PTA

Draconian law cripples Sri Lanka’s reconciliation hopes

“The country’s leadership needs to act on commitment to repeal Prevention of Terrorism Act”

First published at http://www.ucanews.com/news/draconian-law-cripples-sri-lankas-reconciliation-hopes/78188 on 3rd Feb. 2017

In March 2014, my colleague, Father Praveen and I were arrested and detained under the Prevention of Terrorism Act by the Terrorist Investigation Department, under Sri Lanka’s authoritarian government of former president Mahinda Rajapakse.

Three months ago, under the new government whose slogan has been good governance and rule of law, I was briefly detained and interrogated at the airport while traveling to the United Kingdom for meetings related to human rights. More than two years after the new government came to power, the investigation against me and Father Praveen continues and we are still terrorist suspects.

Court orders restricting our freedom of expression, obtained in March 2014 by the state are still in place. Our electronic equipment, confiscated at that same time, has still not been returned. The investigation led to me being publicly discredited as a terrorist supporter. My parents and I will find it difficult to ever recover.

We were arrested while looking into the arrest of a large number of Tamils in north Sri Lanka, including Balendran Jeyakumary, the mother of a disappeared child, who had been a vocal campaigner against forced disappearances. Although Jeyakumary was conditionally released two months after President Maithripala Sirisena took office in January 2015, she was re-arrested a few months later and detained for about a week.

She was again summoned for intense interrogation in August 2016. She still must report to the police every month and must go to court regularly. She also faces social isolation, struggles to find work and has been compelled to keep her young daughter in a hostel. The arrest ruined her and her daughter’s life.

 

Continuing use of the Prevention of Terrorism Act 

The United National Party and the Sri Lanka Freedom Party, the two parties that have ruled Sri Lanka since independence, have used the act to suppress dissent for decades.

In 2008, during the last phase of the war, the act was used to arrest, detain and convict Tamil journalist, J.S. Tissainayagam. In 2009, it was used to detain Christian activist, Santha Fernando. After the war, in 2013, it was again used to arrest and detain opposition Muslim politician, Azath Salley. These are a few better-known examples.

A coalition of the two main parties formed a government in 2015 and continued to use the terrorism act to arrest and detain people, mostly Tamils, albeit on less intense scale.

Some were abducted and later found to be detained. No one has been held accountable for these abductions, bringing into question whether the directives on arrest and detention by President Sirisena in June 2016 have had any impact.

The arrest and detention of Jeyakumary, Tissainayagam, Santha, Salley, as well as Father Praveen and I received national and international media coverage and we had the support of committed lawyers and activists as well as the diplomatic community.

I believe we were released, after periods ranging from few days to two years, due to that support. But people who didn’t get such attention, continue to languish in jail without charge. When they are charged, trials can take years.

In 2015, two Tamil mothers were acquitted after being detained for a total of 22 years. There has been no acknowledgement of their suffering, no apology and no compensation.

I have been told by detainees and lawyers that charges were framed and convictions obtained based on confessions made under duress, as the terrorism act allows such evidence to be admitted for trial. Most detainees I have met have been tortured. They have been scarred for life, mentally and physically.

 

Replacing the act but retaining its draconian features

Recently, I saw a leaked version of a draft policy and legal framework for the Counter Terrorism Act, that will replace the previous act. Like its predecessor, it contains many draconian clauses. It has vague and broad definitions that could infringe on free expression and activism and grants excessive powers to the police to detain people for long periods without judicial supervision.

The spirit and purpose of the old and new acts are similar: giving extreme powers to the executive, military and police in the name of preventing and countering terrorism, and disregarding life, liberty and dignity.

The previous act served as a license for enforced disappearances, arbitrary detention and torture. It removed lifesaving protections when they were most needed: within the first few hours and days of a person being arrested.

The new Counter Terrorism Act seeks to extend this license with a new label and face. No official information has been made available to Sri Lankan citizens about the replacement act either.

 

Sri Lanka’s international obligations and waning international interest

Numerous U.N. treaty bodies have pointed out the terrorism act’s incompatibility with Sri Lanka’s international obligations, most recently the Committee against Torture in December 2016.

For several years, the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights raised similar concerns. But at the same time, some U.N. officials appeared to be willing to ignore these concerns or place excessive confidence and faith in the Sri Lankan government. In a report released earlier this month, the European Commission said that Sri Lanka must ensure its counter-terrorism legislation is in line with international human rights conventions. But it still granted trade privileges to Sri Lanka assuming the “government has started a legislative process to replace the Prevention of Terrorism Act and is making good progress in releasing persons detained under it.”

This appears optimistic at best. While some detainees were released in 2015-2016, there have been many new arrests. Cases continue at a snail’s pace and even those released continue to be harassed.  The terrorism act reform process is shrouded in secrecy, with the government appearing to consult the European Commission, U.N. and a few experts of their choice, instead of being transparent with the victims, their families and the Sri Lankan people.

 

Way forward

Repealing the Prevention of Terrorism Act and getting justice for detainees is a crucial element in forging reconciliation. How can we victims and our families talk of reconciliation if we are still being detained, investigated and face continuing restrictions?

How can we talk of reconciliation if there is no acknowledgement, no apology and no reparations? How can we believe guarantees of non-reoccurrence when the new government did not repeal the act for two years, when secret processes are underway to bring in similar laws, and persons continue to be abducted?

As a victim of the terrorism laws, what I think needs to be done is to ensure justice to all past and present detainees, repeal the legislation and, instead of focusing on equally draconian new anti-terror laws, focus on strengthening legal and institutional frameworks to combat crime and terrorism, while ensuring due process and protections.

The coming months could be crucial. The Council of Europe and the European Parliament must insist on the repeal of the terrorism act before enhanced trade status is granted. At the March session of the U.N. Human Rights Council, its member states and the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights must insist that the government fulfills its October 2015 commitment to repeal the Prevention of Terrorism Act in line with international standards. Both the U.N. and E.U. must stand for justice for terrorism detainees.

But what’s most needed is for the Sri Lankan people to recognize the injustices that have been done to their fellow citizens, brothers and sisters and express outrage about laws that infringe on their safety, freedom and dignity.

The president and prime minister must be transparent about efforts to bring in similar laws. Catholics and church leaders, the majority of whom have been silent, should be part of this, insisting that unjust laws are against the faith and that to justify them or be silent is a sin.

The Troubling Detention of Ruki Fernando

First published as an interview by Taylor Dibbert at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/taylor-dibbert/the-troubling-detention-o_b_12310814.htmlon 3rd October 2016

On October 1, Sri Lankan human rights activist Ruki Fernando was detained at Bandaranaike International Airport. This is Sri Lanka’s principal international airport and is located about twenty miles north of Colombo, the capital. Mr. Fernando has written about the experience (and provided some background information) for Groundviews, a Sri Lankan civic media outlet.

Here’s a paragraph from that piece:

Today, 1st Oct. 2016, I came [to] the Bandaranaike International Airport in Sri Lanka to travel to London. I was asked by the officer at the immigration counter to get clearance from an office I understood to be an office of the Terrorist Investigation Department (TID), situated next to the immigration counters. Inside this office, I was questioned [about] whether I have a case pending, where I was traveling, purpose of my travel, my work and personal details, including addresses and phone number, details of family members etc. An officer wrote down my answers, but I was not shown what was written and I was not asked to sign any documents. Photocopies of my travel documents were also made. They also appeared to examine a file they had.
He was eventually allowed to board his flight. Nonetheless, there’s no question that this is a worrisome development. In a brief exchange, he provides additional insights. This interview has been edited for clarity.

