’

to

Sta

tus

‘B

’ mem

ber

by

the

Inte

rnat

iona

l C

oord

inat

ing

Com

mitt

ee o

f Nat

iona

l In

stitu

tions

for

the

Pro

mot

ion

and

Pro

tect

ion

of H

uman

Rig

hts

(IC

C).

The

HR

C’s

sub

sequ

ent

failu

re t

o in

stitu

te t

he re

form

s re

com

men

ded

by

the

ICC

’s S

ub-C

omm

ittee

on

Acc

redi

tatio

n le

d to

con

fi rm

atio

n of

its ‘

B’ s

tatu

s on

its

revi

ew in

Mar

ch 2

009.

Onl

y ‘A

’ sta

tus i

nstit

utio

ns a

re c

onsi

dere

d fu

ll m

embe

rs o

f th

e IC

C w

ith v

otin

g ri

ghts

and

rec

eive

con

com

itant

re

cogn

ition

by

the

Uni

ted

Nat

ions

Hum

an R

ight

s C

ounc

il w

ithin

its

stru

ctur

es a

nd p

roce

sses

.”, s

ee S

kant

haku

mar

, B,

“Par

alle

l Rep

ort

on th

e Pe

rform

ance

and

Effe

ctiv

enes

s of

the

Nat

iona

l Hum

an R

ight

s Co

mm

issio

n of

Sri

Lank

a in

200

8”, L

aw &

Soc

iety

Tru

st, 0

3 A

ugus

t 20

09 a

t p.3

, ava

ilabl

e at

http

://w

ww

.law

ands

ocie

tytru

st.o

rg/w

eb/im

ages

/PD

F/nh

rc%

20re

port%

2020

09.p

df. H

e fu

rther

com

men

ts th

at “

…its

al

arm

ing

unw

illin

gnes

s to

reco

gnis

e th

e ur

genc

y an

d se

rious

ness

of

the

hum

an r

ight

s cr

isis

and

con

sequ

ently

its

ine

ffect

ual p

erfo

rman

ce,

[is]

of g

reat

er d

isap

poin

tmen

t an

d c

once

rn…

”, a

t p. 2

. The

HR

C is

cur

rent

ly n

on-f

unct

iona

l due

to th

e no

n-ap

poin

tmen

t of n

ew m

embe

rs

by P

resi

dent

Mah

inda

Raj

apak

se.

135

SPE

CIF

IC A

CTO

RS/

GR

OU

PS

CAT

EG

OR

YO

F R

EC

RE

CO

MM

EN

DAT

ION

(AS

STAT

ED

IN R

EPO

RT

)C

oI &

RE

POR

TY

EA

R

Forc

es/ G

ram

a N

iladh

aris

Alte

rnat

ive

stru

ctur

es -

The

elim

inat

ion

of a

ltern

ativ

e st

ruct

ures

of

com

man

d w

ithin

the p

olic

e for

ce an

d G

ram

a Nila

dhar

i sys

tem

as

a p

rere

quis

ite fo

r pre

vent

ion.

IV.

12

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(174

)19

97

Req

uisi

te q

ualifi

cat

ions

for p

olic

e of

fi cer

s and

Gra

ma

Nila

dhar

i to

be

iden

tifi e

d an

d al

l fu

ture

rec

ruitm

ent

and

prom

otio

ns o

f al

l offi

cers

to b

e de

cide

d on

the

basi

s of

the

qual

ifi ca

tions

and

re

cord

of p

ast p

erfo

rman

ce. I

V.12

(i)

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(174

)19

97

Trai

ning

pro

gram

me

in i

nves

tigat

ions

for

all

polic

e of

fi cer

s. IV

.12(

ii)So

uthe

rn, F

inal

(1

74)

1997

Secu

rity

of p

ublic

fi g

ures

- S

ecur

ity o

f pu

blic

fi g

ures

to

be

prov

ided

by

a spe

cial

secu

rity

coor

dina

tion

divi

sion

of t

he p

olic

e,

thes

e of

fi cer

s to

be

subj

ecte

d to

the

com

man

d an

d su

perv

isio

n of

supe

rior o

ffi ce

rs in

the

serv

ice

and

be su

bjec

ted

to p

erio

dica

l tra

nsfe

r. IV

. 15

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(175

)19

97

Priv

ate A

rmy

The

poss

ibili

ty o

f the

mai

nten

ance

of a

“Pr

ivat

e Arm

y” a

t Sta

te

expe

nse

be e

limin

ated

.IV.3

1A

ll Is

land

, Fi

nal L

(85)

2001

136

Citi

zen

Gro

ups/

C

ivil

Soci

ety

Polic

e La

y-V

isito

rs P

anel

-A s

yste

m o

f a

polic

e La

y-V

isito

rs

Pane

l for

eac

h po

lice

area

to b

e se

t up.

IV.1

3

A P

anel

of

Lay-

Vis

itors

be

appo

inte

d in

eac

h Po

lice

area

with

po

wer

s to

spe

ak to

det

aine

es, c

heck

pol

ice

reco

rds,

etc.

and

to

mak

e co

mpl

aint

s the

mse

lves

to th

e H

RC

. IV.

32

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(174

)

All

Isla

nd,

Fina

l (85

)

1997

2001

Civ

il so

ciet

y be

vig

orou

sly

enlis

ted

as m

edia

tors

by

the

HR

C in

th

e re

solu

tions

of d

ispu

tes a

s env

isag

ed b

y th

e H

RC

Act

.IV.3

4A

ll Is

land

, Fi

nal (

85)

2001

Wom

enEn

cour

agem

ent

of a

ctiv

e po

litic

al p

artic

ipat

ion

of w

omen

.209

II.7

Sout

hern

, Fin

al

(171

)19

97

209.

The

Wom

en’s

Bur

eau

of th

e M

inis

try o

f W

omen

’s A

ffairs

con

duct

s a

prog

ram

on

wom

en’s

par

ticip

atio

n in

pol

itics

. It c

ondu

cts

one

day

train

ing/

awar

enes

s pro

gram

s for

wom

en in

tere

sted

in a

ctiv

e po

litic

s.

137

MIS

CE

LL

AN

EO

US

CAT

EG

OR

YO

F R

EC

RE

CO

MM

EN

DAT

ION

(A

S ST

ATE

D IN

RE

POR

T)

CoI

&R

EPO

RT

YE

AR

The

Gov

ernm

ent

of S

ri La

nka

to t

ake

up a

t th

e re

leva

nt

Inte

rnat

iona

l for

a th

e is

sue

of th

e ne

ed fo

r the

form

ulat

ion

and

prom

ulga

tion

of a

n In

tern

atio

nal I

nstru

men

t on

the

subj

ect o

f th

e re

spon

sibi

lity

of A

rmed

Gro

ups.

II.4

All

Isla

nd, F

inal

(8

2)20

01

Wid

e pu

blic

ity b

e gi

ven

to t

he R

epor

ts o

f C

omm

issi

on o

f In

quiry

into

Dis

appe

aran

ces,

trans

latio

ns o

f Rep

orts

to b

e m

ade

avai

labl

e in

Sin

hala

and

Tam

il.21

0 IV.

33

All

Isla

nd, F

inal

(8

5)20

01

Your

Exc

elle

ncy

has

take

n th

e co

rrec

t dec

isio

n an

d es

peci

ally

in

the

eth

nic

sphe

re,

Your

Exc

elle

ncy’

s pr

opos

als

shou

ld b

e ad

opte

d as

a b

asic

pol

icy

of th

e la

nd.21

1

NE

Fina

l (63

)19

97

210.

Ther

e w

as li

ttle

publ

icity

gen

erat

ed b

y th

e go

vern

men

t reg

ardi

ng th

e R

epor

ts.

211.

The

timin

g of

the

Rep

ort s

ugge

sts t

hat t

his r

ecom

men

datio

n re

late

s to

the

1997

pro

posa

ls fo

r dev

olut

ion

of p

ower

, whi

ch w

ere

not a

dopt

ed.

138

CAT

EG

OR

YO

F R

EC

RE

CO

MM

EN

DAT

ION

(AS

STAT

ED

IN R

EPO

RT

)C

oI &

RE

POR

TY

EA

R

Atte

ntio

n be

pai

d to

inqu

ire in

to th

e co

mpl

aint

s al

lege

dly

not

repo

rted

to a

ny C

omm

issi

on so

far i

n re

spec

t of d

isap

pear

ance

s w

hich

hav

e oc

curr

ed a

fter 1

988.

212 V

I.1

All

Isla

nd, F

inal

(8

7)20

01

The

HR

C A

ct b

e am

ende

d to

ena

ble

it to

inqu

ire in

to c

ompl

aint

s re

mai

ning

uni

nqui

red

as th

ese

com

plai

nts d

o no

t fal

l with

in th

e m

anda

te o

f th

is C

omm

issi

on, a

nd a

ny s

ubse

quen

t ins

tanc

es o

f th

is n

atur

e br

ough

t to

thei

r not

ice.

213 V

I.2

All

Isla

nd, F

inal

(8

7)20

01

AL

LE

GE

D D

ISA

PPE

AR

AN

CE

S N

OT

WIT

HIN

MA

ND

ATE

212.

Not

impl

emen

ted

213.

Not

impl

emen

ted.

The

HR

C a

nnou

nced

in J

une

2006

that

it w

ill n

ot in

vest

igat

e ov

er 2

000

alle

gatio

ns o

f di

sapp

eara

nces

pas

sed

on to

it

from

the

All

Isla

nd C

omm

issi

on o

f In

quiry

“un

less

spe

cial

dire

ctio

ns a

re r

ecei

ved

from

the

Pres

iden

t”. H

uman

Rig

hts

Wat

ch, “

Recu

rring

N

ight

mar

e: S

tate

Res

pons

ibili

ty f

or ‘

Disa

ppea

ranc

es’ a

nd A

bduc

tions

in S

ri La

nka”

, 6 M

arch

200

8, V

olum

e 20

, No.

2(C

), av

aila

ble

at:

http

://w

ww

.unh

cr.o

rg/re

fwor

ld/d

ocid

/47d

0fab

62.h

tml [

acce

ssed

11

Nov

embe

r 200

9], s

ee a

lso

Nam

ini W

ijeda

sa, “

No

Inve

stiga

tions

With

out

Spec

ial D

irect

ions

from

Gov

ernm

ent’

– H

RC d

umps

2,0

00 U

ninq

uire

d Co

mpl

aint

s”, S

unda

y Is

land

, Jul

y 16

, 200

6. S

ee a

lso, “

Sri L

anka

: The

H

uman

Rig

hts

Com

miss

ion

of S

ri La

nka

Has

Sto

pped

Inve

stiga

tions

into

200

0 D

isapp

eara

nce

Case

s to

Avo

id H

avin

g to

Pay

Gov

ernm

ent

Com

pens

atio

n to

the

Vict

ims”

, Sta

tem

ent b

y th

e Asi

an H

uman

Rig

hts C

omm

issi

on, A

S-16

9-20

06, J

uly

18, 2

006.

The

pub

lic fu

ror f

ollo

win

g th

is a

nnou

ncem

ent c

ause

d a

note

to b

e is

sued

in Ju

ne 2

006

by th

e Se

cret

ary

to th

e H

RC

ass

ertin

g th

at th

e re

ason

beh

ind

the

deci

sion

was

that

“t

he fi

ndin

gs w

ill re

sult

in th

e pay

men

t of c

ompe

nsat

ion,

etc.

”. P

into

Jaya

war

dena

, Kis

hali,

“Sri

Lank

a’s N

atio

nal H

uman

Rig

hts C

omm

issio

n-

One

Ste

p Fo

rwar

d, T

wo

Step

s Ba

ck…

”, F

OR

UM

ASI

A R

epor

t to

the

Asi

a Pa

cifi c

For

um o

f Nat

iona

l Hum

an R

ight

s In

stitu

tions

, FO

RU

M

ASI

A, B

angk

ok, 2

006.

One

of t

he re

ason

s ci

ted

by th

e IC

C fo

r the

dow

ngra

ding

of t

he H

RC

was

the

failu

re to

inve

stig

ate

into

ove

r 200

0 ca

ses o

f dis

appe

aran

ces f

rom

the

year

s 198

0-20

00; i

n ea

rly F

ebru

ary

2008

the

Dai

ly N

ews p

ublis

hed

a le

tter b

y th

e H

RC

to th

e IC

C re

futin

g th

is c

laim

, urg

ing

that

the

case

s w

ere

inqu

ired

into

and

a re

port

subm

itted

on

15 O

ctob

er 2

007,

See

“Bi

ased

Con

clus

ions

Irk

HRC

,” D

aily

N

ews,

4 Fe

brua

ry 2

008,

ava

ilabl

e at

<ht

tp://

ww

w.d

aily

new

s.lk/

2008

/02/

04/fe

a20.

asp>

. Th

e sa

me

lette

r to

the

ICC

urg

es th

at th

e pr

evio

us

139

Com

mis

sion

s ne

eded

a s

peci

al m

anda

te f

rom

the

Pres

iden

t to

inve

stig

ate

the

alle

gatio

n of

ove

r 20

00 c

ases

of

disa

ppea

ranc

es, a

nd in

the

abse

nce

of a

spe

cifi c

Pre

side

ntia

l man

date

for t

he p

rese

nt H

RC

to p

roce

ed, t

hey

coul

d no

t inv

estig

ate

such

cas

es. T

he H

RC

furth

er u

rges

th

at it

inve

stig

ates

cas

es b

eyon

d th

e tim

e lim

it of

one

yea

r, an

d ha

d in

vest

igat

ed c

ases

as o

ld a

s tw

o ye

ars w

here

evi

denc

e w

as fo

rthco

min

g.