During the past couple weeks, did you notice anything unusual? Had you been under surveillance?

Well, the TID has reportedly asked about me from at least one person they were interrogating recently. Beyond that, I don’t recall anything unusual. But I have been confronting police trying to obstruct peaceful protests and been pushing hard on the right of detainees to access lawyers during detention, especially by the TID. I’ve also been publicly highlighting continuing abductions/disappearances, arrests and detention under the [Prevention of Terrorism Act] PTA this year — the vast majority have occurred in the North. And I’ve generally been quite critical of continuing human rights violations and lack of progress and genuine will to addressing the past. Although I have also been trying to engage constructively with various government processes. So maybe this is an attempt to try and shut me up, or to try to co-opt me to be less critical?

I didn’t feel I was under surveillance for the last year or so. Except at protests, other events, and when in the North, where it appeared to be the event and everyone at it was under surveillance and not just me.

Like my arrest in March 2014, this incident appears to have generated a lot of attention. But this type of intimidation, questioning and surveillance is commonplace, although of less intensity and regularity than under the Rajapaksa years. It will be tragic if this incident takes away attention from Balendran Jeyakumary who is still being investigated under the PTA and subjected to harassment and questioning. The same goes for political prisoners who are still being detained under the PTA for many years — and also threats, intimidation and attacks on human rights defenders and journalists by police and security agencies, negative remarks on [nongovernmental organizations] NGOs and journalists by the president, the prime minister and other government officials, etc.

And I hope the attention this incident has generated will open the eyes and ears of some who appear to want to be blind, deaf and dumb to such incidents and trends. And make them think twice about uncritically welcoming developments in Sri Lanka and prematurely and mistakenly portraying Sri Lanka as a success story in good governance, economic development and transitional justice.

Do you anticipate any problems getting through airport security when you return?

I really, really hope the authorities will officially provide me with some clarity on who actually stopped and questioned me and why before I return. I’m worried about what may happen on my return. But I want to return and continue my activism.

What impact, if any, will this incident have on your work in Sri Lanka?

This will impact my activism and life. My parents are very worried. They and relatives and some friends will again exert pressure for me to restrain myself. Some survivors and victims’ families, as well as local activists I have been assisting and working with will worry about drawing attention to themselves by their interactions with me, and may want to distance themselves from me. It might even intimidate some of them to reduce their activism, thinking about what may happen to them.

Follow Taylor Dibbert on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/taylordibbert

Harrasment of human rights defenders even under “yahapalanaya”

First published at http://groundviews.org/2016/10/02/harassment-of-human-rights-defenders-even-under-yahapalanaya/ on 2nd October 2016

Today, 1st Oct. 2016, I came the Bandaranayake international airport in Sri Lanka to travel to London. I was asked by the officer at the immigration counter to get clearance from an office I understood to be an office of the Terrorist Investigation Department (TID), situated next to the immigration counters. Inside this office, I was questioned whether I have a case pending, where I was traveling, purpose of my travel, my work and personal details, including addresses and phone number, details of family members etc. An officer wrote down my answers, but I was not shown what was written and I was not asked to sign any documents. Photocopies of my travel documents were also made. They also appeared to examine a file they had.

While I was being questioned, other officers appeared to be checking from the TID head office in Colombo whether to allow me to proceed to my flight or not. They appeared to be trying to expedite the process to ensure I will not miss the flight.

Meanwhile, the Attorney General’s department and TID head office has been contacted through my lawyers. One of my lawyers who was also traveling overseas and had cleared immigration already, requested to come into the office I was being kept to speak to me and officers who were questioning me. But she was not allowed and had to stand outside while I was being questioned.

This appeared to be a violation of recent recommendation of the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka to strengthen suspects access to lawyers, especially by providing access before statements are recorded.

Finally I was informed that I was free to travel. I asked the officer in charge what was the reason I was detained and questioned. He pointed out there was very limited time left for my flight and suggested I proceed to the flight rather than discuss this further and risk missing my flight. I then left towards the boarding gate with my lawyer.

The officers questioning me were polite and didn’t physically harass or threaten me. But it was a scary experience to be detained and questioned even briefly, especially given my past experiences of being detained, questioned, threatened etc. And to know that I was still under close scrutiny and not able to travel overseas for human rights work without harassment and intimidation. After long tense journey, I have now arrived safely in London.

Background
I was traveling to deliver several talks on transitional justice and human rights at events organized by the Centre for Applied Human Rights at the University of York in UK and several other human rights related meetings.

I’ve been subjected to an ongoing investigation under the Prevention of Terrorism Act since March 2014 (case no. B4414/08/14). This is after being arrested, detained and released by the TID in March 2014. A court order that TID had obtained in March 2014 continues to restrict my freedom of expression and my confiscated electronic equipment had not yet been returned. My lawyers have made several written submissions and oral representations to the Attorney General’s department but there is no update in closing the investigation against me, returning the confiscated equipment and removing the gag order.

From March 2014 to July 2015, I had to obtain court permission for each of my overseas travels. Despite obtaining court permission, I encountered delays at the airport. On one occasion, I was not allowed to board the flight and and was only allowed to travel overseas the next day, after additional interventions of my lawyers. Based on an application I made to Colombo Magistrate Courts through my lawyers, this travel restriction was lifted by courts in July 2015. Since then, I had traveled overseas several times, without being stopped or questioned by the immigration or any other officials. It remains a mystery why the immigration suddenly had to get permission from TID again to allow me to travel overseas and why I had to be detained and questioned before being allowed to travel.

 

 

 

Sri Lanka’s Transitional Moment and Transitional Justice

First published in the report “Human Rights situation in Sri Lanka: 17Aug 2015 – 17 Aug2016” by INFORM Human Rights Documentation Centre on 18th August 2016

Within the first month after winning the parliamentary elections in August 2015, the new Government made a series of commitments related to transitional justice. These were articulated through a speech by the Foreign Minister at the 30th session of the UN Human Rights Council.[1] These commitments were also reflected in the resolution on Sri Lanka that was adopted by the Human Rights Council on 1 October 2015.[2] The resolution came just after the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights had published a report which alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity and other serious violations of international human rights and humanitarian laws, by both the Sri Lankan government and the LTTE.[3]

Government’s commitments 

The present Government’s commitments included setting up an Office of Missing Persons (OMP), a Commission for Truth, Justice, and Guarantees of Non-reoccurrence, a Judicial mechanism with Special Counsel, which will have the participation of foreign judges, prosecutors, investigators and defence lawyers, and an Office for Reparations. The Government also committed to reduce the military’s role in civilian affairs, facilitate livelihoods, repeal and reform the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA), criminalise disappearances, ratify the Enforced Disappearance Convention[4] , review the victim and witness protection law, and range of other actions. Consultations to seek people’s views on transitional justice is underway across the country, under the leadership of some civil society activists.

The Enforced Disappearance Convention was ratified in May this year and the draft Bill to create the OMP was passed by Parliament on 11 August. There are positive features as well as weaknesses and ambiguities in the Bill[5]. Due to a history of failed initiatives, the minimal ‘consultations’ that occurred during drafting process and the lack of information on details, there appears to be very little confidence in the OMP amongst families of the disappeared. This is likely to be the case for other mechanisms, unless there’s a drastic change in approach from the government.

Reactions to transitional justice within Sri Lanka

Currently, the transitional justice agenda appears to be polarising Sri Lankan society. Opinion polls, and my own impressions, indicate that the Tamil community, particularly in the North and the East, who bore the brunt of the war, appears to favour strong international involvement. But the majority Sinhalese community appears to reject international involvement. Varying opinions have been expressed about forgetting the past, memorialisation, prosecutions, and amnesty. There are also different or contradictory opinions and expectations within each ethnic community and amongst survivors of violations and families of victims.

The Government’s transitional justice commitments have been criticised by the former President and his supporters. Even the release of a few political prisoners, the release of small amounts of land occupied by the military, and the establishment of the OMP to find truth about missing persons have been framed as an international conspiracy that endangers national security and seeks revenge from “war heroes”.

There does not appear to be an official Government policy document on transitional justice. The Government’s commitments have only been officially articulated in Geneva by the Foreign Minister and not in Sri Lanka . The Foreign Minister has been the regular advocate and defender of these commitments. Some of the meetings with local activists have been convened by him and the Secretariat for Co-ordinating Reconciliation Mechanisms (SCRM) is housed in the Foreign Ministry. All these contribute to the process being seen as emanating and driven by foreign pressure. Outreach on the Government’s transitional justice plans appears to focus on the international community and not towards Sri Lankan people.

The President and Prime Minister have not been championing the Government’s official commitments. For example, the duo have publicly stated that the commitment to have foreign judges in the judicial mechanism will not be fulfilled. Even this has not satisfied the critics alleging foreign conspiracy, and has disappointed some activists, especially Tamils, as well as survivors and victims’ families.

Developments on the ground

Monuments erected to honour the Sinhalese dominated military during the Rajapakse time continue to dominate the Tamil majority Northern landscape. Army camps that were built over some of the cemeteries of former LTTE cadres that were bulldozed by the Army after the war are still there. The loved ones of those whose remains were in these cemeteries have no place to grieve, lay flowers, light a candle, or say a prayer. While the numbers have reduced from those under the Rajapaske regime, intimidation and reprisals on families, attacks, and threats and intimidation of activists and journalists continue to occur. Limited progress on issues, such as the release of political prisoners, land occupied by military, continuing military involvement in civilian affairs in the North and East, reports of continuing abductions, and arrests under the PTA have raised doubts about the Government’s commitments. Although a few military personnel have been convicted and some others arrested on allegations of human rights abuses, the lack of progress in thousands of other cases only reinforces calls for international involvement for justice.

Towards Rights & Democratization beyond Transitional Justice framework

Unemployment, debt, and sexual and gender-based violence is widespread in the former war ravaged areas. The new Government’s economic and development policies are focusing on trade, investment, and mega development projects, which privilege the rich and marginalise the poor. Pre-war rights issues, such as landlessness, sexual and gender-based violence and discrimination, caste, rights of workers, including those working on tea estates, still need to be addressed.

A consultation process towards a new constitution drew a large number of public representations, dealing with many of the issues mentioned above. But the next steps are not clear, particularly in finding political solutions to the grievances of the country’s ethnic minorities.

The political leadership will have to reach out to all Sri Lankans, especially to the Sinhalese majority, about its reform agenda, while taking principled actions to win the confidence of numerical minorities such as Tamils and Muslims. At the national level, the coming together of the two major political parties and support of the two major parties representing Tamils and Muslims, makes this a unique opportunity to push towards radical reforms.

It will also be a challenge to go beyond a conventional transitional justice framework and use the transitional moment to move towards reconciliation, democratisation, and sustainable development, by addressing civil and political rights as well as economic, social, and cultural rights in a holistic manner, considering the yearnings of war survivors, victims’ families, and the poor, for truth, reparations, criminal accountability, and economic justice.

[1] Speech by Hon Mangala Samaraweera at the 30th session of the Human Rights Council, Geneva, 14 September 2015.

[2] Human Rights Council Resolution, Promoting reconciliation, accountability, and human rights in Sri Lanka, 14 October 2015, UN Doc. A/HRC/RES/30/1 (adopted 1 October 2015).

[3] Human Rights Council, Report of the OHCHR Investigation on Sri Lanka (OISL), thirtieth session, 16 September 2015, UN Doc. A/HRC/30/CRP.2.

[4] International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, adopted 20 December 2006, UN Doc. A/61/488 (entered into force 23 December 2010) (“Enforced Disappearance Convention”).

[5] For more on OMP, see http://thewire.in/42687/sri-lankas-disappeared-will-the-latest-missing-persons-office-bring-answers/

On Rights and Justice: Some Perspective from Colombo

First published at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/taylor-dibbert/on-rights-and-justice-som_b_11250536.html on 28th July 2016

Ruki Fernando is a human rights activist based in Colombo, Sri Lanka. In this interview, Mr. Fernando shares his thoughts on a range of salient issues.

Sri Lanka’s former president, Mahinda Rajapaksa, took the country in an ever more authoritarian direction. How much has changed since Maithripala Sirisena became president in January 2015?

Authoritarianism has lessened and there is more space across the country for free expression, free assembly and free association. This was visible when Tamil people in the country’s North and East came out for the first time on May 18, 2015 — to grieve collectively and publicly for their loved ones who had died during the civil war. There was more space and less restrictions and less intimidation for this in 2016 compared to 2015. However, there have been regular incidents of surveillance, intimidation, harassment and threats on journalists and activists — particularly in the North and East, even though the intensity and regularity of these incidents appears to be less than it was during the Rajapaksa era.

I feel more safe and free, and now travel to the interior of the Vanni (in the country’s Northern Province). I also go home late at night on my own, using public transport — something I never did when the Rajapaksas were in power. But even after 18 months of “good governance,” I’m still under investigation by the Terrorist Investigation Department and my freedom of expression is restricted through a court order.

As a human rights activist, what issues are taking up most of your time? What projects are you currently working on?

There are too many things than I could mention! I have been trying to assist a few families of disappeared persons in their continuing struggles. I have been trying to engage critically with the proposed Office of Missing Persons (OMP). I have been monitoring and documenting recent abductions and arrests under the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA). I’m continuing to work with a few communities whose lands have been expropriated by the military. I am trying to critique militarized and large, business-oriented tourism, and to promote a more community-centered, reconciliation-oriented form of tourism. I’m also spending time discussing transitional justice issues with rural Sinhalese communities, and participating in radio and TV discussions in Sinhalese. In addition, I have been trying to support exiled Sri Lankan journalists and activists to return to Sri Lanka, and to support Pakistanis and Bangladeshis fleeing their countries and seeking refuge in Sri Lanka. Lastly, I have been giving talks and interviews, and have been writing about these issues.

In terms of the government’s wide-ranging transitional justice agenda, how much has been accomplished thus far?

Some political prisoners have been released, mostly conditionally. Some lands occupied for decades by the military have been released. Last year, there were significant judgements convicting soldiers for the rape of a Tamil woman in 2010 and a massacre of Tamil civilians in 2000.