They

stat

e th

at si

nce

the

form

er C

omm

issi

on li

mite

d th

e ca

ses t

o w

ithin

one

yea

r of t

he in

cide

nt, t

he H

RC

had

now

dec

ided

to li

mit

the

time

to th

ree

mon

ths

sinc

e ev

iden

ce w

as n

ot a

vaila

ble

for b

elat

ed in

quiri

es. M

eanw

hile

the

Dai

ly N

ews

repo

rts th

at a

Com

mitt

ee w

as a

ppoi

nted

by

Cha

irman

, HR

C in

mid

200

6 to

inve

stig

ate

the

2210

cas

es w

hich

had

not

bee

n in

quire

d in

to b

y th

e pr

evio

us c

omm

issi

ons,

follo

win

g a

Pres

iden

tial d

irect

ive

to th

is e

ffect

. The

Com

mitt

ee c

ompr

ised

K.G

. Jay

asen

a, re

tired

Dis

trict

Jud

ge a

nd H

.S. J

ayas

uriy

a, fo

rmer

Dire

ctor

, C

olom

bo F

raud

Inve

stig

atio

n B

urea

u w

ith W

. Eka

naya

ke, f

orm

er G

over

nmen

t Age

nt C

olom

bo a

s Se

cret

ary.

The

Com

mis

sion

com

men

ced

inqu

iries

fro

m N

ovem

ber

2006

to J

uly

2007

. It i

s re

porte

d th

at 6

50 c

ompl

aina

nts

cam

e be

fore

the

Com

mis

sion

whi

le 1

13 w

rote

of

thei

r in

abili

ty to

atte

nd a

nd fo

rwar

ded

affi d

avits

inst

ead.

120

of t

he c

ompl

aint

s wer

e w

ith re

gard

to n

on p

aym

ent o

f com

pens

atio

n (c

ompe

nsat

ion

calc

ulat

ed a

s fo

llow

s; R

s.50,

000

for m

arrie

d pe

rson

s, R

s. 25

,000

for p

erso

ns o

ver 2

1 an

d R

s. 15

,000

for p

erso

ns u

nder

21

year

s). T

he fi

nal

repo

rt w

as h

ande

d ov

er to

Cha

irman

, HR

C o

n 15

Oct

ober

200

7. T

he D

aily

New

s re

ports

that

the

JVP,

LTT

E, p

olic

e an

d ar

my

offi c

ers

have

be

en fo

und

to b

e re

spon

sibl

e w

hile

insu

ffi ci

ent e

vide

nce

and

depa

rtmen

tal c

hang

es p

reve

nt c

rimin

al a

ctio

n be

ing

inst

itute

d ag

ains

t the

latte

r st

ate

offi c

ials

. Onl

y 29

.41%

per

cent

of t

he 2

210

case

s wer

e in

vest

igat

ed.

See

“Com

mitt

ee to

Inqu

ire in

to d

isapp

eare

d an

d m

issio

n pe

rson

s”,

Dai

ly N

ews,

29 O

ctob

er 2

007,

avai

labl

e at <

http

://w

ww

.dai

lyne

ws.l

k/20

07/1

0/29

/fea2

0.as

p>. F

urth

er th

e HR

C h

as st

ated

that

as at

Sep

tem

ber

2007

the

HR

C h

ad a

bac

klog

of

4500

cas

es w

hich

hav

e be

en d

istri

bute

d am

ong

inve

stig

atin

g of

fi cer

s, ha

ving

cle

ared

a b

ackl

og o

f 90

00

case

s fro

m th

e fo

rmer

Com

mis

sion

. Se

e V

isit

of L

ouis

e Arb

our:

RC

SL c

larifi

es,

Dai

ly N

ews,

05 N

ovem

ber 2

007,

ava

ilabl

e at

<ht

tp://

ww

w.

daily

new

s.lk/

2007

/11/

05/fe

a20.

asp>

214.

Not

impl

emen

ted.

That

eac

h of

the

com

plai

nts

not c

omin

g w

ithin

the

Man

date

of

this

Com

mis

sion

be

refe

rred

to D

ivis

iona

l Sec

reta

ries

to v

erify

w

ith th

e G

ram

a N

iladh

arie

s w

heth

er th

e w

here

abou

ts o

f su

ch

pers

ons i

s stil

l not

kno

wn

in h

is a

rea.

214 V

I.3

All

Isla

nd, F

inal

(8

7)20

01

140

PART 3RECOMMENDATIONS OF OTHER

COMMISSIONS OF INQUIRY

INTRODUCTION

The following is a compilation of the recommendations of six Commissions of Inquiry including: (1) the Commission to Inquire into the Assassination of S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike; (2) the Commission of Inquiry into Incidents which Took Place between 13th August and 15th September, 1977; (3) the Presidential Commission of Inquiry into the Kokkadicholai Incident; (4) the Commission of Inquiry into Unlawful Detention and Torture at the Batalanda Housing Scheme; (5) the Commission of Inquiry into the Massacre at Bindunuwewa Rehabilitation Centre; and (6) Presidential Truth Commission on Ethnic Violence (1981 – 1984).

These six Commissions span three decades; the fi rst was created in 1963, and the last was created in 2001. The commissions address a number of diverse themes and, as such, are more diffi cult to compare than the recommendations of the disappearance Commissions. Consequently, we have not attempted to merge the recommendations of these six Commissions into one table. Rather, the recommendations of each Commission have been organized in separate tables, within which they have been further grouped thematically.

Despite the distinct nature of each Commission, certain trends emerge, including recommendations calling for accountability through legal or disciplinary procedures. Although such recommendations have been a persistent product of commissions of inquiry, they have failed to impact the enduring culture of impunity.

141

TAB

LE

OF

RE

CO

MM

EN

DAT

ION

S O

F O

TH

ER

CO

MM

ISSI

ON

S O

F IN

QU

IRY

RE

POR

T O

F T

HE

CO

MM

ISSI

ON

TO

IN

QU

IRE

IN

TO A

ND

RE

POR

T O

N A

SSA

SSIN

ATIO

N

OF

S.W

.R.D

. BA

ND

AR

AN

AIK

E, 1

965

CAT

EG

OR

Y O

F R

EC

RE

CO

MM

EN

DAT

ION

Con

tem

ptW

e co

nsid

er it

nec

essa

ry to

brin

g to

you

r Ex

celle

ncy’

s no

tice

a de

fi cie

ncy

in th

e le

gal

prov

isio

ns re

leva

nt to

the C

omm

issi

ons o

f Inq

uiry

appo

inte

d in

term

s of t

he C

omm

issi

ons

of In

quiry

Act

. Sec

tion

12 o

f tha

t Act

enu

mer

ates

the

acts

and

om

issi

ons w

hich

con

stitu

te

the

offe

nce

of c

onte

mpt

aga

inst

or

in d

isre

spec

t of

the

aut

horit

y of

the

Com

mis

sion

. Pa

rticu

larly

in

case

s w

here

jud

ges

are

appo

inte

d C

omm

issi

oner

s un

der

this

Act

, w

e th

inks

its

nece

ssar

y, in

ord

er to

ena

ble

them

to p

erfo

rm th

eir

func

tions

effi

cien

tly a

nd

with

inde

pend

ence

and

so

bette

r se

cure

the

publ

ic in

tere

st, t

o ex

tend

the

defi n

ition

of

cont

empt

aga

inst

or

in d

isre

spec

t of

the

aut

horit

y of

the

Com

mis

sion

to

certa

in o

ther

ac

ts a

nd o

mis

sion

s. It

is h

ardl

y ne

cess

ary

for u

s he

re to

atte

mpt

to in

dica

te th

e lim

its o

f th

e ar

ea o

f suc

h ex

tens

ion.

We

may

, how

ever

, tak

e le

ave

to p

oint

out

that

the

legi

slat

ure

appe

ars t

o ha

ve c

onte

mpl

ated

in 1

958

an a

men

dmen

t of t

he la

w so

mew

hat a

long

the

lines

w

e ha

ve in

min

d. W

e ga

ther

that

a B

ill d

rafte

d ab

out t

hat t

ime

to a

men

d th

e C

omm

issi

ons

of In

quiry

Act

was

not

pro

ceed

ed w

ith fo

r rea

sons

of w

hich

we

are

unaw

are.

The

effi

cien

t pe

rfor

man

ce o

f th

e w

ork

of th

e C

omm

issi

ons

and

the

publ

ic in

tere

st a

like

dem

and

the

supp

lyin

g of

the

pres

ent d

efi c

ienc

ies o

f the

rele

vant

law

.215

215.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

1965

, p.5

.

142

Evi

denc

eA

s we h

ad n

ot d

ecid

ed to

take

into

acco

unt,

as ag

ains

t any

per

son

who

se co

nduc

t app

eare

d to

us

to r

equi

re e

xam

inat

ion,

any

inf

orm

atio

n th

at c

ould

not

be

repr

oduc

ed b

efor

e us

in

the

shap

e of

evi

denc

e at

our

inqu

iry in

the

pres

ence

of

the

pers

on o

r pe

rson

s w

ho

mig

ht b

e af

fect

ed b

y su

ch in

form

atio

n, th

e in

form

atio

n co

ntai

ned

in th

ese

anon

ymou

s an

d ps

eudo

nym

ous

petit

ions

had

to

be k

ept

out

of c

onsi

dera

tion

in r

each

ing

our

conc

lusi

ons.21

6 Pr

oced

ure

Ther

e is

, of

cou

rse,

an

impl

ied

stat

utor

y pr

ovis

ion

that

nat

ural

jus

tice

mus

t no

t be

di

sreg

arde

d an

d an

exp

ress

sta

tuto

ry p

rovi

sion

that

any

per

son

who

may

be

affe

cted

by

the

inqu

iry u

nder

take

n by

the

Com

mis

sion

is e

ntitl

ed to

be

repr

esen

ted

by le

gal a

dvis

ers

of h

is c

hoic

e. B

ut o

nce

thes

e sa

fegu

ards

are

obs

erve

d, t

here

is

suffi

cien

t el

astic

ity i

n th

e pe

rmis

sibl

e pr

oced

ure

to e

nabl

e th

e C

omm

issi

oner

s to

ado

pt a

ny p

roce

dure

that

is

basi

cally

fair

and

just

.217

The

func

tions

tha

t de

volv

e on

us

by o

ur p

rese

nt C

omm

issi

on a

re s

ubst

antia

lly n

ot

diss

imila

r to

thos

e th

at d

evol

ve o

n a

Cou

rt or

oth

er ju

dici

al tr

ibun

al. F

or th

at re

ason

and

al

so o

n ac

coun

t of t

he c

ircum

stan

ce th

at th

e co

nseq

uenc

es o

f adv

erse

fi nd

ings

by

us c

an

be s

erio

us o

r da

mag

ing

to in

divi

dual

s, w

e de

cide

d to

adh

ere,

so

far

as p

ract

icab

le, t

o pr

oced

ure

obta

inin

g in

a C

ourt

of Ju

stic

e.21

8

216.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

1965

, p.4

.21

7.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

1965

, p.1

0.21

8.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

1965

, p.1

0.

143

RE

POR

T O

N I

NC

IDE

NT

S W

HIC

H T

OO

K P

LA

CE

BE

TW

EE

N 1

3TH

AU

GU

ST A

ND

15T

H

SEPT

EM

BE

R, 1

977

(SA

NSO

NI R

EPO

RT

), 19

80

CAT

EG

OR

Y O

F R

EC

RE

CO

MM

EN

DAT

ION

R

EL

IEF/

R

EC

ON

CIL

IAT

ION

Nat

iona

l Uni

tyIt

[the A

ll C

eylo

n B

uddh

ist C

ongr

ess]

sugg

este

d ce

rtain

mea

sure

s to

prev

ent a

recu

rren

ce

of th

e in

cide

nts,

som

e of

them

bei

ng:

(1)

The

esta

blis

hmen

t of B

uddh

ist a

nd H

indu

cul

tura

l cen

tres,

and

a H

indu

-Bud

dhis

t M

useu

m in

the

Nor

th; a

nd a

spec

ial F

acul

ty in

the

Jaffn

a U

nive

rsity

for r

esea

rch

on

Bud

dhis

t and

Hin

du c

ultu

re.

(2)

The

stat

e sh

ould

take

ade

quat

e st

eps t

o pr

eser

ve B

uddh

ist r

uins

all

over

the

coun

try

and

to p

rote

ct B

uddh

ist p

ilgrim

s.(3

)Th

e st

ate

shou

ld e

ncou

rage

the

prin

ting

of b

ooks

whi

ch p

rom

ote

unity

bet

wee

n Si

nhal

ese

and

Tam

ils.

(4)

A U

nit

shou

ld b

e se

t up

by

the

stat

e to

cor

rect

wro

ng i

nfor

mat

ion

whi

ch m

ay

jeop

ardi

se H

indu

-Bud

dhis

t rel

atio

ns, t

o st

op a

ll an

ti-na

tiona

l and

div

isiv

e ac

tiviti

es

and

prop

agan

da, a

nd to

che

ck f

orei

gn a

id r

ecei

ved

by li

bera

tion

mov

emen

ts th

at

aim

to d

amag

e H

indu

-Bud

dhis

t uni

ty.

(5)

The

gove

rnm

ent

shou

ld s

et u

p ne

w i

ndus

tries

in

Jaffn

a pe

nins

ula,

and

pro

vide

em

ploy

men

t and

hou

sing

for b

oth

Sinh

ales

e an

d Ta

mils

.(6

)Fa

cilit

ies

shou

ld b

e pr

ovid

ed f

or p

erso

ns w

ho l

eft

Jaffn

a to

ret

urn

ther

e fo

r re

-em

ploy

men

t.

144

I com

men

d th

ese

sugg

estio

ns a

s wor

thy

of c

onsi

dera

tion.

219

Fr. C

aspe

rsz m

entio

ned

in h

is M

emor

andu

m ce

rtain

step

s whi

ch m

ight

be t

aken

to re

mov

e th

e re

mot

e an

d pr

oxim

ate

caus

es w

hich

wer

e re

spon

sibl

e fo

r the

dis

turb

ance

s. I m

entio

n so

me

now

:(1

)Th

e te

achi

ng o

f his

tory

, geo

grap

hy, l

angu

age

and

relig

ion

in sc

hool

and

uni

vers

ity

shou

ld b

e m

otiv

ated

by

the

need

to u

nite

, with

out m

akin

g un

iform

, the

var

ious

el

emen

ts in

our

rich

ly p

lura

l-cul

tura

l soc

iety

.(2

)It

is es

sent

ial t

o te

ach

Tam

il to

Sin

hale

se ch

ildre

n an

d vi

ce v

ersa

. Muc

h pr

ejud

ice i

s du

e to

igno

ranc

e of

the

othe

r’s la

ngua

ge a

nd c

ultu

re. U

nity

in d

iver

sity

is a

chie

ved

by k

now

ledg

e of

them

.(3

)B

oth

Sinh

ales

e an

d Ta

mil

mus

t be

mad

e co

mpu

lsor

y fo

r elig

ibili

ty to

gov

ernm

ent

empl

oym

ent a

t any

leve

l; an

d ce

rtain

ly E

nglis

h at

the

terti

ary

stag

e of

edu

catio

n,

and

if po

ssib

le a

t the

prim

ary

and

seco

ndar

y st

ages

.(4

)A

ctio

n is

nec

essa

ry t

o co

nvin

ce p

eopl

e of

the

Gov

ernm

ent’s

det

erm

inat

ion

to

achi

eve

the

inte

r-com

mun

al h

arm

ony

nece

ssar

y fo

r soc

io-e

cono

mic

pro

gres

s. H

e ga

ve in

stan

ces

[sic

] C

.G.R

. (C

eylo

n G

over

nmen

t Rai

lway

s) a

nd C

.T.B

. (C

eylo

n Tr

ansp

ort B

oard

) sig

ns, n

ame

boar

ds a

nd a

nnou

ncem

ents

whi

ch sh

ould

be

in a

ll 3

lang

uage

s: a

nd b

an o

n th

e br

oadc

astin

g of

song

s tha

t enc

oura

ge c

omm

unal

ism

.(5

)Ef

forts

are

nec

essa

ry to

inte

grat

e, w

ithou

t ass

imila

ting,

the

Tam

il es

tate

pop

ulat

ion

with

the

Sinh

ales

e vi

llage

.

219.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

1980

, p.2

70.

145

(6)

Econ

omic

stag

natio

n an

d un

empl

oym

ent,

espe

cial

ly o

f the

you

ths b

etw

een

18 a

nd

25 m

ust b

e ov

erco

me.

Act

ion

is n

eces

sary

to m

ake

Sinh

ales

e an

d Ta

mil

yout

hs jo

in

hand

s to

ensu

re a

bet

ter f

utur

e.(7

)C

onfi d

ence

sho

uld

be c

reat

ed i

n al

l, th

at t

he l

aw e

nfor

cem

ent

mac

hine

ry w

ill

act

sure

ly a

nd s

wift

ly a

t th

e sl

ight

est

sign

of

com

mun

al d

istu

rban

ce o

r pu

blic

ho

olig

anis

m, o

r as s

oon

as ru

mou

rs b

egin

.(8

)A

ll le

ader

s of c

omm

uniti

es sh

ould

join

to re

mov

e pas

t mis

unde

rsta

ndin

gs an

d bu

ild

a so

ciet

y w

here

eve

ryon

e ca

n liv

e w

ithou

t fea

r or i

njus

tice.

Har

ping

on

com

mun

al

mat

ters

mus

t cea

se.

(9)

The

forc

e of

Rel

igio

n m

ust b

e us

ed to

def

eat f

orce

s of E

vil.

(10)

Scho

ol c

hild

ren

shou

ld m

ix in

ord

er to

und

erst

and

each

oth

er.22

0 Fr

. B

erna

rd,

sugg

estin

g re

med

ies

to p

reve

nt a

rec

urre

nce

of c

omm

unal

dis

turb

ance

s, ca

lled

for t

he m

oral

edu

catio

n of

bot

h Si

nhal

ese

and

Tam

ils a

nd o

ther

s to

war

ds g

enui

ne

non-

viol

ence

. All

relig

ious

lead

ers s

houl

d ta

ke p

art i

n th

at e

xerc

ise,

in o

rder

to c

hang

e th

e he

arts

of t

he p

eopl

e. T

hey

shou

ld in

culc

ate

resp

ect f

or th

e rig

hts o

f oth

ers,

such

as r

espe

ct

for l

ife, r

espe

ct fo

r sex

, res

pect

for p

rope

rty ri

ghts

.221

Com

pens

atio

n/

Reh

abili

tatio

nI w

ould

adv

ise

that

all

thes

e su

gges

tions

be

cons

ider

ed b

y th

e G

over

nmen

t [Sa

nson

i]:22

2

220.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

1980

, p.2

72.

221.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

1980

, p.2

72.

222.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

1980

, p.2

61.

146

Fr. C

aspe

rsz

deal

t with

the

subj

ect t

hus:

(1)

Spee

dy a

nd w

ell-s

uper

vise

d di

sbur

sem

ent o

f ade

quat

e co

mpe

nsat

ion

is n

eces

sary

.(2

)R

e-se

ttlem

ent o

f har

dwor

king

fam

ilies

in th

e N

orth

-Cen

tral a

nd E

aste

rn P

rovi

nces

w

ill h

elp

the

coun

try to

be

self-

suffi

cien

t.(3

)R

ehab

ilita

tion

thro

ugh

settl

emen

t sh

ould

gua

rant

ee t

hat

the

fam

ilies

will

be

the

mai

n be

nefi c

iarie

s of

thei

r ef

forts

to p

rodu

ce f

ood

and

will

not

be

expl

oite

d by

la

ndlo

rds a

nd o

ther

s.(4

)W

here

peo

ple

are

still

livi

ng in

inse

curit

y an

d fe

ar, t

hey

shou

ld b

e tra

nsfe

rred

to

mor

e se

cure

pla

ces.

(5)

Pers

ons,

whe

ther

land

lord

s or o

ther

pos

sess

ors o

f lan

ds, w

ho w

ere

oust

ed fo

rcib

ly,

shou

ld b

e re

stor

ed to

pos

sess

ion.

223

The

Fede

ratio

n of

Tam

il Tr

ade

Uni

ons s

ugge

sted

, as m

easu

res o

f reh

abili

tatio

n of

vic

tims

of th

e di

stur

banc

es, t

he tr

ansf

er o

f Ta

mil

empl

oyee

s to

Tam

il ar

eas;

the

prov

isio

ns o

f ho

usin

g fa

cilit

ies

in s

afe

plac

es a

nd s

ecur

ity a

rran

gem

ents

; and

the

optio

n of

retir

emen

t fo

r em

ploy

ees

who

do

not w

ant t

o co

ntin

ue in

em

ploy

men

t und

er th

e G

over

nmen

t, w

ith

adeq

uate

com

pens

atio

n fo

r los

s of c

aree

r.224

The

Tam

il R

efug

ees R

ehab

ilita

tion

Org

anis

atio

n su

gges

ted

that

, in

addi

tion

to th

e ab

ove,

Ta

mils

who

had

to

leav

e th

eir

land

and

pro

perty

in

Sinh

ales

e ar

eas

and

do n

ot w

ish

to r

etur

n to

them

, sho

uld

be g

iven

land

in o

ther

are

as w

here

they

will

hav

e a

sens

e of

se

curit

y. In

such

case

s, it

was

sugg

este

d by

the A

ssoc

iatio

n of

Affe

cted

Tam

il O

ffi ce

rs, t

he

gove

rnm

ent s

houl

d bu

y th

ose

land

s at m

arke

t val

ue, a

s tha

t was

the

only

way

to o

btai

n a

reas

onab

le p

rice

for t

hem

.225

223.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

1980

, p.2

60.

224.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

1980

, p.2

60.

225.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

1980

, p.2

61.

147

Wha

teve

r m

ay b

e th

e ru

le in

this

isla

nd u

nder

nor

mal

con

ditio

ns, t

he in

cide

nts

whi

ch

occu

rred

dur

ing

the

spec

ifi ed

per

iod

wer

e of

suc

h an

ext

rem

e na

ture

and

so

wid

espr

ead,

th

at a

n ex

cept

ion

shou

ld b

e m

ade

as r

egar

ds th

e pa

ymen

t of

com

pens

atio

n to

all

thos

e pe

rson

s who

wer

e ad

vers

ely

affe

cted

. I su

gges

t ful

l com

pens

atio

n fo

r all

loss

es su

stai

ned

shou

ld b

e pa

id to

all

such

per

sons

by

the

Gov

ernm

ent.22

6 It

will

be

nece

ssar

y to

hav

e th

e cl

aim

s m

ade

by t

hose

who

suf

fere

d lo

sses

car

eful

ly

inve

stig

ated

by

pers

ons w

ho a

re c

ompe

tent

to a

sses

s the

qua

ntum

of c

ompe

nsat

ion

whi

ch

shou

ld b

e pa

id in

eac

h ca

se.22

7 Th

eir

[vic

tims

of t

he i

ncid

ents

] de

pend

ants

hav

e su

ffere

d by

los

ing

the

brea

d-w

inne

r un

der s

uch

circ

umst

ance

s; w

hile

if h

e ha

d en

joye

d th

e no

rmal

life

exp

ecta

ncy

they

wou

ld

have

bee

n in

a m

uch

mor

e fa

vour

able

situ

atio

n. S

uch

case

s sho

uld

be su

itabl

y de

alt w

ith,

and

an e

nhan

ced

pens

ion

be p

aid

to th

e he

irs.22

8 I

reco

mm

end

that

all

pers

ons

who

suf

fere

d da

mag

es a

risin

g ou

t of

the

inci

dent

s w

hich

oc

curr

ed d

urin

g th

e pe

riod

13th

Aug

ust,

1977

to

15th

Sep

tem

ber

1977

, be

pai

d fu

ll co

mpe

nsat

ion

to t

he e

xten

t of

suc

h da

mag

es.

Any

sum

s al

read

y re

ceiv

ed f

rom

the

G

over

nmen

t, or

pay

able

by

reas

on o

f ins

uran

ce p

olic

ies i

n th

eir f

avou

r, sh

ould

of c

ours

e be

ded

ucte

d.22

9

226.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

1980

, p.2

62.

227.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

1980

, p.2

62.

228.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

1980

, p.2

62.

229.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

1980

, p.2

62.

148

AC

TOR

S230

Polic

eB

y lo

ng tr

aditi

on th

e C

eylo

n Po

lice,

like

the

Brit

ish

Polic

e, d

o no

t as

a ge

nera

l pra

ctic

e ca

rry

fi rea

rms.

They

hav

e be

en tr

aine

d to

use

them

, and

are

equ

ippe

d w

ith th

em w

hen

an

emer

genc

y ar

ises

, in

orde

r tha

t the

y m

ay d

eal w

ith ar

med

crim

inal

s and

pol

itica

l ter

roris

ts.

It is

a m

atte

r for

the

cons

ider

atio

n of

the

gove

rnm

ent w

heth

er fu

rther

act

ion

is n

eces

sary

to

dea

l with

thre

ats t

o se

curit

y in

par

ticul

ar a

reas

of t

he Is

land

, esp

ecia

lly w

hen

terr

oris

ts,

who

shoo

t and

kill

una

rmed

pol

ice

offi c

ers a

nd ru

n aw

ay, a

re a

ctiv

e.23

1 It

is v

ery

desi

rabl

e, if

not

ess

entia

l, th

at p

olic

e of

fi cer

s sh

ould

be

able

to c

omm

unic

ate

with

out d

iffi c

ulty

with

the p

eopl

e in

the a

rea w

here

they

are s

tatio

ned.

Mis

unde

rsta

ndin

gs

coul

d be

avo

ided

if th

ere

is m

utua

l int

erco

urse

bet

wee

n th

e tw

o pa

rties

.232

It sh

ould

be i

mpr

esse

d on

all p

olic

e offi

cers

, tha

t whe

n th

ey ar

e in

unifo

rm o

r on

duty

they

ce

ase

to b

e Si

nhal

ese

or T

amils

or M

uslim

s. Th

ey m

ust t

hen

unde

r all

circ

umst

ance

act

fa

irly

and

impa

rtial

ly a

nd fe

arle

ssly

, hee

dles

s of t

heir

own

race

or r

elig

ion.

233

230.

“Per

petra

tors

iden

tifi e

d in

the

repo

rt w

ere

not p

rose

cute

d. I

nste

ad, i

n 19

82, P

arlia

men

t pas

sed

the

Inde

mni

ty A

ct, N

o 20

of

1982

, whi

ch

prev

ente

d le

gal

actio

n of

any

kin

d ag

ains

t an

y re

pres

enta

tive

or e

mpl

oyee

of

the

gove

rnm

ent

for

any

act,

“leg

al o

r ot

herw

ise,

don

e or

pu

rpor

ted

to b

e do

ne w

ith a

vie

w to

rest

orin

g la

w a

nd o

rder

dur

ing

the

perio

d 1

Aug

ust 1

977

to 3

1 A

ugus

t 197

7, if

don

e in

goo

d fa

ith...

” Th

is A

ct w

as fu

rther

am

ende

d in

Dec

embe

r 198

8 to

ext

end

the

rele

vant

per

iod

of in

dem

nity

to 1

6 D

ecem

ber 1

988.

” “T

wen

ty Y

ears

of M

ake

Belie

ve –

Sri

Lan

ka’s

Pres

iden

tial C

omm

issi

ons o

f Inq

uiry

” In

dex:

ASA

37/

005/

2009

Am

nest

y In

tern

atio

nal,

June

200

9 at

p.1

0.23

1.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

1980

, p.2

68; “

M.C

. San

soni

did

ack

now

ledg

e po

lice

failu

res t

o pr

otec

t civ

ilian

s and

to p

reve

nt v

iole

nce,

and

iden

tifi e

d a

few

pol

ice

offi c

ers w

ho h

ad in

stig

ated

or p

artic

ipat

ed in

vio

lenc

e ag

ains

t Tam

ils.”

Am

nest

y In

tern

atio

nal,

June

200

9 at

p.9

.23

2.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

1980

, p.2

68.

233.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

1980

, p.2

68.