There have been arrests of military and senior police personnel in some important and high-profile cases of killings and disappearances. The new leadership of the Human Rights Commission has asserted their independence and challenged the government, though an overhaul of the institution to be fully independent and effective will take much longer.

On the other hand, the military’s involvement in civilian activities in the North — such as hotels, shops, preschools, farms and airlines, among other activities, continues. Buddhist domination with the help of the military, in the predominantly non-Buddhist (mostly Tamil) North also continues. There has been an alarming rise of abductions and arrests under the PTA in the North and East during the last few months. Impunity reigns and accountability seems far away for tens of thousands of incidents, despite the availability of compelling evidence in some cases.

The positive progress is politically symbolic and matters a lot to ordinary people in their daily lives. But overall, progress has been too little and painfully slow. And there have been too many backward steps for the few forward steps.

How have public consultations (for the country’s transitional justice mechanisms) been going? What, if anything could be done to improve the consultative process?

Six months after the appointment of the Consultation Task Force (CTF), the consultations on transitional justice have commenced. But it seems the government has not thrown its political weight behind it, championing and promoting the process amongst Sri Lankans, using its vast infrastructure and extensive outreach through the mainstream and new media. The government doesn’t appear to be supporting the process financially, and it seems dependent on foreign funding from the United Nations (UN), which has resulted in delays.

In addition, the government had initiated a parallel process of drafting in secret, legislature in relation to transitional justice institutions, even before the consultation process started. There needs to be a convergence of expert drafting processes and popular consultations with ordinary people.

As it is, despite the best efforts of the CTF and subsidiary bodies, politically, the popular consultations appear to be an eyewash, designed to placate foreign governments and UN officials, and tick the box.

Do you believe that it’s important for Sri Lanka’s transitional justice process to include international participation? If so, why?

The reality in Sri Lanka is that most Tamils, who are a numerical minority, who have suffered the most, and who have historical grievances that led to the civil war, don’t trust a purely domestic process. Sinhalese who are the majority community, don’t trust international involvement. So if the transitional justice process is about all communities, we need to negotiate a middle way, acceptable to most communities and people. But there’s also a danger that the aspirations of the majority may prevail. Then there is also the issue of whether competency and experience to the extent needed is fully available in Sri Lanka.

Regarding the accountability mechanism to address alleged wartime abuses, what role (if any) would you like to see international actors play?

Personally, I believe it’s important to have the participation of international judges, prosecutors, investigators and defense lawyers. Their participation should go beyond monitoring, advising and training. But being international alone will not guarantee independence and credibility. It’s crucial to ensure that accountability mechanisms have the acceptance of all communities and thus, the government must play the major role in reaching out to all Sri Lankans — in particular to the Sinhalese-Buddhist community, to stress the importance of doing what’s right and principled, instead of bowing down to populist slogans. Tamil political and civil society leaders too must not get carried away with populist slogans and work towards solutions for affected people, considering the existing domestic and international political realities.

This interview has been edited for clarity.

Continuing abuse under PTA: Abductions, Arbitrary Arrests, Unlawful Detentions and Torture

First published at http://groundviews.org/2016/06/28/continuing-abuse-under-pta-abductions-arbitrary-arrests-unlawful-detentions-and-torture/ on 28th June 2016

On 30th March, 2016, a suicide jacket, explosives and other ammunition was found in Chavakachcheri, Jaffna. Since then, as at 28th June, the arrest of at least 28 persons have been reported. All of them have been Tamils from the north and east of Sri Lanka. All were men, except one woman whose husband was been arrested. A further 2 persons, (also Tamil men) were given “chits” (pieces of paper) at the international airport summoning them to the Terrorism Investigation Division (TID) of the Police for inquiry. They were questioned and released on the same day.

Of the 28 arrested, 24 had been arrested under the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA). The other 4 appear to have been arrested and detained on matters not related to the incident above, although they are ex-LTTE cadres. One of those arrested under the PTA was arrested inside the Human Right Commission office in Trincomalee, whilst he was lodging a complaint.

The people in Chavakachcheri that we spoke to said that around 10-12 youth, both male and female, have been continuously called for questioning at various places in the Jaffna District between April and June 2016, in addition to those who had been arrested. A sense of fear prevails in this village, and amidst families of those arrested. People who used to move around quite freely now look at each other with suspicion and doubt.

A human rights lawyer claims that many of the arrests are related to 5-6 motorbikes reportedly found around the house where the explosives were found. There also seems to be a trend of the TID tracking phone numbers that have been in contact with those already arrested, and calling them in for further inquiries, whilst also arresting some of them. This had led to people refraining from lending their phones to anyone else.

As of 23rd June, 2016,

  • At least 23 of the 28 persons who have been arrested have not been charged with any crime.
  • No arrest receipts were issued at the time of arrest in at least 10 cases.
  • In most of the cases, the arresting officers claimed to be TID officers and were dressed in civilian clothes. They hadn’t provided any form of identification, but had given a land phone number and told families to call it and clarify if they wanted to.
  • Suspects were not produced before a Magistrate (as specified in the PTA) within 72 hours in at least 23 cases. In most cases, Detention Orders are issued directly to the detainee whilst in detention, so families and lawyers are not always aware of its issuance.
  • Families were not notified of place of detention for more than 48 hours in at least 5 cases.
  • At least 15 of those arrested are former LTTE cadres, with at least 7 having gone through rehabilitation and been released.
  • Detainees were not offered opportunity to contact lawyers for more than 48 hours in at least 23 cases, with lawyers having restricted access even thereafter. It’s mostly families that are in contact with the lawyers.
  • Of the 28 arrested, we have come to know that 4 have been released unconditionally, 2 have been released on surety bail and 1 has been sent for 1 year in rehabilitation.
  • After visiting their detained family members, several have reported that detainees appear to have been tortured.
  • Private property of detainees and family members were confiscated and held without receipts being issued in at least 5 cases. Property includes, mobile phones, vehicles and at least Rs. 100,000 in cash.
  • Although, in accordance with Section 28 of the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka (HRCSL) Act[1], most arrests and detentions are being communicated by the TID to the HRCSL now, the HRCSL is still not being kept notified of detainee transfers and changes in detention facilities.[2]
  • Family members and lawyers reported that they had restricted access to the detainees.
  • Family members have also been reported as being detained, subjected to intensive interrogation, harassment and/or intimidation.

Below are the names and brief details of the 28 reported as arrested and 2 reported as having been summoned to TID, questioned and released. Information is valid as of 23rd June, unless otherwise stated.