149

Fina

lly, I

wou

ld re

com

men

d th

at th

e Pol

ice s

houl

d ha

ve su

ffi ci

ent m

an-p

ower

, be e

quip

ped

with

an

adeq

uate

sup

ply

of v

ehic

les,

and

be g

iven

cle

ar in

stru

ctio

ns w

hich

they

sho

uld

alw

ays h

ave

in m

ind,

so th

at th

ey m

ay b

e ab

le to

take

swift

, ste

rn, a

nd su

ffi ci

ent a

ctio

n to

su

ppre

ss a

n ou

tbre

ak o

f vio

lenc

e.23

4 Th

e le

sson

s to

be le

arne

d fr

om th

e fa

cts I

hav

e m

entio

ned

are

that

(1) i

f law

less

ness

is n

ot

imm

edia

tely

nip

ped

in th

e bu

d, it

can

gro

w fa

st a

nd sp

read

ove

r a la

rge

area

; (2)

if th

e la

w

is n

ot e

nfor

ced

both

by

the

polic

e an

d th

e C

ourts

with

all

delib

erat

e sp

eed,

it w

ill c

ease

to

exer

cise

that

ess

entia

l dis

cipl

ine

over

the

lives

of t

he la

wbr

eake

rs, w

hich

is th

e gu

aran

tee

of p

eace

and

ord

er in

the

coun

try.23

5 Po

litic

al L

eade

rsIt

is d

eplo

rabl

e th

at, a

s M

r. Ja

yasi

nghe

sta

ted,

som

e M

embe

rs o

f Pa

rliam

ent a

ided

and

ab

ette

d or

inst

igat

ed th

e w

rong

doer

s. Th

e tra

gedy

was

hei

ghte

ned

by th

e fa

ilure

of

the

Polic

e, w

ho h

ad b

een

war

ned,

to ta

ke p

reve

ntiv

e ac

tion

at o

nce.

The

re is

no

plac

e fo

r po

litic

al v

iole

nce

in a

dem

ocra

cy. I

t sho

uld

be o

utla

wed

and

stam

ped

out s

peed

ily.23

6 Th

e na

tiona

l int

eres

t req

uire

s tha

t the

re sh

ould

be

patri

otic

col

labo

ratio

n ac

ross

the

party

ba

ttle

lines

.237

I ha

ve n

o do

ubt t

hat i

t is

nece

ssar

y to

lay

dow

n gu

idel

ines

, pre

fera

bly

afte

r a

mee

ting

betw

een

the

Gov

ernm

ent a

nd th

e T.

U.L

.F, w

here

the

exis

ting

area

s of

con

fl ict

can

be

disc

usse

d.23

8

234.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

1980

, p.2

68.

235.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

1980

, p.2

70.

236.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

1980

, p.2

70.

237.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

1980

, p.2

73.

238.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

1980

, p.2

73.

150

Publ

ic S

ervi

ceD

r B

alas

ingh

am, P

resi

dent

of

the

Affe

cted

Tam

il O

ffi ce

rs’ A

ssoc

iatio

n, s

ugge

sted

the

de

cent

raliz

atio

n of

the

pub

lic s

ervi

ce,

with

a v

iew

to

redu

cing

the

num

ber

of T

amil

offi c

ers

requ

ired

to s

erve

in C

olom

bo. T

his

wou

ld a

lso

resu

lt in

var

ious

bra

nche

s of

the

publ

ic se

rvic

e be

ing

mov

ed to

the

Nor

th.23

9 O

TH

ER

I hav

e al

read

y ex

pres

sed

my

view

s on

the

cry

for E

elam

rais

ed b

y th

e T.

U.L

.F. T

he V

en.

Mad

ihe

Pann

asih

a, F

r. C

aspe

rz a

nd m

any

othe

r per

sons

hav

e st

ated

that

it w

as th

e m

ain

caus

e of

the

dist

urba

nces

. The

refo

re, t

he fi

rst m

easu

re I

wou

ld re

com

men

d, to

pre

vent

a

recu

rren

ce o

f the

dis

turb

ance

s, is

that

this

cla

im b

e ab

ando

ned.

240

239.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

1980

, p.2

61.

240.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

1980

, p.2

66; “

The R

epor

t put

mos

t of t

he b

lam

e for

vio

lenc

e on

the T

amil

polit

ical

lead

ersh

ip, a

nd d

isco

unte

d si

gnifi

cant

w

itnes

s tes

timon

y th

at im

plic

ated

the

stat

e (a

lthou

gh it

repo

rted

the

alle

gatio

ns).”

Am

nest

y In

tern

atio

nal,

June

200

9, a

t p.9

.

151

RE

POR

T O

F T

HE

PR

ESI

DE

NT

IAL

CO

MM

ISSI

ON

OF

INQ

UIR

Y I

NT

O T

HE

K

OK

KA

DIC

HO

LA

I IN

CID

EN

T, 1

992

CAT

EG

OR

Y O

F R

EC

RE

CO

MM

EN

DAT

ION

L

EG

AL

PRO

CE

ED

ING

S

Mili

tary

Law

We r

ecom

men

d th

at th

e Arm

y sh

ould

mak

e its

ow

n in

vest

igat

ions

and

that

actio

n be

take

n un

der t

he M

ilita

ry L

aw a

gain

st th

e Arm

y m

en w

ho c

omm

itted

thes

e cr

imes

,(a

)ta

king

into

cons

ider

atio

n th

at th

ese o

ffenc

es w

ere t

he re

sult

of u

nres

train

ed b

ehav

iour

of

the

sold

iers

afte

r the

exp

losi

on a

nd th

e de

ath

of tw

o so

ldie

rs;

(b)

that

the

witn

esse

s fr

om t

he v

illag

es i

nvol

ved

wer

e qu

estio

ned

as t

o w

heth

er

befo

re th

is in

cide

nt th

ere

was

any

har

assm

ent b

y, o

r ba

d co

nduc

t of,

the

sold

iers

. Th

e vi

llage

rs w

ere

unan

imou

s in

sta

ting

that

sin

ce t

he C

amp

was

est

ablis

hed

at

Kok

kadi

chol

ai a

bout

6 m

onth

s pr

ior t

o Ju

ne, 1

991

(viz

: in

Dec

embe

r, 19

90),

ther

e ha

d be

en n

o ha

rass

men

t fro

m th

e so

ldie

rs, a

nd th

at it

app

ears

ther

e ha

d be

en c

ordi

al

rela

tions

with

the

sold

iers

.241

241.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

1992

, p.6

.

152

AC

TOR

SA

rmed

For

ces

The

inci

dent

whi

ch is

the

subj

ect-m

atte

r of t

his

Inqu

iry b

y ou

r Com

mis

sion

is o

ne

whi

ch h

ad o

ccur

red

outs

ide

mili

tary

act

ion

as r

epor

ted

to Y

our

Exce

llenc

y in

the

Inte

rim R

epor

t. W

e re

com

men

d th

at t

he m

embe

rs o

f th

e A

rmed

for

ces

be g

iven

in

tens

ive

inst

ruct

ions

and

the

Arm

y m

en b

e tra

ined

not

to in

dulg

e in

, or

exec

ute

extra

-mili

tary

or n

on-m

ilita

ry ac

ts o

f thi

s kin

d. It

mus

t be i

mpr

esse

d on

the m

embe

rs

of th

e A

rmed

forc

es th

at in

disc

iplin

e of

this

kin

d pe

rpet

rate

d on

the

publ

ic w

ill b

e de

alt w

ith d

eter

rent

pun

ishm

ent.24

2

242.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

1992

, p.6

.

153

RE

POR

T O

F U

NL

AWFU

L D

ET

EN

TIO

N A

ND

TO

RT

UR

E A

T T

HE

BAT

AL

AN

DA

HO

USI

NG

SC

HE

ME

, 200

0

CAT

EG

OR

Y O

F R

EC

RE

CO

MM

EN

DAT

ION

IN

VE

STIG

ATIO

NS

Judi

cial

In

vest

igat

ions

W

e are

of t

he o

pini

on th

at, i

n in

stanc

es su

ch as

this

[whe

n th

ere i

s bel

ief t

hat t

hose

resp

onsib

le

are

Polic

e O

ffi ce

rs],

it is

appr

opria

te to

em

pow

er J

udic

ial O

ffi ce

rs (

such

as

Mag

istra

tes)

to

cau

se n

eces

sary

inve

stiga

tions

and

sup

ervi

se th

e sa

me,

and

forw

ard

the

inve

stiga

tiona

l fi n

ding

s to

the

Atto

rney

Gen

eral

, fo

r th

e co

nsid

erat

ion

of t

he i

nstit

utio

n of

crim

inal

pr

ocee

ding

s. A

mon

gst o

ther

inve

stiga

tive

pow

ers,

the

rele

vant

judi

cial

aut

horit

ies s

houl

d be

em

pow

ered

to p

roce

ed to

the

rele

vant

ven

ue in

whi

ch it

is s

uspe

cted

that

ille

gal a

ctiv

ity is

be

ing p

erpe

tuat

ed, a

nd ex

amin

e the

sam

e. In

this

rega

rd, w

e rec

omm

end t

hat, Y

our E

xcel

lenc

y be

ple

ased

to ap

poin

t a C

omm

ittee

to co

nsid

er fo

rmul

atin

g su

itabl

e am

endm

ents

to th

e Cod

e of

Crim

inal

Pro

cedu

re A

ct, t

o im

plem

ent t

he re

com

men

datio

ns c

onta

ined

her

ein.

243 (

3)L

EG

AL

PRO

CE

ED

ING

SPr

osec

utio

nsW

e re

com

men

d th

at Y

our E

xcel

lenc

y be

ple

ased

to d

irect

the

Insp

ecto

r Gen

eral

of P

olic

e to

cau

se c

ompr

ehen

sive

inv

estig

atio

ns i

nto

all

com

plai

nts

mad

e to

the

Com

mis

sion

, w

ith th

e vi

ew to

inst

itutin

g cr

imin

al p

roce

edin

gs in

app

ropr

iate

Cou

rts o

f La

w, a

gain

st

the

rele

vant

sus

pect

s. In

this

reg

ard,

You

r Ex

celle

ncy

may

be p

leas

ed to

for

war

d to

the

Insp

ecto

r Gen

eral

of P

olic

e th

e R

epor

t of t

his

Com

mis

sion

, alo

ng w

ith th

e pr

ocee

ding

s, th

e N

otes

of I

nves

tigat

ions

and

oth

er m

ater

ial p

erta

inin

g to

the

inve

stig

atio

ns c

ondu

cted

by

the

Polic

e O

ffi ce

rs a

ttach

ed to

the

Com

mis

sion

.244

243.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

1992

, p.1

25- (

3). (

Ref

eren

ce to

num

ber i

n ( )

here

inaf

ter i

n the

foon

tnot

es is

refe

rabl

e to t

he nu

mbe

r of t

he re

com

men

datio

n in

the

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort.

244.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

1992

, p.1

25- (

4).

154

PUN

ITIV

E

ME

ASU

RE

S D

isci

plin

ary

Act

ion

It is

rec

omm

ende

d th

at,

Your

Exc

elle

ncy

be p

leas

ed t

o fo

rwar

d th

e R

epor

t of

thi

s C

omm

issi

on a

long

with

the

pro

ceed

ings

to

the

rele

vant

Dis

cipl

inar

y A

utho

rity

and

the

Insp

ecto

r G

ener

al o

f Po

lice,

for

the

con

side

ratio

n of

the

ins

titut

ion

of n

eces

sary

di

scip

linar

y ac

tion

agai

nst t

he re

leva

nt P

olic

e O

ffi ce

rs.24

5 L

EG

AL

RE

FOR

MSu

prem

e C

ourt

Ju

risd

ictio

nW

e re

com

men

d th

at th

e Su

prem

e C

ourt

be v

este

d w

ith su

itabl

e ad

ditio

nal j

uris

dict

ion,

to

impo

se su

itabl

e sa

nctio

ns in

the

form

of ‘

depr

ivat

ion

of c

ivil

right

s’, o

n pe

rson

s who

are

fo

und

to re

peat

edly

vio

late

bas

ic F

unda

men

tal R

ight

s of C

itize

ns.24

6 A

CTO

RS

Gui

delin

es/ C

odes

of

Con

duct

We

reco

mm

end

that

You

r Ex

celle

ncy

be p

leas

ed t

o co

nsid

er i

nviti

ng R

epre

sent

ativ

es

of th

e Pe

ople

(su

ch a

s M

embe

rs o

f Pa

rliam

ent)

to d

iscu

ss th

ese

mat

ters

in d

etai

l, an

d pr

opos

e a

set o

f gui

delin

es, a

pplic

able

to p

oliti

cian

s an

d La

w E

nfor

cem

ents

Offi

cers

, in

thei

r co

nduc

t dur

ing

extra

-ord

inar

y si

tuat

ions

, whe

re th

ere

is a

ser

ious

thre

at to

pea

ce

and

publ

ic o

rder

. If

nec

essa

ry,

suita

ble

amen

dmen

t, to

exi

stin

g La

ws,

incl

udin

g th

e C

onst

itutio

n sh

ould

be

cons

ider

ed. I

n th

is p

roce

ss, i

t is

reco

mm

ende

d th

at, p

eopl

e an

d re

pres

enta

tives

of a

ll so

cial

gro

ups b

e gi

ven

an o

ppor

tuni

ty to

exp

ress

thei

r vie

ws.24

7

245.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

1992

, p.1

25- (

5).

246.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

1992

, p.1

24- (

2).

247.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

1992

, p.1

24-(

1).

155

It w

ould

be

appr

opria

te t

hat,

Rep

rese

ntat

ives

of

the

peop

le c

onsi

der

deve

lopi

ng a

nd

adop

ting

a ‘C

ode

of C

ondu

ct’ f

or th

emse

lves

. In

the

even

t of

a R

epre

sent

ativ

e of

the

peop

le (s

uch

as a

Mem

ber o

f Par

liam

ent o

r Mem

ber o

f a P

rovi

ncia

l Cou

ncil)

bei

ng fo

und

guilt

y fo

r hav

ing

viol

ated

the

afor

e-m

entio

ned

Cod

e of

Con

duct

, it i

s re

com

men

ded

that

th

e ot

her

Mem

bers

of

the

rele

vant

for

um b

e en

title

d to

mov

e fo

r th

e im

peac

hmen

t of

the

guilt

y M

embe

r. U

pon

such

impe

achm

ent,

the

rele

vant

Mem

ber

shal

l cea

se to

be

a R

epre

sent

ativ

e fo

r a sp

ecifi

c pe

riod.

248

248.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

1992

, p.1

24-(

1).