  1. Kebriel Edward Julian (alias Ramesh) – According to Julian’s lawyers, at about 7.30pm, on 29th March, approximately 20 Police, Special Task Force, army and TID personnel, had arrived in 4 army vehicles, and surrounded Julian’s house in Chavakachcheri. As Julian had not been at home, the personnel had eventually left at about 9pm after having arrested Julian’s wife, Kebriel Thusyanthi, accompanied by her 6 year old step-daughter. The cache of explosives and suicide vest were discovered at Julian’s house the following morning (30).[3]Julian was arrested on the 30th of March, 2016. According to his lawyers, on the 31st of April, police, army and TID personnel had brought Julian back to his house in a van, but his family had not been allowed to meet him. They had notified his family that Julian had been arrested on the 30th. Julian was a former LTTE cadre.As far as his lawyers are aware, no Detention Order has been served, and Julian was not produced before the Magistrate or JMO as at 23rd of June. Mobile phones belonging to Julian, his father and wife, Julian’s motorcycle and TATA Batta van, their vehicle documents, and account books were all confiscated by the TID. No receipt was issued following the confiscation of these possessions and none of them have been returned as yet.[4]
  1. Rasathurai Jeyanthan, a former LTTE cadre, was abducted from his home in Nunavil, Chavakachcheri on the 10th of April, 2016, by men in civilian clothing, who claimed they were from the Police.[5][6]They interrogated and handcuffed him, refused to identify themselves, refused to tell his family members the cause of arrest and where they were taking him to, took him away in an unmarked white van, detained him for two days at locations unknown to the family, and confiscated two motorcycles registered under Jeyanthan’s brother’s name and 3 mobile phones belonging to him, his wife and mother. More than 2 months since his arrest, none of their personal property has been returned to the family. Neither have they received a receipt for the confiscated property. The notice of arrest was sent to his family only about a week following his actual arrest. The HRCSL, however, had received a routine fax notifying the Commission of his arrest, as mandated in Section 28(1) of the Human Rights Commission Act of 1996. Having been detained at the TID office in Colombo for 2 days, he was transferred to Boossa on the 12th of April, 2016 and is still detained there as of 23rd.
  2. Ganeshapillai Arivalahan (alias Kalaiarasan), a former LTTE Intelligence chief, was arrested on the 26th of April, 2016, whilst lodging a complaint at the HRCSL, Trincomalee.[7] On the 25th of April, 3 men dressed in civil had visited Arivalahan’s home whilst he was at work, and asked his wife where he was, where he worked, which route he took back home etc., As there had been a spate of arrests of former LTTE cadres at the time, they had gone the very next morning (26th) to a legal aid organization in Trincomalee. They were then advised to lodge a complaint at the HRCSL in Trincomalee.When getting into the three-wheeler from the legal aid office, Arivalahan’s wife had noticed 3 policemen in uniform standing on the opposite side of the office (sea-side), but hadn’t taken too much notice of them. However, as soon as they left the office, they saw a white and grey van with tinted windows following them. At one point, it had even tried to overtake their three-wheeler. The van too arrived at the same time as the three-wheeler at the HRCSL office, so Arivalahan had run into the HRCSL out of fear. One man in civil had gotten out of the van and followed Arivalahan inside and apprehended him. At which point a lady working at the HRCSL had asked the man from the van, who he was. He had responded that he was from the TID in Colombo. Meanwhile, 4 other men in civil too had gotten out of the van and walked into the HRCSL. Also, a police jeep with 3 police officers in uniform had arrived at the Commission and walked inside. When asked by the lady who they were, they had said they were from the Trincomalee Police.The lady at the HRCSL had got the first TID officer who had apprehended Arivalahan, to record his (the officer’s) details in a book at the Commission. By this point, the police had issued a receipt of arrest to Arivalahan’s wife, citing that he’s being arrested under the suspicion of reviving terrorist activity. As at 23rd June, he was being detained at the TID office in Colombo. His wife visits him weekly, but says that they are not able to speak freely as TID officers are always in the vicinity. They had even told the wife during one of her visits, that her husband would be released in two months.
  1. Muththulingam Vijeyakumar Ketheeswaran, was arrested in Kilinochchi town in the Kilinochchi district on 10th He had previously been detained in May 2014, while sitting for his A/L examinations as an 18 year old and released in November 2015 on bail. As he could not go back to school, he had requested his father to try and raise funds to buy him a three wheeler. His father had reportedly sold his cattle and transferred funds to his son’s bank account. Ketheeswaran has now been detained on the suspicion that he had received funds in relation to the explosives found in Chavakachcheri.When the father had visited his son in Boossa, it had appeared that the son had been severely beaten whilst in detention in Vavuniya and Boossa. The family has lodged a complaint (HRC/KI/056/2016) at the HRCSL in Kilinochchi, on the 11th April.Ketheeswaran’s sister, a student at the Eastern University, had received numerous abusive calls from persons claiming to be from the TID, from this phone number 021-2283707, following her brother’s arrest. The University has arranged some security measures for her, and she has lodged a complaint (HRC/BCO/99/2016) at the HRCSL in Batticaloa.
    Ketheeswaran’s father and another brother, a school boy, have also been repeatedly summoned to an unmarked TID office in Kilinochchi after his detention.[8] He was being detained as at 23rd June.[9]
  1. Muthulingam Jeyakanthan, a former LTTE cadre, from Mullaithivu, who had sought employment overseas after the war, was detained and interrogated for almost 7 hours by the TID, at the Katunayake international airport on his return to Sri Lanka on the 12th of April, 2016. He was then released and asked to report to the 2nd floor of the TID office in Colombo, on the 19th of April, for further interrogation.[10] According to his sister[11], they had taken Jeyakanthan into the office at about 11.15am, and at around 2.15pm, informed her that he had been arrested, but his family had not been given any document with regard to his arrest. The TID had refused to let his sister see Jeyakanthan that day, and had told her to come and visit him on Sunday (24th) April instead. Jeyakanthan is a father of two and had gone overseas to help support his family. He was last detained at the New Magazine Prison, and was ordered 1 year rehabilitation at the Poonthotam Rehabilitation Centre, Vavuniya, on the 22nd of June, 2016.
  2. Former LTTE commander Ithimalasangam Arichandran (alias Ram), was reported as abducted from his home in Thambuluvil, Ampara, on the 23rd of April, 2016. Two days later, on the 25th, the Police Spokesperson was quoted by media as having acknowledged[12] that Ram was in the custody of the TID, and was being detained at the TID office in Colombo for further questioning. Ram too had been rehabilitated after the war in 2009 and released in 2013, and has since then been reported as having been involved in agricultural activity.
  3. Another former LTTE colonel, Krishnapillai Kalainesan (alias Lt. Col. Prabha) was reported as arrested from his home in Batticaloa, on the 2nd of May, 2016, and taken to the TID office in Kalmunai for further questioning. A father of two, he was working with his wife at a canteen at the time of his arrest.[13][14] Initially registered to have been disappeared after the war, he was found to be in custody of the military and then underwent rehabilitation from 2009, till his release in 2013. He was being detained at the TID office in Colombo as at 23rd
  4. Kanapathipillai Sivamoorthy (alias Nakulan), a former LTTE commander, was abducted[15] in Jaffna on the 26th of April, and subsequently found to be in the custody of the TID in Colomb. Co-Cabinet Spokesperson, Rajitha Senaratne was reported in the media as having acknowledged[16] that Sivamoorthy, was one of many rehabilitated former LTTE cadres who had been arrested in April, in relation to a cache of weapons found in the North. He was reported as being detained by the TID as at 28th
  5. Thamotharampillai Jeyakanth, was reported as arrested under the PTA on the 20th April, 2016, from Murukandi, Kilinochchi, and being detained at the TID HQ in Colombo, as at 23rd[17]
  6. Mahadevan Prasanna and Jesuratnam Jegasamson, were arrested under the PTA on the 06th of April, 2016, from Puvarasamkulam (Vavuniya district), and are being detained at the New Magazine Remand Prison in Colombo, as at 23rd[18] A Mr. Nagulan too has been arrested in connection with this same case, and a human rights lawyer told us that his last known place of detention was at the Narahenpita Police station. However, his current whereabouts are unknown. All 3 of these suspects have been arrested and detained in relation to allegedly being in the possession of a military hat belonging to former intelligence head of the LTTE, Pottu Amman.[19]
  7. Sathyaseelan Jeyanthan Fernando, was reported arrested under the PTA on the 1st of April, 2016, from Kilinochchi, and is being detained at Boossa, as at 23rd[20]
  8. Seethagopal Arumugam, was arrested on the 29th of April, from Nedunkerny (Vavuniya district). A tractor and motorbike belonging to him, and Rs. 100,000 in cash, was confiscated by the TID, without a receipt, upon his arrest, and none of it has been returned to the family. He is being detained at the TID office in Colombo, as at 23rd[21]
  9. Sankaralingam Sasikaran, a father of two and local NGO worker, was reported as arrested[22][23] on the 30th of May, 2016, from Bharathipuram, Kilinochchi district. His current whereabouts are not known.
  1. Magalingam Vasantharasa, was arrested on the 31st of May, 2016, at the Katunayaka International Airport, and is being detained at the TID office in Colombo, as at 23rd[24]
  2. Kanagalingam Kamalakannan, who runs a money exchange centre in Jaffna, was reported as arrested from Jaffna, between April-May, in connection to the weapons discovery in Chavakachcheri. He is being detained at Boossa as at 23rd[25] 
  1. Suppramaniam Janakaraj and Suppramaniam Chandrakumar were two brothers who were arrested from their home in Akkaraipattu, Ampara district on the 6th of April, 2016. They were both released on bail on the 8th, and released unconditionally on the 12th of April, 2016. Their lawyers believe that the two brothers were arrested in order to get to their eldest brother, Suppramaniam Devathas, who was arrested on the 7th of April, and being detained at Boossa as at 23rd[26]
  1. Subramaniyam Sivakaran, Secretary of the Ilankai Thamil Arasu Kachchi (ITAK) Northern Province Youth Organisation, was arrested under the PTA, by the TID, in Mannar on the 27th of April, 2016. He was released,[27] on bail, with two personal sureties of Rs. 100,000, on the following day (28th). He was also barred from leaving the country for one year from the date of his release.[28]
  1. Pathmanathan Rameshkanthan and Subramaniam Kokilan, were arrested under the PTA, and having spent almost 2 months in detention without being charged, were released unconditionally on the 2nd of June.[29]
  1. Kireniyar Sebathasan, was returning to Sri Lanka from Qatar where he went on work, was given a chit at the Katunayaka International Airport summoning him to be present at the 2nd floor of the TID office in Colombo-01, on the 18th of April, 2016 at 10am. The chit was signed by the OIC of Unit III. He was questioned and released on the 18th[30]
  2. Gunasekaram Vijaykumar, was summoned for an inquiry by the TID, from Kilinochchi (where he resided,) on the 27th of April, to the TID HQ in Colombo. He was questioned and released later that day.[31]