156

RE

POR

T O

F T

HE

MA

SSA

CR

E A

T B

IND

UN

UW

EW

A R

EH

AB

ILIT

ATIO

N C

EN

TR

E, 2

001

CAT

EG

OR

YO

F R

EC

RE

CO

MM

EN

DAT

ION

LE

GA

L PR

OC

EE

DIN

GS

Pros

ecut

ions

… [

I]t i

s in

cum

bent

upo

n th

e St

ate

to a

ppre

hend

and

pun

ish

the

perp

etra

tors

of

thes

e cr

imes

com

mitt

ed a

t Bin

dunu

wew

a on

25.

10.2

000.

249 A

con

fi den

tial c

over

con

tain

ing

a lis

t of t

he s

uspe

cts

agai

nst w

hom

indi

ctm

ent w

ill b

e fo

rwar

ded

was

pro

duce

d be

fore

the

Com

mis

sion

and

is a

nnex

ed to

this

Rep

ort.

PUN

ITIV

E

ME

ASU

RE

SD

isci

plin

ary

Act

ion

Hav

ing

cons

ider

ed th

e to

talit

y of

evi

denc

e le

d be

fore

me,

I ha

ve c

ome

to th

e co

nclu

sion

th

at t

he c

ondu

ct o

f th

e fo

llow

ing

offi c

ers

on 2

5.10

.200

0, s

houl

d be

the

sub

ject

of

a di

scip

linar

y in

quiry

, for

the

rea

son

that

the

ir in

actio

n, a

nd a

ttitu

de a

t th

e tim

e of

the

in

cide

nt is

inde

fens

ible

. Th

ere

is a

mpl

e ev

iden

ce th

at th

ey w

ere

pres

ent a

t the

tim

e of

the

inci

dent

and

mad

e no

ef

fort

eith

er to

ave

rt th

e at

tack

or t

o di

sper

se th

e m

ob a

nd a

rres

t the

offe

nder

s.1.

A.W

.Day

arat

ne (

Ass

ista

nt S

uper

inte

nden

t of

Polic

e) 2

.R.M

.T.K

.Jaya

ntha

Sen

evira

tne

(Chi

ef In

spec

tor)

3.S

.J.K

arun

asen

a (In

spec

tor o

f Pol

ice)

4.N

.G.S

.Wal

pola

(Sub

Insp

ecto

r)

5.P.

Rat

naya

ke (S

ub In

spec

tor)

6.K

.W.C

.N.A

beyn

aray

ana

(Sub

Insp

ecto

r)

249.

‘At t

he h

earin

g be

fore

the

Com

mis

sion

, the

lear

ned

Dep

uty

Solic

itor G

ener

al st

ated

that

the

Hon

oura

ble A

ttorn

ey G

ener

al, h

avin

g co

nsid

ered

th

e no

tes o

f inv

estig

atio

n, h

as a

lread

y de

cide

d to

forw

ard

indi

ctm

ent a

gain

st so

me

susp

ects

’ Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

2001

, p.2

06 –

207

(16)

.

157

Am

ple

evid

ence

has

bee

n el

icite

d at

the

inqu

iry to

the

effe

ct th

at th

e ad

min

istra

tion

was

pa

rtly

resp

onsi

ble f

or th

e cre

atio

n of

the s

ituat

ion

and

as su

ch it

is d

esira

ble t

hat t

he co

nduc

t of

the

fol

low

ing

offi c

ers

also

is

enqu

ired

into

at

such

inq

uiry

. 1.

Cap

t.Y.K

.Abe

yrat

ne

form

er O

ffi ce

r-in-

Cha

rge,

Bin

dunu

wew

a R

ehab

ilita

tion

Cen

tre. 2

.Lt.P

.Abe

yrat

ne S

econ

d O

ffi ce

r, B

indu

nuw

ewa

Reh

abili

tatio

n C

entre

.250

RE

HA

BIL

ITAT

ION

Rep

eal

of R

egul

atio

n 20

A (1

) Se

ctio

n 20

A (1

) pro

vide

s tha

t a p

erso

n w

ho su

rren

ders

"thr

ough

fear

of t

erro

rist a

ctiv

ities

" be

sent

for r

ehab

ilita

tion.

The

re is

no

mor

al b

asis

to k

eep

a per

son

who

surr

ende

rs th

roug

h fe

ar o

f ter

roris

t act

iviti

es to

be

kept

und

er a

ny fo

rm o

f cus

tody

whe

ther

und

er th

e cu

stod

y of

the

Com

mis

sion

er-G

ener

al o

f R

ehab

ilita

tion

or o

ther

wis

e.25

1 It

coul

d w

ell

be a

n in

frin

gem

ent o

f hum

an ri

ghts

. The

refo

re I

stro

ngly

reco

mm

end

that

this

pro

visi

on in

the

Reg

ulat

ion

be re

peal

ed.25

2 D

etai

nees

v.

Surr

ende

es

250.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

2001

, p.2

06 (1

5).

251.

‘In

the

case

of S

inna

tam

by R

ajen

dran

, I h

ave

com

e to

the

conc

lusi

on th

at th

ere

is ju

stifi

catio

n in

his

pos

ing

the

ques

tion

"why

am

I ke

pt in

a

Reh

abili

tatio

n C

entre

?”, C

omm

issi

on R

epor

t, 20

01, p

.200

(4).

252.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

2001

, p.2

00 (4

).

158

253.

“In

the

case

of a

sur

rend

ee, t

he fa

ct o

f sur

rend

er is

the

dete

rmin

ing

fact

or in

con

side

ring

the

suita

bilit

y fo

r reh

abili

tatio

n. A

sta

tem

ent m

ade

by th

e su

rren

dee

to th

e ef

fect

that

he

volu

ntar

ily s

urre

nder

ed a

nd th

e ce

rtifi c

atio

n th

at th

e su

rren

der w

as v

olun

tary

by

the

offi c

er o

r per

son

to w

hom

the

surr

ende

r was

mad

e, q

ualifi

es

such

per

son

for a

dmis

sion

to a

Reh

abili

tatio

n C

entre

. I h

ave

disc

usse

d in

my

repo

rt th

e da

nger

s in

volv

ed in

ado

ptin

g su

ch a

pro

cedu

re.”

, p.

199.

254.

The A

men

dmen

t to

Emer

genc

y (M

isc.

Pro

visi

ons a

nd P

ower

s) R

egul

atio

n, 1

2 Se

ptem

ber 2

006.

255.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

2001

, p.1

99 (2

).25

6.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

2001

“Th

e di

stin

ctio

n be

twee

n th

e de

tain

ees a

nd th

e su

rren

dees

is w

ell r

ecog

nise

d by

the

Emer

genc

y R

egul

atio

ns. T

he

Cen

tres w

here

, sur

rend

ees a

re to

be

reha

bilit

ated

are

refe

rred

to a

s “Pr

otec

tive

acco

mm

odat

ion

and

Reh

abili

tatio

n C

entre

s” in

the

Reg

ulat

ion

20C

[au

thor

s no

te: a

lso

see

Reg

ulat

ion

22(3

) in

the

Am

endm

ent t

o Em

erge

ncy

(Mis

c. P

rovi

sion

s an

d Po

wer

s) R

egul

atio

n, 1

2 Se

ptem

ber

2006

.], w

here

as c

entre

s fo

r Reh

abili

tatio

n of

the

deta

inee

s ar

e re

ferr

ed to

as

“You

th D

evel

opm

ent a

nd T

rain

ing

Cen

tres”

in th

e R

egul

atio

n 20

B.H

owev

er, i

n pr

actic

e w

e fi n

d on

e ce

ntre

func

tioni

ng o

n th

e lin

es o

f bot

h ty

pes.

This

is a

cle

ar v

iola

tion

of th

e pr

ovis

ions

mad

e un

der t

he

said

Reg

ulat

ions

.”, p

.198

. 25

7.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

2001

, p.1

99 (1

).

Asc

erta

inin

g Id

entit

y253

It is

reco

mm

ende

d th

at th

is R

egul

atio

n254 b

e am

ende

d an

d ap

prop

riate

pro

visi

on m

ade

to

enab

le th

e au

thor

ities

to m

ake

a pr

oper

scr

eeni

ng fo

r asc

erta

inin

g th

eir i

nvol

vem

ents

in

terr

oris

t act

iviti

es p

rior t

o th

e re

com

men

datio

n by

the

Com

mitt

ee. I

t is a

lso

reco

mm

ende

d th

at p

rope

r gui

delin

es b

e mad

e ava

ilabl

e to

the C

omm

ittee

. The

Reg

ulat

ion

shou

ld co

ntai

n m

anda

tory

pro

visi

ons t

hat t

he d

ecis

ion

be m

ade

with

in a

par

ticul

ar ti

me

limit.

255

Sepa

rate

Hou

sing

256

It is

rec

omm

ende

d th

at d

etai

nees

and

sur

rend

ees

be s

epar

atel

y ho

used

as

requ

ired

by

the

Reg

ulat

ions

. Thi

s w

ould

ena

ble

the

auth

oriti

es t

o pr

ovid

e se

curit

y ap

prop

riate

to

each

cat

egor

y fo

r th

e re

ason

that

bot

h ca

tego

ries

may

not

req

uire

the

sam

e de

gree

of

secu

rity.

257

159

Tim

e Pe

riod

258

It is

reco

mm

ende

d th

at w

hen

deta

inee

s or

sur

rend

ees

are

sent

to a

Reh

abili

tatio

n C

entre

th

ey sh

ould

be m

ade a

war

e of t

heir

perio

d of

stay

in th

e Cen

tre an

d th

eir d

ate o

f rel

ease

. It i

s de

sira

ble

that

whe

neve

r a d

etai

nee

or su

rren

dee

reac

hes a

par

ticul

ar le

vel o

f reh

abili

tatio

n fo

r the

Com

mis

sion

er-G

ener

al to

reco

mm

end

his o

r her

rele

ase

even

bef

ore

the

spec

ifi ed

da

te. S

uch

prov

isio

n w

ill c

erta

inly

hav

e a

telli

ng e

ffect

on

thei

r con

duct

dur

ing

thei

r sta

y in

the

Reh

abili

tatio

n C

entre

. In

deci

ding

the

perio

d of

reha

bilit

atio

n th

eir c

ivil

stat

us a

lso

shou

ld b

e ta

ken

into

con

side

ratio

n.25

9 C

hild

ren

Sepa

ratio

n fr

om A

dults

In t

he c

ase

of e

x-ch

ild c

omba

tant

s an

d ch

ildre

n, i

n or

der

to s

afe

guar

d th

eir

dign

ity,

confi

den

tialit

y an

d to

pro

vide

the

m w

ith s

peci

al c

are

and

atte

ntio

n, t

hey

shou

ld b

e se

para

ted

from

the

adul

ts in

reha

bilit

atio

n.26

0

Spec

ialis

ed S

taff

In a

dditi

on, t

he s

taff

wor

king

with

thes

e ch

ildre

n sh

ould

be

sele

cted

with

car

e an

d be

gi

ven

spec

ialis

ed tr

aini

ng.26

1

258.

“O

ne o

f the

mai

n gr

ieva

nces

of t

he in

mat

es a

t Bin

dunu

wew

a w

as th

e un

certa

inty

of t

heir

perio

d of

reha

bilit

atio

n. E

ven

the

wom

en su

rren

dees

at

"M

eth

Seva

na"

in G

ango

daw

ila a

re u

naw

are

of th

eir d

ate

of re

leas

e.”

259.

C

omm

issi

on R

epor

t, 20

01, p

.200

(3).

260.

“I

t mus

t be

born

e in

min

d th

at S

ri La

nka

is a

sig

nato

ry to

the

"Con

vent

ion

of th

e R

ight

s of

the

Chi

ld"

whi

ch la

ys d

own

that

"in

acc

orda

nce

with

thei

r obl

igat

ions

und

er In

tern

atio

nal H

uman

itaria

n La

ws

in a

rmed

con

fl ict

Sta

te s

houl

d ta

ke a

ll fe

asib

le m

easu

res

to e

nsur

e pr

otec

tion,

an

d ca

re o

f chi

ldre

n af

fect

ed b

y ar

med

con

fl ict

." C

omm

issi

on R

epor

t, 20

01, p

. 201

(6(a

)).

261.

C

omm

issi

on R

epor

t, 20

01, p

.201

(6(b

)).

160

Loc

atio

nIn

the

sele

ctio

n of

a s

ite f

or s

uch

Cen

tres

in f

utur

e, s

peci

ally

due

to th

e w

ar s

ituat

ion

in th

e co

untry

, the

aut

horit

ies

shou

ld n

ot o

nly

give

con

side

ratio

n to

the

avai

labi

lity

of

geog

raph

ical

loca

tiona

l fac

tors

but

als

o sh

ould

take

into

con

side

ratio

n th

e al

l im

porta

nt

hum

an fa

ctor

as

wel

l. It

is v

ital t

hat t

he C

entre

sho

uld

be a

ccep

tabl

e to

the

peop

le. T

his

mat

ter h

as b

een

cons

ider

ed in

det

ail i

n th

e ch

apte

r titl

ed "

Loca

tion

of th

e R

ehab

ilita

tion

Cen

tre".

In th

is c

onte

xt it

is a

dvis

able

to c

all f

or in

telli

genc

e re

ports

, sur

veys

, stu

dies

and

fe

asib

ility

repo

rts p

rior t

o th

e ta

king

of a

ny d

ecis

ion

in th

e se

lect

ion

of a

site

.262

On

18.0

9.20

01,

the

Com

mis

sion

vis

ited

"Met

h Se

vana

" R

ehab

ilita

tion

Cen

tre a

t G

ango

daw

ila e

stab

lishe

d fo

r th

e re

habi

litat

ion

of L

TTE

wom

en s

urre

ndee

s, fo

r th

e pu

rpos

e of

seei

ng w

heth

er th

e sa

fety

of t

he in

mat

es w

as a

dequ

ate

loca

tion

wis

e. W

ith th

e w

ar s

ituat

ion

still

on,

this

Cen

tre is

sev

erel

y ex

pose

d an

d vu

lner

able

. Hen

ce I

stro

ngly

re

com

men

d th

at th

is C

entre

be

mov

ed to

a p

lace

whi

ch w

ould

ens

ure

thei

r sa

fety

and

pr

otec

tion.

263

262.

C

omm

issi

on R

epor

t, 20

01, p

.202

(8).

263.

C

omm

issi

on R

epor

t, 20

01, p

.205

(14)

.