Other arrests of dubious nature

Three men, Ramachandran Kanesh, Navarathnarajah Ranjith and Mutthulingam Yogarasa,have been brought back to Sri Lanka from the Maldives after having finished serving a jail sentence, and are currently in detention in Welikada prison. Neither them, nor the prison officials one of the authors spoke to, had any idea of the reason for their continued detention, and under what laws they were being detained.

In May 2007, they were found by Maldivian Authorities in the territorial seas of Maldives and were arrested for possessing firearms. The detainees stated that they were kept in custody and were interrogated by Maldivian Authorities, Sri Lankan Authorities and Indian Authorities. The trial and sentence had been concluded in one day. The detainees stated that they did not know their charge or their sentence until after the Court proceedings had concluded as they had been provided with only one interpreter who was fluent in Malayalam and did not speak Tamil, which was the only language the detainees understood. When they were taken away from Courts an Officer had told them, that they were charged and convicted for possessing firearms. The appeal process for their release was on-going when the Sri Lankan Ambassador to Maldives visited them in prison and asked them if they were willing to be transferred to Sri Lanka. He also promised them that once in Sri Lanka they would be released in April 2016 with the Sri Lankan New Year. As the appeal process would have dragged up to September 2016, the three prisoners decided to abide by the Ambassador’s advice.

The prisoners were brought to Sri Lanka in April in a Navy ship. They said they travelled for two days. Once they landed in the Colombo port, they were sent directly to Welikada prison. Few days later they were transferred to the Magazine prison where they are now. No one apart from a few lawyers and their family has met them.

All three admitted to being part of the LTTE. However only one admitted to have joined them voluntarily. One of the detainees were recruited by the LTTE when he was 16. According to them they were sent on a mission to transport weaponry from a ship to Sri Lanka in 2007.This is when they were caught by the Maldivian Authorities. According to them they did not possess any weapons when they were caught. However they also said that three of them together with another boatman were on the boat when the Maldivian Authorities open fired. The boatman had died at sea.[32]

Velauthapillai Renukaruban’s family claims that on the 2nd of June, 2 men had arrived on motorbikes, at their home in Jaffna, assaulted Renukaruban in the presence of his mother and older sister, and then forcibly taken him away in a van. The family claims that they had only discovered his whereabouts several days following his arrest[33], when they found out that he was being held at the Jaffna Remand Prison. Following a motion for bail being filed on the 15thof June, he was produced at the Chavakachcheri Magistrates Court on the 16th of June, and released on surety bail. The courts issued a travel ban on him till the conclusion of his case, and he also had to surrender his passport to the Courts.

According to his lawyer, on the 22nd of June, Renukaruban was charged with trespassing and assault, he pleaded not guilty, and the Trial date was set for the 1st of July. In a previous trip to Sri Lanka in January 2016, Renukaruban, his uncle and 3 others had allegedly trespassed the premises of, and assaulted the complainant. Renukaruban had apparently not known of the case filed against him, and so had left the country. However, as there was a warrant out for his arrest, the Police had arrested him as soon as he returned to Jaffna. He is a British national.

Whilst being held at the Jaffna Remand Prison, there had been a clash between some of the prisoners, and Renukaruban had run outside his cell wearing only his sarong. Having seen the tiger tattooed on his chest, he claims that the Sinhala prison officials had then assaulted him, explained Mr. Punethanayagam. As there are CCTV cameras fixed inside the prison now, it shouldn’t be too difficult to find out what took place, the lawyer added. As Renukaruban had been injured due to the assault, he had been hospitalized for a few days.

His lawyer had lodged a complaint with the Jaffna Police regarding Renukaruban’s alleged assault by prison officials.

The Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) and Emergency Regulations (ER)

The PTA and ER gives wide authority to the Terrorist Investigation Division (TID), the Police and the Minister of Defense on arrest, detention, interrogation and extraction of confessions. A mere suspicion on the part of the Minister can warrant an arrest. Anything from taking a person from place to place for interrogation, seizing property can be done without the judicial oversight. The Minister can extend a detention order up to eighteen months. In practice, persons detained under the PTA have been kept in detention almost indefinitely till the case is concluded. Last year, two Tamil women were acquitted as not guilty, after being detained for more than 15 and 7 years respectively. Torture in custody is common practice and it’s rarely questioned in Courts. Even if it’s is brought to the notice of the Magistrate, the Magistrates have rarely taken proactive steps to safeguard the rights and welfare of the detainee. Under the PTA the Magistrate has no powers to intervene and hence. The PTA makes the judiciary is subordinate to the Minister of Defense under the Act. [34]

In May this year the Human Rights Commission has issued directives[35] to be followed by authorities when making arrests under the PTA. These include issuing the detention order in the language of the detainee upon arrest, identifying the person making the arrest to the arrestee and providing receipts for property seized. However it is yet to be seen whether these recommendations will be implemented. The President too has issued Directions to the Police and security forces, reiterating many of the directives issued by the HRCSL.

On the 13th of June, 2016, media reported that the government will introduce a new Act – the National Security Act – that will soon replace the PTA.[36] In addition, the government also hopes to enact two other counter-terror Acts – namely – the Prevention of Organized Crimes Act and the Intelligence Act.

On the other hand, there has been no mention of the review of the Public Security Ordinance (PSO) which the government committed to as part of the UN resolution it co-sponsored on 1st October 2015. It’s under the PSO that Emergency Regulations with provisions equally draconian as the PTA was in force for around 30 years.

It is the authors’ position that all crimes must be dealt with under ordinary law, with due checks and balances and judicial discretion and appeals. We strongly feel that the PTA should be repealed and fresh anti-terror laws should not be brought in, given that they tend to take away checks and balances, undermines judicial discretion and protection, severely undermines rights and liberties of persons and can be used to suppress peaceful and legitimate dissent. We also feel that the PSO should be reviewed and amended, to ensure that deceleration of emergency regulations are only in exceptional situations, are for specified short terms, subjected to strict parliamentary and judicial supervision with due checks and balances including eight of appeal, to ensure rights of persons are not infringed on.

Will UN rights chief’s Sri Lankan visit deliver outcomes?

First published at http://www.ucanews.com/news/will-un-rights-chiefs-sri-lankan-visit-deliver-outcomes/75236 on 17th February 2016

On Feb. 6, the day before a top U.N. official arrived at a camp for internally displaced people in Sri Lanka’s north it was visited by intelligence officers.

U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein had planned to visit the camp in Jaffna province and the officers wanted to know who was organizing his visit and what they were going to talk with him about.

The camp is a sensitive issue because those living there have had their land occupied by the military for the past 25 years.

It was all a part of Al Hussein’s visit to Sri Lanka to monitor the progress of a U.N. Human Rights Council resolution that the Sri Lankan government co-sponsored in October.

Part of the resolution included a commitment by the government to return land to those who lost theirs during the country’s decades-long civil war.

Other commitments that Sri Lanka signed up to involve the repeal or reform of terrorism laws and reduction of the military’s presence in the north.

Through the resolution, Sri Lanka’s government also committed to establishing four transitional justice mechanisms covering reparations, missing persons, truth seeking and accountability through judicial mechanisms.

The intimidation of activists in the camp before Al Hussein’s visit is typical in Sri Lanka’s highly militarized north. This sadly remains a reality, despite the fact that the civil war ended nearly seven years ago.

The problems these areas face are many. They are impoverished with little economic prospects. The cemeteries of Tamil militants have been desecrated and traditional Tamil lands are now being cultivated by Sinhalese. Meanwhile Muslims struggle to return and establish themselves in majority Tamil areas a quarter century after they were evicted by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam.

These are but a few examples that some of my friends from the east discussed with Al Hussein who they met at a civil society meeting in the eastern city of Trincomalee on Feb. 7.

They said that Al Hussein and his team listened sympathetically, but despite the many issues examined, there were a few matters left out of the discussion. Among them were the predicament of survivors of Tamil Tiger massacres in Sinhalese “border villages” and how caste based divisions are resurfacing in the northern Tamil community.

Al Hussein’s visit could have been an occasion to ignite fresh momentum to deal with these issues. It could have been better used to re-energize survivors, families of victims and activists who are becoming frustrated and disillusioned with the direction the country is going in.

 

Overall, it appeared that Al Hussein took a political approach during his visit and gave priority to engaging with powerful politicians and officials.

He did though have time to visit the Temple of Tooth in Kandy (which was bombed by the Tamil Tigers) and Nallur Kovil in Jaffna, two of most sacred places of worship for Buddhists and Hindus respectively.

But the main part of Al Hussein’s visit to Kandy was to meet the influential Buddhist Chief Prelates who were later quoted in local media rejecting his rationale for international involvement in transitional justice.

Al Hussein appears to have failed to convince them about the trust deficit many Tamil survivors and victim’s families have of a process that’s entirely domestic and includes the serious deficiencies of Sri Lanka’s criminal justice system. Nor was he able to sway them about the importance of the government honoring the commitments it has made in Geneva on having international involvement in a judicial process dealing with accountability and justice for wartime abuses.

Several Tamil Catholic priests also met Al Hussein at a civil society meeting in Trincomalee. One of them told me that the U.N. official had been friendly, listened patiently and took notes diligently.

“There was not enough time to raise all issues,” the priest told me and advised me on areas I could stress on when I later had the chance to meet the high commissioner.

Overall, Christians are a minority in Sri Lanka’s North and East while also being a minority among the Tamil community. Despite this, Tamil clergy and the church have led institutions which have played a prominent and influential role in advocating for strong international involvement in pursuing accountability in Sri Lanka.

Going forward the clergy will have to analyze changes in domestic and international politics while understanding the situation at grass roots level. This will allow them to devise creative ways to engage and advocate in a way that is holistic and helps Sri Lanka reconcile with itself.

Significantly however, Al Hussein’s visit doesn’t appear to have generated any significant commitments by the Sri Lankan government, just like his agreement to defer war crimes investigation reports from March to September last year.

This is particularly worrying as the country’s president and prime minister have made public pronouncements to backtrack on key government commitments while resolutions and progress made on other commitments have been minimal. During this visit, the high commissioner could have set high benchmarks and left it to the politicians to deal with them.

Ruki Fernando is a human rights activist and consultant to the Justice, Peace and Integrity of Creation Commission of the Conference of Major Religious Superiors in Sri Lanka. He is also a member of the Asia-Pacific chaplaincy team of the International Movement of Catholic Students.

PTA detainees in Sri Lanka: Prospects for justice

First published at http://groundviews.org/2015/11/06/pta-detainees-in-sri-lanka-prospects-for-justice/ on 6th November 2015

The fast by prisoners last month has given rise to fresh debate about justice for them. It is a sad reflection on Sri Lankan people and the new Government that the prisoners had to resort to such drastic action in order to even gain momentum for justice; for what is a categorical breach of these individuals’ fair trial rights and a failure of the criminal justice system. It has been reported that the fast was called off based on assurances by the President to offer a solution by 7 November 2015. However, what the President will offer as a solution is not clear.

Having been detained under the PTA[1] last year and still remaining under investigation and facing restrictions on freedom of expression after 10 months of “good governance”, justice for PTA detainees is something very personal for me. I consider myself to be the luckiest of those who have come into contact with the PTA; my detention was relatively short, I was not harmed physically, and today I am relatively free physically. Ironically, despite being a “terrorist suspect”, this year I have been invited to meetings on various human rights issues, including reconciliation, accountability, and transitional justice, with the Prime Minister, other Government Ministers, and the Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka to the UN in Geneva. I attended a few of those meetings in good faith, but I still ask myself whether I should participate in such discussions when I am, by their own designation, still a terrorist suspect.