161

Secu

rity

In v

iew

of t

he e

xper

ienc

e Sr

i Lan

ka h

ad a

t Bin

dunu

wew

a, a

wel

l tho

ught

out

per

imet

er

secu

rity

is re

quire

d to

pre

vent

the

recu

rren

ce o

f any

"br

eak

in"

situ

atio

ns o

r "br

eak

out"

sit

uatio

ns in

a Re

habi

litat

ion C

entre

. The

refo

re, i

t is r

ecom

men

ded t

hat t

he pe

rimet

er se

curit

y m

echa

nism

ado

pted

in 1

971

at R

ehab

ilita

tion

Cent

res f

or JV

P su

rrend

ees b

e ad

opte

d in

the

Cent

re w

here

LTT

E de

tain

ees a

nd su

rrend

ees a

re to

be h

ouse

d. N

amel

y,to

fi x

doub

le b

arbe

d w

ire fe

nces

5 to

6 fe

et a

part

with

the

mid

dle

sect

ion

secu

red

with

cris

s-cr

osse

d ba

rbed

wire

at

gro

und

leve

l. Pe

rimet

er fe

nces

shou

ld b

e gua

rded

from

out

side a

t cho

sen

poin

ts by

arm

ed

pers

onne

l. Th

ey s

houl

d ha

ve c

lear

instr

uctio

ns n

ot to

allo

w a

ny o

utsid

er to

get

nea

r th

e fe

nce.

Inm

ates

of t

he c

amp

shou

ld h

ave

clea

r ins

truct

ions

that

they

shou

ld n

ot g

et c

lose

to

the

inne

r fen

ce. T

he G

ate

Room

shou

ld b

e es

tabl

ished

to c

ontro

l all

entra

nces

and

exi

ts to

th

e Ca

mp.

It sh

ould

be

loca

ted

at a

suita

ble

poin

t on

the

perim

eter

fenc

e.26

4 It

is de

sira

ble t

hat a

polic

e pos

t be e

stab

lishe

d in t

he im

med

iate

vici

nity

of th

e Reh

abili

tatio

n C

amp

but n

ot in

side

the

cam

p. It

sho

uld

be a

poi

nt fr

om w

here

bot

h th

e R

ehab

ilita

tion

Cen

tre it

self

and

the

outs

ide

coul

d be

obs

erve

d. It

is a

dvis

able

to h

ave

a st

aff c

onsi

stin

g of

at

leas

t an

OIC

, in

the

rank

of S

ub-I

nspe

ctor

, 2 P

olic

e Se

rgea

nts a

nd 2

4 Po

lice

Con

stab

les

with

ade

quat

e tra

nspo

rt, c

omm

unic

atio

n an

d al

lied

faci

litie

s. Th

e O

IC a

nd t

he o

ther

m

en s

houl

d be

han

d-pi

cked

and

be

give

n su

ffi ci

ent t

rain

ing

and

inst

ruct

ions

bef

ore

they

ar

e po

sted

. Sta

ndin

g or

ders

and

con

tinge

ncy

plan

s sp

ellin

g ou

t wha

t is

to b

e do

ne in

an

emer

genc

y sh

ould

be

esta

blis

hed

for t

he g

uida

nce

of th

e m

en a

ttach

ed to

the

polic

e po

st.

Reg

ular

vis

its b

y su

perv

isor

y of

fi cer

s to

the

polic

e po

st m

ust b

e m

ade

man

dato

ry, f

or

the

reas

on th

at it

wou

ld m

ake

it po

ssib

le fo

r any

dev

elop

men

ts w

ithin

the

Reh

abili

tatio

n C

entre

or o

utsi

de b

e co

mm

unic

ated

to th

e au

thor

ities

con

cern

ed fo

r im

med

iate

act

ion.

265

264.

C

omm

issi

on R

epor

t, 20

01, p

p.20

2-20

3 (1

0) “

In th

is re

gard

I ha

ve ta

ken

into

con

side

ratio

n th

e vi

ews e

xpre

ssed

by

a Se

nior

Dep

uty

Insp

ecto

r-G

ener

al o

f Pol

ice

and

a fo

rmer

Com

mis

sion

er-G

ener

al o

f Pris

ons.

I als

o to

ok in

to c

onsi

dera

tion

the

curr

ent t

hink

ing

that

the

inm

ates

shou

ld

not g

et th

e fe

elin

g th

at th

ey a

re li

ving

in a

n at

mos

pher

e of

impr

ison

men

t.” C

omm

issi

on R

epor

t, 20

01, p

.203

(10)

.26

5.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

2001

, p.2

03 (1

1).

162

I re

com

men

d th

at th

e su

rren

dees

and

det

aine

es s

elec

ted

for

reha

bilit

atio

n be

hou

sed

in

build

ings

mad

e of

per

man

ent

stru

ctur

es, s

o th

at t

he i

nmat

es c

ould

liv

e w

ith p

eace

of

min

d.26

6 I a

lso

emph

asis

e th

e ne

ed to

hav

e a

mec

hani

sm to

gat

her i

nfor

mat

ion

in a

nd a

roun

d th

e ce

ntre

and

to c

arry

out

con

tinuo

us su

rvei

llanc

e so

that

if a

ny a

ttem

pts a

re m

ade

to d

isru

pt

the

Inst

itutio

n, p

rior k

now

ledg

e w

ill b

e av

aila

ble

and

effe

ctiv

e m

easu

res

coul

d be

take

n by

the

auth

oriti

es to

avo

id a

ny su

ch c

alam

ity.26

7 So

cial

Inte

grat

ion

It is

des

irabl

e to

hav

e a

wel

l tho

ught

out

pla

n fo

r fol

low

up

actio

n af

ter t

heir

rele

ase

with

su

ppor

t at c

omm

unity

leve

l to

furth

er re

inte

grat

ion

with

thei

r fam

ilies

and

com

mun

ity to

pr

even

t the

m b

eing

re-r

ecru

ited.

268

AC

TOR

SSt

aff

It is

fur

ther

rec

omm

ende

d th

at t

he s

taff

sele

ctio

n cr

iteria

sho

uld

incl

ude

not

only

kn

owle

dge

and

skill

s in

thei

r par

ticul

ar fi

elds

but

als

o at

titud

es. T

hey

shou

ld b

e pe

ople

w

ho h

ave m

oder

ate v

iew

s on

the c

ount

ry's

ethn

ic cr

isis

and

are w

illin

g to

trea

t the

inm

ates

as

mis

guid

ed y

outh

who

cou

ld b

e re

habi

litat

ed a

nd re

inte

grat

ed to

soci

ety.

269

266.

‘W

alls

of t

he b

uild

ings

that

hou

sed

inm

ates

at B

indu

nuw

ewa

wer

e m

ade

of z

inc

shee

ts w

hich

eas

ily g

ave

into

the

mob

atta

ck fr

om o

utsi

de.

Bec

ause

the

zinc

shee

ts a

re in

fl am

mab

le th

e m

ob w

as a

ble

to se

t fi re

to th

e bu

ildin

gs e

asily

. Had

ther

e be

en w

alls

of a

per

man

ent n

atur

e th

e nu

mbe

r of c

asua

lties

and

dam

age

caus

ed to

the

build

ings

wou

ld h

ave

been

min

imis

ed.’

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

2001

, p.2

04 (1

2).

267.

C

omm

issi

on R

epor

t, 20

01, p

.202

(9).

268.

C

omm

issi

on R

epor

t, 20

01, p

.201

(5).

269.

C

omm

issi

on R

epor

t, 20

01, p

.201

(7).

163

Non

-gov

ernm

enta

l O

rgan

isat

ions

Evid

ence

als

o re

veal

ed th

at th

ere

are

non-

gove

rnm

enta

l org

anis

atio

ns w

hose

ass

ista

nce

coul

d be

mad

e av

aila

ble

to f

acili

tate

the

wel

fare

of

the

inm

ates

dur

ing

the

perio

d of

th

eir

stay

at

a re

habi

litat

ion

cent

re a

nd a

s w

ell

as t

he p

ost

reha

bilit

atio

n pe

riod.

The

re

pres

enta

tives

of t

he U

NIC

EF (U

nite

d N

atio

ns C

hild

ren’

s Fun

d), i

n th

e di

scus

sion

s the

y ha

d w

ith m

e, e

xpre

ssed

thei

r will

ingn

ess

to p

rovi

de e

xper

tise

if ne

cess

ary.

I re

com

men

d th

at th

ese

aven

ues b

e ex

plor

ed a

nd m

ade

use

of in

the

futu

re.27

0

270.

C

omm

issi

on R

epor

t, 20

01, p

.204

(13)

.

164

RE

POR

T O

F T

HE

PR

ESI

DE

NT

IAL

TR

UT

H

CO

MM

ISSI

ON

O

N

ET

HN

IC

VIO

LE

NC

E(1

981

- 198

4), 2

002

CAT

EG

OR

YO

F R

EC

RE

CO

MM

EN

DAT

ION

(A

S ST

ATE

D IN

RE

POR

T)

INV

EST

IGAT

ION

SSp

ecia

l In

vest

igat

ive

Uni

tA

n In

vest

igat

ion

Div

isio

n of

offi

cers

with

pol

ice

pow

ers

func

tioni

ng e

ntire

ly u

nder

the

dire

ctio

n of

the

Hum

an R

ight

s Com

mis

sion

to a

ppre

hend

and

pro

secu

te p

erso

ns h

oldi

ng

publ

ic o

ffi ce

act

ing

in v

iola

tion

of fu

ndam

enta

l rig

hts w

ith p

artic

ular

refe

renc

e to

eth

nic

rela

ted

disc

rimin

atio

n be

est

ablis

hed

with

ade

quat

e le

gal p

ower

s.271

The H

uman

Rig

hts C

omm

issi

on, in

all c

ases

on it

s ow

n or u

pon c

ompl

aint

s of u

nsat

isfa

ctor

y in

vest

igat

ions

by

Polic

e re

latin

g to

eth

nic

viol

atio

ns o

r iss

ues m

ust t

ake

over

and

con

duct

in

vest

igat

ions

thro

ugh

its In

vest

igat

ions

Div

isio

n an

d en

sure

app

ropr

iate

act

ion.

272

271.

C

omm

issi

on R

epor

t, 20

02, p

.93

– 28

8(9)

.27

2.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

2002

, p.9

4 –

288(

10).

165

LE

GA

L PR

OC

EE

DIN

GS

Pros

ecut

ions

Th

e pe

rpet

rato

rs o

f et

hnic

vio

lenc

e w

heth

er t

hey

be m

embe

rs o

f th

e pu

blic

[si

c] t

he

polic

e, th

e arm

ed fo

rces

or t

he p

ublic

serv

ice b

e pro

secu

ted

whe

neve

r any

ethn

ic v

iole

nce

occu

rs in

the f

utur

e. T

he g

over

nmen

t mus

t on

the o

ccur

renc

e of a

ny et

hnic

vio

lenc

e in

the

futu

re fo

rthw

ith a

ppoi

nt a

hig

h le

vel N

atio

nal C

omm

ittee

refl e

ctin

g as

far a

s pos

sibl

e an

eq

uiva

lent

num

ber o

f per

sons

of a

ll et

hnic

gro

ups

and

com

pris

ing

the

atto

rney

-Gen

eral

, In

spec

tor G

ener

al o

f Pol

ice

Serv

ice

Com

man

ders

, Sec

reta

ries t

o th

e C

hairm

an o

f Hum

an

Rig

hts

Com

mis

sion

, the

Civ

il So

ciet

y an

d th

e M

edia

cha

rged

with

the

task

of e

nsur

ing

imm

edia

te ac

tion

on al

l eth

nic r

elat

ed v

iole

nce.

The

Nat

iona

l Com

mitt

ee m

ust e

nsur

e tha

t th

ere

is n

o co

ver-u

p of

pro

secu

tions

.273

RE

LIE

F/

RE

CO

NC

ILIA

TIO

NC

ompe

nsat

ion

The

Gov

ernm

ent m

ust p

ay fu

ll co

mpe

nsat

ion

to th

e vi

ctim

s (o

r the

ir de

pend

ents

) on

the

basi

s of

the

Com

mis

sion

’s R

ecom

men

datio

ns b

y pu

blic

ly r

ecog

nizi

ng th

e tra

uma

and

suffe

rings

the

vict

ims

had

to e

ndur

e an

d as

a w

arni

ng to

the

perp

etra

tors

that

eco

nom

ic

dest

ruct

ion

will

be

fully

com

pens

ated

: an

d st

rong

ly r

ecom

men

d th

at t

he g

over

nmen

t in

clud

es l

egal

int

eres

t on

the

det

erm

ined

com

pens

atio

n as

fro

m 1

983

till

paym

ent

in

full.

274

273.

C

omm

issi

on R

epor

t, 20

02, p

.94

– 28

8(11

).27

4.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

2002

, p.9

3 –

288(

8).

166

Nat

iona

l Uni

tyTh

e Pr

esid

ent

and

the

Prim

e M

inis

ter

mus

t gi

ve l

eade

rshi

p to

a n

ew e

ra o

f et

hnic

re

conc

iliat

ion

and

natio

nal u

nity

.275

The

supp

ort a

nd p

artic

ipat

ion

of th

e pe

ople

of t

he c

ount

ry in

the

tow

ns a

nd v

illag

es m

ust

be o

btai

ned

and

sust

aine

d by

the

coun

try’s

lead

ers f

or th

e ab

ove

purp

ose.

276

Legi

slat

ion

sim

ilar t

o th

e So

uth

Afr

ican

, Pro

mot

ion

of N

atio

nal U

nity

and

Rec

onci

liatio

n A

ct N

o. 3

2 of

199

5 be

ena

cted

to e

stab

lish

the

lega

l fra

mew

ork

for s

usta

inin

g th

e pr

oces

s of

eth

nic

reco

ncili

atio

n an

d to

pro

vide

for

the

elim

inat

ion

of a

ll fo

rms

of r

acis

m a

nd

ethn

ic re

late

d di

scrim

inat

ions

.277

The

lead

ersh

ip, s

uppo

rt an

d co

oper

atio

n of

relig

ious

lead

ers,

the

civi

l soc

iety

, the

med

ia,

the

scho

ols

the

polic

e an

d th

e ar

med

forc

es b

e en

sure

d in

the

proc

ess

of re

conc

iliat

ion

and

natio

nal u

nity

.278

The

natio

nal

unity

and

eth

nic

amity

be

fost

ered

with

due

reg

ard

and

reco

gniti

on f

or

plur

alis

m a

nd d

iver

sity

.279

Trut

h C

omm

issi

ons

be a

ppoi

nted

man

datin

g to

cov

er e

thni

c vi

olen

ce d

urin

g th

e po

st-

1948

per

iod

and

to c

ompe

nsat

e al

l vic

tims

of e

thni

c vi

olen

ce a

nd to

ach

ieve

nat

iona

l un

ity a

nd e

thni

c re

conc

iliat

ion.