In my view, there are six distinct categories of PTA detainees, and a key issue is how these six different categories will be addressed. The six categories are:(1) those who have been arrested but are detained without charge, (2) those who have been charged but their cases have not been concluded, (3) those who have been convicted, (4) those whose convictions are being challenged in courts, (5) those who are in “rehabilitation”, and (6) those who are still under investigation without being in detention.

How long will it take to implement the President’s November 7th solution?  Weeks, months, years? Which cases will be prioritised?Those awaiting justice have been waiting from a few months to upto two decades.

The lack of official information has also led to speculation about the actual numbers in each category, as well as preventing proper checks and balances about each category. In January 2015, a list of 182 persons in 11[2] remand prisons under the PTA was released (“the January List”). The January List excluded those who have been convicted under the PTA. The January List also excluded those detained in places such as the headquarters of the Terrorist Investigation Department (TID) in Colombo and Boossa. Further, during this year, I am aware of two persons in the January List who were acquitted, at least one person who was released on bail, and two persons that have been convicted. Between January and August 2015, there have also been at least 21 reported arrests under the PTA. Thus, the actual numbers of PTA detainees/suspects/those under investigation is likely to be higher than 182.

This article below is largely based on information contained in the January List of 182 names, complimented by personal interviews with detainees, those released, their families, lawyers, and activists assisting them.

Categories

Convicted

According to the Minister of Justice, 99 persons have been convicted under the PTA and out of this, 45 have been sent for rehabilitation and 54 were serving their sentences[3]. The Minister’s statement raises more questions than provides answers. Is this figure the total number persons convictedsince the inception of the PTA? How many of the 54 serving their sentences are under appeal? To the best of my knowledge, convicted persons are not sent for rehabilitation, rather it relates to suspects (whether they are charged on not) who have agreed to subject themselves to rehabilitation and thus, who the 45 persons are not clear. Basically, to date, there is no official information relating to the numbers of convictions since the inception of the PTA, the nature of the convictions, the duration of sentences handed down, and how many are still serving sentences. Another key piece of information lacking is how many convictions are based solely (or primarily) on confessions.

Convicted, but on appeal

The number of those who have been convicted under the PTA but whose convictions (or sentences) are being challenged on appeal has also not been revealed. Some of the 54 quoted by the Minister could be on appeal, with their convictions or sentences or both being challenged.

Charged, but cases not concluded

This is a critical category. According to theMinister’s statement above, 134 have been charged and their cases are ongoing. We do not know how long these 134 individuals have been in detention for, awaiting trial.The January List indicated that there are people who are detained upto 18-19 years whose cases have still not been concluded.

Arrested, but not charged 

This is also a critical category. The Ministers statement referred to above indicates 85 persons had not been charged. We do not know how long these 85 individuals have been in detention for, awaiting charges.

Suspects, but not in detention

Out of the six categories, this is the least urgent category, as these persons’ liberty has not been deprived or is no longer deprived. Nevertheless, it is still a category on which no information is available and should be dealt with within a specific time frame. This category includes Ms Balendran Jeyakumary, Father Praveen, me and several others. The number of persons in this category is unknown. It has been nearly 20 months since Father Praveen and I were arrested and released, and despite two written submissions by my lawyers to the Attorney-General in 2014 and 2015, there is still a refusal to close the case. I have also been subjected to restrictions on my freedom of expression and my confiscated equipment has not been returned. The overseas travel restrictions on me was removed only after 15 months.Others are still subjected to overseas travel restrictions. Ms Jeyakumary has to present herself to a Police station every month after being released on bail. In September 2015, she was re-arrested and detained for six days, even though she was only released on bail after 362 days in detention (without charge). She is assumed to be amongst the eight persons the Justice Minister has said is on bail.

Detained in “rehabilitation centres”

Some of those who are detained had “bargained” with authorities to “accept guilt” and serve time in a “rehabilitation centre”, instead of waiting unknown periods of time for a trial and risking long sentences if they were convicted. These can hardly be called “voluntarily” requesting for rehabilitation.

Double standards

Most of the top leaders of the LTTE were killed or have disappeared after surrendering to the Army. Other top leaders are within the Government, including Karuna and KP, which is a blatant double standard. In particular, as Karuna and KP are accused of complicity in very serious crimes. KP has publicly admitted to being the leader of the LTTE. But the reasons for detention of some presently detained under the PTA have been given as “encouraging LTTE” or “supporting LTTE”. Some of those kept in detention have been declared not guilty by Courts and released after long years in detention – few months ago, a Tamil mother was acquitted as not guilty after 15 years in detention. How fair is it to refuse to detain and prosecute top leaders of the LTTE like Karuna and KP, who are “most responsible” and yet detain, prosecute, convict for decades those “less responsible”?

Use of confessions 

Another key issue, which has not come to the limelight, is the use of confessions under the PTA. There is no official information relating to those who have been charged or convicted based on confessions. This is critical information in a context where confessions made to police or other public officers, which ordinarily are not admissible unless made in the presence of a Magistrate,[4] are considered admissible evidence under the PTA.[5]Confessions, in the PTA context, are routinely obtained under duress, including torture, in circumstances where individuals have very little or limited access to lawyers, families, and medical assistance.

Justice for those acquitted after numerous years in detention

In the last few months, two Tamil mothers were acquitted by Courts after more than 15 years and 6 years of detention. There maybe other such individuals who have been acquitted or released after numerous years in detention. As the Government attempts to conclude other PTA cases, more of those who have been detained, anywhere upto two decades, could be acquitted or released. The Government will have to think of ways of providing justice for such persons.At the very minimum, a public apology at a personal meeting with the President/Prime Minister, reimbursement of all costs in relation to the detention for the detainee and family, loss of income, compensation and other facilities and opportunities to recover from the mental and physical harm suffered could be considered. The Government ought to also launch investigations to determine why PTA cases have been so long and drawn out, including disciplinary action and criminal prosecutionsagainst those responsible.

Concluding reflections

For 10 months, why has the “good governance” Government failed to address the issue of PTA detainees?

Why has the Government failed to provide the country with comprehensive, clear, specific and official statistics relating to the PTA detainees?  Will this information ever be provided and, if so, when?

Promptly dealing with PTA detainees who are in detention in limbo without charge, or are charged but are awaiting a trial, is a minimum first step to giving effect to fair trial rights and providing justice to these prisoners. Further, there must be the provision of comprehensive and clear information about numbers and timelines for dealing with such persons Without immediate and significant movement in ensuring justice for these prisoners, reconciliation and transitional justice will ring hollow.

###

[1]Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act No. 48 of 1979 (“PTA”).

[2]Anuradhapura, Kandy, Badulla, Moneragela, Polonnaruwa, Trincomalee, Jaffna, Negombo and three in Colombo, namely the New Magazine Prison, Colombo Remand Prison, and Welikada.

[3]http://www.island.lk/index.php?page_cat=article-details&page=article-details&code_title=126154

[4]Evidence Ordinance 1896, ss 25-26.

[5]PTA, ss 16-17.