280

275.

C

omm

issi

on R

epor

t, 20

02, p

.93

– 28

8(1)

.27

6.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

2002

, p.9

3 –

288(

2).

277.

C

omm

issi

on R

epor

t, 20

02, p

.93

– 28

8(3)

.27

8.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

2002

, p.9

3 –

288(

4).

279.

C

omm

issi

on R

epor

t, 20

02, p

.93

– 28

8(5)

.28

0.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

2002

, p.9

4 –

288(

12).

167

AC

TOR

SVe

ttin

gTh

e es

tabl

ishm

ent o

f jus

t and

fair

gove

rnan

ce th

at w

ill e

limin

ate

all f

orm

s of r

acis

m a

nd

disc

rimin

atio

n be

pro

mot

ed w

ith p

erpe

trato

rs o

f di

scrim

inat

ion

losi

ng th

e rig

ht to

hol

d an

y pu

blic

offi

ce fo

r spe

cifi e

d pe

riods

of t

ime.

281

Med

iaTh

e m

edia

be

mad

e to

reco

gniz

e th

at s

ectio

ns fr

om a

mon

gst t

hem

did

con

tribu

te to

the

sust

enan

ce o

f et

hnic

mis

givi

ngs

and

that

the

y ha

ve a

maj

or r

espo

nsib

ility

to

supp

ort

and

prom

ote

natio

nal u

nity

and

eth

nic

reco

ncili

atio

n w

ith d

ue re

gard

for p

lura

lism

and

di

vers

ity [s

ic] a

dver

tisin

g on

med

ia w

hich

fail

to p

rom

ote

ethn

ic re

conc

iliat

ion

mus

t be

disc

oura

ged

by th

e st

ate

as w

ell a

s the

priv

ate

sect

or.28

2

281.

C

omm

issi

on R

epor

t, 20

02, p

.93

– 28

8(6)

.28

2.

Com

mis

sion

Rep

ort,

2002

, p.9

3 –

288(

7).

168

PART 4

COMPARATIVE EXPERIENCES & CONCLUSIONS

Sri Lanka, as a nation, has a history of resorting to Commissions of Inquiry as a primary tool for reconciliation in instances of national trauma and human rights abuses. As is evident from the preceding analysis, these attempts have not always met with success. In fact, the work of each Commission of Inquiry has been handicapped by several issues, ranging from limited mandates to fi nancial constraints.283

Experimenting with Commissions of Inquiry is not novel to Sri Lanka; the experiences globally of Commissions of Inquiry established to investigate gross human rights abuses reveals similar handicaps. For example, the fi rst Latin American truth commission established in 1982-1984 by the then President of Bolivia, President Hernan Siles Zulazo to investigate disappearances between 1967 and 1982 was riddled with limitations. It is reported that the investigations were never concluded conclusively due to a limited mandate, and restricted resources from the Bolivian government led to its early disbandment284. The composition of the Commission itself however recommends itself to other countries adopting similar means to investigate human rights abuses - the Commission was composed of a cross section of society in order to ensure representative investigations.

283. See for example Pinto-Jayawardena, January 2010, supra where it is observed that governments have used commissions of inquiry (COI’s) to ‘expose the abuses of a previous political regime for partisan reasons or, conversely, when they have been appointed to inquire into abuses committed during that same administration, to escape accountability’. This is a commonly known and uncontroversial characteristic of COI’s in Sri Lanka.

284. Bolivia- Comisión Nacional de Investigación de Desaparecidos - National Commission of Inquiry into Disappearances, Justice in Perspective, The Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation, available at http://www.justiceinperspective.org.za/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=75&Itemid=121, hereinafter referred to as CSVR.

169

The Argentinean Comisión Nacional para la Desaparición de Personas - National Commission on the Disappearances of Persons (CONADEP) is another example of a commission of inquiry but with a more encouraging result. Also known as 'The Sábato Commission' of Argentina, this Commission of Inquiry documented almost nine thousand cases of disappearances and identifi ed three hundred and sixty fi ve torture and detention camps. As of January 2008, fi ve of nine Juntas brought to trial were found guilty. However further prosecutions have proved prohibitive due to laws which provide immunity to military offi cers acting under orders. In a disturbingly similar vein, the Emergency Regulations of Sri Lanka285 provides an immunity clause for acts carried out by security personnel under the regulations, or any order given under the regulations. No prosecution of either civil or criminal nature can be instituted against such acts of security personnel without the written consent of the Attorney General286.

The recommendations of the Sabato Commission included the passing of laws to enable reparations. $3 billion was set aside for this task though actual distribution proved complex due to diffi culties in proving detention without trial during the period. The Commission was established in 1983 and its work was concluded within nine months287. While its mandate was to collect and document evidence on the disappearances which took place from 1976 to 1983 under the rule of the Junta, its success may be attributable to the fact that it was given access to all government facilities and the Security Forces were ordered to co-operate with the Commission. The political will to at least partially implement the recommendations of the Commission forcibly puts in mind the importance of the support of the regime in power in successful reconciliation. This particular Commission was

285. Emergency Regulations, Reg. 73 [ER 2005].286. id.287. Argentina- National Commission on the Disappearance of Persons, CSVR, ibid n. 283,

available at http://www.justiceinperspective.org.za/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=74&Itemid=111.

170

made up of thirteen commissioners and sixty additional staff. The report given to the President by the Commission included a list of the military staff involved in the human rights abuses investigated under its mandate288.

The Sri Lankan Commissions on Disappearances were faced with several issues in terms of procuring records and information maintained during the period under investigation. One of the recommendations of the All Island Commission on Disappearances for example was that police records be handed over to the Commission of Inquiry, and that the Criminal Investigation Unit be responsible for the safety of such information books and records289. The support system provided to the Argentinean Sabato Commission can be directly linked with its success in terms of fulfi lling its mandate.

The Guatemalan Comisión para el Esclaracimiento Histórico, Commission for Historical Clarifi cation (CHC) had several points of similarity with some of the Sri Lankan Commissions of Inquiry. Established by law to examine human rights abuses during the armed confl ict, the mandate of the Commission fell short of mandating it to judge those individuals who were credibly implicated.290 The recommendations made by the Commission included formal recognition and apology by the President, a day of remembrance and erection of monuments in memory of the war victims, investigations into the Disappearances and exhumation programs. The 1994/1998 Commissions on Disappearances in Sri Lanka have made similar recommendations, particularly with regard to investigations on

288. The Sri Lankan Disappearances Commissions have also provided lists of individuals against whom credible evidence was available before the Commission. See for example the Northern Final Report, p.62.

289. All Island Final, p. 83.290. Guatemala- Comisión para el Esclaracimiento Histórico, CSVR, ibid n. 283, available at

http://www.justiceinperspective.org.za/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=67&Itemid=142.

171

the disappeared291 and erection of monuments in memory of the disappeared and the families of the disappeared.292

In terms of implementation of the recommendations of the CHC, a capacity building project was initiated by the International Centre for Transitional Justice on the request of the government of Guatemala.293 Its mandate was to review and reform the justice system in order to increase the capacity of the system to prosecute perpetrators. This program was completed in 2004. However on the downside, when the UN Working Group on Disappearances visited Guatemala on the request of the Government in 2006, there were three thousand one hundred and fi fty three pending cases of which two thousand eight hundred and ninety six were pending as of January 2008. The Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation reports that as of that date there were no prosecutions of those responsible for the disappearances in Guatemala, with an estimated forty fi ve thousand persons having disappeared during the armed confl ict294. This type of impunity is refl ected in the failure by successive Governments in Sri Lanka to successfully bring to book perpetrators who have been credibly implicated and publicly named by successive Commissions of Inquiry.

On a more positive note, the Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians established by the United States Congressional Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs in 1980 was relatively successful in achieving successful implementation of its recommendations. Its mandate was to investigate the relocation of 110,000 American citizens between 1942 and 1945. It found that there was no military or security reason for such relocation and exclusion of

291. All Island Final, p. 15.292. All Island Final, p. 86.293. CSVR, Guetamala, ibid n. 288. 294. CSVR, Guatemala, ibid n. 288.

172

Japanese Americans during the war, and that the treatment of Alaskan Aleuts who were relocated to isolated camps under US control was inhumane. The US government acknowledged the injustices caused and passed the Civil Liberties Act in 1988. $1.2 Billion was distributed in addition to formal apology.

South Africa is often held out to be the classic example of a country where an experiment of a truth and reconciliation commission had, in fact, succeeded. The formation of the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) was preceded by a long process of discussion and consultation by all political parties in South Africa in the post apartheid period. This was borne out by its detailed and carefully thought out composition. The TRC was, in fact, made up of three committees on Human Rights Violations, on Amnesty and on Reparation and Rehabilitation which had specifi c tasks allotted to them. The Committee on Human Rights Violations was responsible for collecting the stories of victims while the Committee of Amnesty heard evidence on political crimes committed during this period and considered whether amnesty could be granted there was a full confession by the perpetrator. Amnesty meant that they would be pardoned for the crime that they had committed and if they were on trial, the trial would be stopped. The Committee on Reparation and Rehabilitation investigated ways to help people who had suffered. Besides this, it was mandated to recommend the manner in which a culture of human rights could be built in the police force, the prisons and other government institutions. In addition, the TRC itself had an independent investigation unit, made up of lawyers, members of the police force and international experts, which were given powers to question persons and to search and seize documents.

This experiment in national healing was accompanied by an emphasis on its non political objectives. The Commission was established by an Act of Parliament and the Commissioners were individuals whose appointments were agreed upon by all the political parties. Before and during the sittings of the TRC, the South African people were made

173

aware through public meetings, posters, leafl ets and the media, of the purpose of the TRC which was to put together a complete picture of all the serious human rights violations that took place against South Africans between March 1960 and December 1993. It began its work in December 1995 and was mandated to run until December 1997.

Then again, the experiences of the Greensboro Truth Commission of the USA show how community initiatives can also pave the way to successful investigation and at times implementation, of reparation and reconciliation programs. The Greensboro Commission was established in June 2004 as a civil society initiative in North America to investigate racial killings by the Ku Klux Klan and the American Nazi Party in 1979. The Commission undertook documentary research and also conducted 3 two-day public hearings, conducted over two hundred interviews and examined offi cial records. The Commission presented its report to the Greensboro community in 2006, naming those responsible and recommending institutional reforms, formal apologies, restitution methods and a more representative method of selecting jurors. The responsibility of implementing these recommendations has been passed onto more than fi fty civic, religious and community groups295.

See also for example the Guatemalan mechanism for reconciliation called Recovery of the Historic Memory (REMHI)296. Established in 1995 and functioning to date, REMHI was established by the Catholic Church. Its mandate was to seek reconciliation and healing as opposed to justice as perceived in the criminal justice sense. Its structure is inspiring; four phases consisting of sensitisation, compilation, dissemination and analysis. Almost seven thousand interviews with

295. United States of America- The Greensboro Truth Commission, CSVR ibid n. 283 available at http://www.justiceinperspective.org.za/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=73&Itemid=152

296. Guatemala- Recovery of the Historic Memory (REMHI), CSVR ibidn. n. 283, available at http://www.justiceinperspective.org.za/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=66&Itemid=141

174

victims were conducted on the thirty six year old civil war which displaced one million persons and took the lives of two hundred thousand. Two days after the publication of the fi nal report, Bishop Gerardi, leader of the REMHI was murdered. Three high ranking military offi cers and the Bishop’s personal assistant were convicted for the murder.

One of the most controversial Commissions of Inquiry, during the proceedings of which, the deaths of the one judge, two defence lawyers and fi ve other court offi cials occurred, was the Iraq Special Tribunal (since 2005, the Iraqi Higher Criminal Court (IHCC). Established in December 2003 by law by the Iraqi Governing Council, the IHCC was mandated to investigate war crimes, genocide and crimes againt humanity committed since 1968. The IHCC tried and convicted former President of Iraq, Saddam Hussein, who was later executed. The proceedings were criticized by international human rights monitors including Human Rights Watch. Accusations relating to abuse of due process included the application of a lower evidence threshold for conviction than ‘beyond reasonable doubt.’297.

Some of these experiences are instructive in terms of what reconciliation mechanisms can achieve if properly constituted and effectively executed. However, these histories also illustrate the dangers of summary justice meted out by special tribunals and the furtherance of the trauma of victims that such defective processes of accountability can contribute to.

As much as the imperatives of restorative justice should underlie our thinking in the post war period, Sri Lanka needs to bring about reforms to the criminal justice system, establish a good witness protection system, ensure effective prosecutions of perpetrators of human rights abuses and encourage the funtioning of a sensitive and effective judicial and legal system.

These should remain priorities for this country and the people.

297. Iraq- the Iraqi Higher Criminal Court, CSVR ibid n. 283, available at http://www.justiceinperspective.org.za/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=61&Itemid=114

175

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

Cases

Aloeboetoe et al v Suriname Judgment of September 10, 1993,Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. (Ser. C) No. 15 ...............................................................

Lama Hewage Lal, Rani Fernando and Others v. OIC Seeduwa [2005] 1Sri LR, 140 .......................................................................................................

Leeda Violet and Others v. Vidanapathirana, OIC Police Station,Dickwella and Others, [1994] 1 Sri LR, 377 ...................................................

Martin Appuhamy v. Sub Inspector of Jaffna 64 NLR 43 ................................

Murin Fernando v. Sugathaasa , [1997] 1 Sri LR, 281 ..................................

Nallaratnam Sinharasa v. Attorney General and Others,S.C. SpL (LA) No. 182/99, SCM15.09.2006 .....................................................

Sasanasiritissa Thera and Others v. de Silva and Others [1989] 2Sri LR, 356 .......................................................................................................

Shantha Pathirana v. D.I.G. (Personnel & Training) and others, C.A. Writ Application No. 1123/2002, CA. Minutes 09-10-2006 ................................

Sriyani Silva v. Iddamalgoda [2003] 2 Sri LR, 63 ...........................................

The Yamashita Trial, IV WCR 35 .....................................................................

Wewelage Rani Fernando No.700/2002, SC Minutes 26/07/2004 ...................

Wijesuriya v. the State [1973] 77 NLR, 25 .......................................................

Statutes

Code of Criminal Procedure Act, No 15 of 1979 (as amended) .................

Convention Against Torture Act No. 22 of 1994 .............................................

Evidence Ordinance No. 14 of 1895 (as amended) .........................................

176

Human Rights Commission Act No. 21 of 1996 .............................................

Indemnity Act No. 20 of 1982, (as amended) ..................................................

Judicature Act No.2 of 1978 (as amended) .....................................................

Prevention of Terrorism Act No. 48 of 1979 (as amended) ............................

Prisons Ordinance No. 16 of 1877, (as amended) ...........................................

Public Security Ordinance No.25 of 1947 (as amended) .................................

Registration Of Deaths (Temporary Provisions)Act No 17 of 2005 ............................................................................................

Reports

Amnesty International, “Time for Truth and Justice: Observations and recommendations regarding the commissions investigating past human rights violations”

(AI Index: ASA 37/04/95, April 1995). ....................................................

Amnesty International, Sri Lanka: “Highest Number of “Disappearances” Reported since 1990”,

(AI Index: ASA 37/10/97, 11 April 1997) .................................................

Amnesty International: “Twenty Years of Make Believe – Sri Lanka’s Presidential Commissions of Inquiry”

(AI Index: ASA 37/05/2009, June 2009) ........................................passim

Atapattu S., “Integrity of the Person”, Sri Lanka State of Human Rights 1998 (Law & Society Trust, 1999) ............................................................

Biased Conclusions Irk HRC, Daily News, February 2008 .............................

Briefi ng paper; Sri Lanka’s Emergency Laws, International Commission of Jurists, May 2009 .......................................................................................

Bulankulame, Indika, “The Debates on Truth Commissions: A Retrospective Healing Process?”, Law & Society Trust, 2004 ........................................

177

Comisión Nacional de Investigación de Desaparecidos - National Commission of Inquiry into Disappearances, Justice in Perspective, The Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation, available at http://www.justiceinperspective.org.za/index.php?option=com_content&task=view

&id=75&Itemid=121 .................................................................................

Committee to Inquire into disappeared and missing persons, Daily News, 29 October 2007, available at <http://www.dailynews.lk/2007/10/29/fea20.

asp> ............................................................................................................

Directions issued by Her Excellency the President, Commander-in-Charge of the Armed Forces and Minister of Defence, July 21, 1997 .......................

Directions issued by His Excellency the President, Commander-in-Charge of the Armed Forces and Minister of Defence, 2006

http://www.nationalsecurity.lk/fullnews.php?id=5473 ..............................

Directions issued by His Excellency the President, Commander-in-Charge of the Armed Forces and Minister of Defence, 2006. http://www.nationalsecurity.lk/fullnews.php?id=5473. Directive issued 7th July 2006 and re circulated by Secretary,

Ministry of Defence in April 2007 .............................................................

Final statement of the International Independent Group of Eminent Persons (IIGEP), 15 April 2008, Ref: IIGEP-PS-006-2006, Colombo, available at http://www.ruleofl awsrilanka.org/resources/IIGEPnbspSTM.pdf

Gomez, Shyamala, “Post Tsunami Housing Rights”, Sri Lanka State of Human Rights 2007, Law & Society Trust ............................................

Hoole, Rajan, “The Arrogance of Power - Myth, Decadence and Murder”, University Teachers for Human Rights, Jaffna, Colombo, Sri Lanka,

2001............................................................................................................

Human Rights Watch World Report, 1993, http://www.hrw.org/reports/1993 WR93/Asw-10.htm ....................................................................................

Human Rights Watch, Recurring Nightmare: State Responsibility for "Disappearances" and Abductions in Sri Lanka, 6 March 2008, Volume 20, No. 2(C), available at: http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/docid/47d0fab62

html [accessed 11 November 2009] ...........................................................

178

Justice in Perspective, The Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation, available at http://www.justiceinperspective.org.za ...................................

Keenan, Alan, “Exorcizing Ghosts and Disappearing Reports: Building the Political and Social Conditions for Implementing the Recommendations of the Report of the All-Island Commission of Inquiry into Involuntary Removal and Disappearance of Certain Persons,” Presentation to the Law & Society Trust, Colombo, Sri Lanka, 14 August 2002 ........................

Keenan, Alan, “Making Sense of Bindunuwewa – From Massacre to Acquittals,” in LST Review, Vol. 15 Issue 2, 12 June 2005 ......................

Law &Society Trust, unpublished concept paper, Presidential Commissions of Inquiry, Civil and Political Programme of LST, August 2007 .........

Ministry of Child Development and Women’s Empowerment Progress Report 2006............................................................................................................

Nissan E., “Impunity”, Sri Lanka State of Human Rights 1994 (Law & Society Trust, 1995) ...................................................................................

Nissan E., “Integrity of the Person”, Sri Lanka State of Human Rights 1997 (Law & Society Trust,1998) ......................................................................

Organization of Parents and Family Members of the Disappeared, et. al, A Concise Report about Enforced Disappearances in Sri Lanka submitted to the United Nations Human Rights Commission through the 75th Session of the United Nations Working Group on Enforced Disappearances

(2005) .........................................................................................................

Perera, Sasanka, “Public Space and Monuments: Politics of Sanctioned and Contested Memory”, South Asia Journal of Culture, Vol. 1, 2007, available at http://colomboinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/sasanka

perera-essay-sajc-vol-1-2007.pdf ...............................................................

Pieris, Kamalika, “Lands in Medieval Sri Lanka”, The Island (newspaper), available at http://www.island.lk/2008/12/13/satmag3.html, accessed on

14/9/2009 ...................................................................................................

Pinto-Jayawardena, Kishali, “Sri Lanka’s National Human Rights Commission- One Step Forward, Two Steps Back…,” FORUM ASIA Report to the Asia

179

Pacifi c Forum of National Human Rights Institutions, FORUM ASIA, Bangkok, 2006 ...........................................................................................

Pinto-Jayawardena, Kishali “The Rule of Law in Decline, Study on Prevalence, Determinants and Causes of Torture and other Forms of Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment in Sri Lanka”, The Rehabilitation and Research Centre for Torture Victims (RCT), May 2009, Denmark .................................................................................................

Pinto-Jayawardena, Kishali, “Still Seeking Justice in Sri Lanka; Rule of Law, the Criminal Justice System and Commissions of Inquiry since 1977,” International Commission of Jurists, January 2010.

Pinto-Jayawardena, Kishali, “Thoughts on the drowning of one man”, Sunday Times, 8th November 2009, p. 12 .............................................

Rajasingham, K.T. “Sri Lanka the Untold Story”, http://www.atimes.com ind-pak/Cl01Df05.html ..............................................................................

Response of the Government of Sri Lanka to the conclusions and recommendations of the Committee Against Torture after consideration of the second periodic report at its 671 and 674 meeting held on 10th and 11th November 2005, Consideration of Reports Submitted by States Parties under Article 19 of the Convention, Committee against Torture,

CAT/C/LKA/CO/2/Add. 1, 20 February 2007 ...........................................

Skanthakumar, B., “Parallel Report on the Performance and Effectiveness of the National Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka in 2008”, Law & Society Trust, 03 August 2009, available at ...........................................

SRI LANKA: Commemorating Day of the Disappeared in Sri Lanka, By Dushiyanthini Kanagasabapathipillai, Asian Human Rights Commission, 31 October 2006 available at http://www.ahrchk.net/ahrc-in-news

mainfi le.php/2006ahrcinnews/923/ ............................................................

Sri Lanka: The Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka Has Stopped Investigations into 2000 Disappearance Cases to Avoid Having to Pay Government Compensation to the Victims, Statement by the Asian

Human Rights Commission, AS-169-2006, July 18, 2006. .......................

TamilNet, “Devanesan Nesiah appointed to inquire Jaffna disappearances,” http://www.tamilnet.com, November 30, 2002. ........................................

180

TamilNet, “MoD eyewash over Jaffna disappearances,” http://www.tamilnet com, October 04, 1997 ...............................................................................

United Nations Committee against Torture, Second Periodic Report, CAT C/48/Add.2, 06/08/2004.............................................................................

University Teachers for Human Rights (Jaffna), “Scripting the Welikada Massacre and the Fate of Two Dissidents”, Supplement to Special Report No. 25, 31 May 2007 ............................................................................

University Teachers for Human Rights (Jaffna), “The Debasement of Law and of Humanity and the Drift Towards Total War”, 28 August 1991. http:/www.uthr.org/Reports/Report8/chapter3.htm ...............................

Visit of Louise Arbour: HRCSL clarifi es, Daily News, 05 November 2007, available at <http://www.dailynews.lk/2007/11/05/fea20.asp> .................

Vittachi, Tarzi, “Emergency ’58”, London: Andre Deutsch, 1958 ...................

Wijedasa, Namini, “No Investigations Without Special Directions from Government” – HRC dumps 2,000 Uninquired Complaints, Sunday Island, July 16, 2006 ..............................................................................

Regulations

Emergency (Miscellaneous Provisions and Powers) Regulation No 1 of 2005 as contained in Gazette No 1405/14 ..........................................................

Emergency (Prevention and Prohibition of Terrorism and Specifi ed Terrorist Activities) Regulation No 7 of 2006 as contained in Gazette No 1474/5 of

6 December 2006 .......................................................................................

Establishment Code of Sri Lanka (01st September 1985) ...............................

Proposed Amendment to the Emergency (Miscellaneous Provisions and Powers) Regulation No 1 of 2005 by Gazette 1651/11 of 5 August

2008............................................................................................................

Public Administration Circular No. 17/92 .......................................................

Public Administration Circular No.21/85 ........................................................

Public Adminstration Circular 28/95 of 29.09.95 ............................................

181

Constitutional Provisions

13th Amendment to the Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka (1978) certifi ed on 14 November 1987 .....................................

17th Amendment to the Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka (1978), certifi ed on 3rd October 2001 .......................................

Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka, 1978............................................................................................................

Commission Reports

Final Report of Commission of Inquiry into the Involuntary Removal or Disappearance of Persons in the Northern and Eastern Provinces, Sessional Paper No. VII, P.O. No. SP/6/N/193/94,

September 1997 .........................................................................................

Final Report of the Commission of Inquiry into Involuntary Removal and Disappearance of Certain Persons (All Island), Warrant No. SP/6

N/214/97 of 30 April 1998, March 2001 ...................................................

Final Report of the Commission of Inquiry into Involuntary Removal or Disappearance of Persons in the Western, Southern and Sabaragamuwa Provinces, Volume I, Sessional Paper No. V – 1997, P.O. No. SP/6

N/192/94, September 1997 ........................................................................

Final Report of the Commission of Inquiry into Involuntary Removal or Disappearance of Persons in the Western, Southern and Sabaragamuwa Provinces, Volume II, Sessional Paper No. V – 1997, P.O. No. SP/6

N/192/94, September 1997 ........................................................................

Final Report of the Commission of Inquiry into the Involuntary Removal or Disappearance of Persons in the Central, North Western, North Central and Uva Provinces, Sessional Paper No. VI – 1997, P.O. No. SP/6

N/191/94, ...................................................................................................

Final Report of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry into the Kokkadicholai Incident, Warrant No. P.O. No. PPA/6/N/174/91, 9th

March 1992 ................................................................................................

182

Interim Reports of the Commission of Inquiry into the Involuntary Removal or Disappearance of Persons in the Central, North Western, North Central and Uva Provinces, Sessional Paper No. III, September,

1997............................................................................................................

Presidential Commission of Inquiry into Involuntary Removals: President Wijetunga (1993) ...................................................................................

Presidential Commissions of Inquiry into Involuntary Removals of persons: President Premadasa (1991, 1992, 1993) ...............................................

Report of the Commission of Inquiry into the Establishment and Maintenance of Places of Unlawful Detention and Torture Chambers at the Batalanda Housing Scheme, Sessional Paper No. I – 2000, Warrant No. SP/6

N/206/95, 2000 ..........................................................................................

Report of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry into incidents thattook place at the Bindunuwewa Rehabi l i ta t ion Centre , Bandarawela on 25 October 2000, Warrant No. SP/6/N/221/2001,

November 2001 (unpublished). .................................................................

Report of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry into Incidents which Took Place between 13th August and 15th September, 1977, Warrant No. P.O.

No. N. 143/77 .............................................................................................

Report of the Presidential Truth Commission on Ethnic Violence (1981 - 1984), Warrant No. SP/6/N/223/2001, September 2002. ...........................

Report to His Excellency the Governor-General by the Commission Appointed in Terms of the Commissions of Inquiry Act to Inquire into and Report on Certain Matters Connected with the Assassination of the Late Prime Minister Solomon West Ridgeway Dias Bandaranaike , Warrant No.

G.-G. O. No. N. 101/63, March,1965. .......................................................

Gazettes

The Gazette of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka, Extraordinary, No. 644/27 of January 11, 1991 .................................................................

The Gazette of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka, Extraordinary, No. 784/1 of September 13, 1993 ..............................................................

183

The Gazette of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka, No. 697/5 of January 13, 1992 ........................................................................................

Other Mechanisms

Report of the Board of Investigation into Disappearances in Jaffna Peninsula, Ministry of Defence, 9 March 1998 ...........................................................

Report of the Committee on Disappearances in the Jaffna Region, National Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka, October 2003 ..........................

A LEGACY TO REMEMBER SRI LANKA S COMMISSIONS OF INQUIRYhumanitariansrilanka.org/newchapdf/IHR/COI...

Documents

Transcript of A LEGACY TO REMEMBER SRI LANKA S COMMISSIONS OF INQUIRYhumanitariansrilanka.org/newchapdf/IHR/COI...