Sri Lanka: President’s remarks on “missing persons” are an affront to victims

Sri Lanka: President’s remarks on “missing persons” are an affront to victims

The ICJ expressed alarm about comments made by Sri Lankan President Gotabaya Rajapaksa which offensively mischaracterized the situation of “missing persons” in Sri Lanka, many of whom have been the victims of the crime of enforced disappearances.

According to a statement released by the President’s office after President Rajapaksa’s meeting with UN Resident Coordinator, Hanaa Singer, on 17 January 2020, the President had “explained that these missing persons are actually dead” and that “most of them had been taken by the LTTE or forcefully conscripted. The families of the missing attest to it. However, they do not know what has become of them and so claim them to be missing.”

“It is appalling to hear such callous declarations from the Office of the President, particularly given that no credible investigations have been conducted into the cases of those who have gone missing during the armed conflict,” said Frederick Rawski, Asia Pacific Director for the International Commission of Jurists.

The fate and whereabouts of some 20,000 people were reportedly unaccounted for in the immediate aftermath of the armed conflict in Sri Lanka. Many of these people are suspected to have been subjected to enforced disappearance, unlawful killings and/or other crimes under international law.

The Report of the UN Secretary-General’s Panel of Experts on Accountability in Sri Lanka (2011) and the reports of the State-led Commissions of Inquiry on Lesson Learnt and Reconciliation (2011), and Presidential Commission of Inquiry into Complaints of Abductions and Disappearances (2015) found that at least some of those who had surrendered to the Sri Lankan military at the end of the war in 2009 remain unaccounted for to date, and that many cases remain unresolved.

According to the same statement, Rajapaksa further informed the UN Resident Coordinator that, “after necessary investigations, steps would be taken to issue a death certificate to these missing persons. Afterwards their families would be given the support they need to continue with their lives.”

Under international law and standards, allegations of enforced disappearances and unlawful killings must be investigated, promptly, thoroughly, impartially. Those responsible must be brought to justice in fair trials, and the victims and their families are entitled to effective remedy and reparation.

“The President’s statement appears to disregard the purpose of the Office of Missing Persons. Any attempt to provide ‘closure’ to the relatives of the missing without following the necessary legal procedure to establish the truth is unacceptable,” said Rawski. “Their families have waited for ten years or longer to find out the fate of their loved ones.  The response of the State should be to help facilitate the existing process, not to disrupt or obstruct it,” he added.

The previous government adopted the Office of Missing Persons Act in August 2016 and established the Office of Missing Persons (OMP) in February 2018, in light of its commitments to the UN Human Rights Council under Resolution 30/1. According to Section 13 (1) (a) (ii) of the OMP Act, a certificate of death shall be issued only upon the conclusion of an investigation and the issuing of a report to the relative of such missing person to such effect. However, as an interim measure, the OMP is empowered to facilitate the provision of certificates of absence to family members of a missing person. A certificate of absence legally recognizes that a person is missing and allows the family to conduct transactions as though the person is dead.

The ICJ urges the Government of Sri Lanka to desist from any measures that would derail from the established legal procedure to search and trace the “disappeared” and other missing persons in Sri Lanka. ICJ instead calls upon the Government to support the Office of Missing Persons to speed up the investigation process in establishing the truth, accountability, and reparation.

Contact

Frederick Rawski, ICJ’s Asia Pacific Regional Director, t: +66 2 619 84 77; e: frederick.rawski(a)icj.org

Thailand: continuing delay in the enactment of the draft law on torture and enforced disappearance undermines access to justice and accountability

Thailand: continuing delay in the enactment of the draft law on torture and enforced disappearance undermines access to justice and accountability

On 20 December 2019, the ICJ submitted recommendations to the Ministry of Justice on the Draft Prevention and Suppression of Torture and Enforced Disappearances Act (“Draft Act”), scheduled for public consultation between 4 and 31 December 2019.

The ICJ also expressed concern at the recurrent delays in the amendment and enactment of this important legislation which will be critical for ensuring accountability and justice for future victims of torture and enforced disappearance.

In October, the Ministry of Justice withdrew the draft Act from the Cabinet “for further revision”, an act which has served to further delaye the passage of essential legislation criminalizing torture and enforced disappearances.

The ICJ also regretted that the latest Draft Act, after several rounds of revisions and public hearings, still has not addressed many of the principal shortcomings which the ICJ and other stakeholders and experts have indicated need necessarily be amended in order to bring the law into line with Thailand’s international human rights obligations, particularly under the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (“UNCAT”) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (“ICCPR”).

As it stands, it is also inconsistent with the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (“ICPPED”), which Thailand has signed and committed itself to ratify.

The key concerns include:

  • Incomplete definitions of the crimes of torture and enforced disappearance, as well as other key terms discordant with international law;
  • The absence of provisions concerning cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment (CIDT/P);
  • The inadequacy of provisions on the inadmissibility of statements and other information obtained by torture, CIDT/P and enforced disappearances as evidence in legal proceedings;
  • The inadequacy of provisions relating to modes of liability for crimes described in the Draft Act;
  • The inadequacy of provisions concerning safeguards against torture, CIDT/P and enforced disappearances; and
  • The absence of provisions concerning the continuous nature of the crime of enforced disappearance and statute of limitations for torture and enforced disappearance crimes.

Download the recommendations in English and Thai. (PDF)

Further reading

Thailand: ICJ, Amnesty advise changes to proposed legislation on torture and enforced disappearances

Thailand: ICJ submits recommendations on draft law on torture and enforced disappearance amendments

Human Rights Day: South Asian States must end culture of impunity for torture

Human Rights Day: South Asian States must end culture of impunity for torture

The pervasive practice of torture and other ill treatment can only be addressed if the States in the region ensure perpetrators are held accountable in line with international standards, said lawyers and activists from Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka.

The call came at a regional conference on the investigation and prosecution of torture and other ill treatment in South Asia, organized by the ICJ ahead of Human Rights Day.

“Governments in South Asia have done very little to support the victims and survivors of torture and other ill treatment, or to ensure their rights to truth, justice and reparation,” said Frederick Rawski, ICJ’s Asia Director.

“Despite the persistence of the practice, Governments have failed to follow their legal obligation to treat these crimes as the serious human rights violation they are,” he added.

Torture and other ill treatment are prevalent in South Asia, and in some countries widespread and systematic, with perpetrators enjoying impunity for the crime.

According to the ICJ, States in the region continue to deny the pervasiveness of torture, use torture as a deliberate tool to control and punish dissent, fail to enact specific legislation to criminalize torture, and where a special law exists, fail to implement it in good faith.

Consequently, there have been few concerted efforts to hold perpetrators of torture and ill treatment to account.

All too often, perpetrators get away with only disciplinary sanctions, and even when prosecutions happen, they do not result in convictions and commensurate penalties.

Suspects are often lower or middle-ranking public officials rather than their superiors, who are charged with lesser crimes than torture, such as assault, battery, coercion or abuse of office that carry relatively low punishments.

Prosecutions frequently fail because of the difficulties to prove torture, including securing witnesses for the prosecution, inadequate or conflicting medical evidence as well as threats of reprisals influencing victims and witnesses.

Even when such hurdles are overcome, immunities that protect public officials from prosecutions allow perpetrators to escape accountability.

Furthermore, military and intelligence agencies have extensive and unaccountable powers, including for arrest and detention, which facilitate the practice of torture and other ill treatment.

Under international law, States must ensure protection against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Whenever there are reasonable grounds to believe that torture has been committed, States are required to investigate allegations competently, impartially, independently, promptly and thoroughly.

While a comprehensive set of reforms, both in law and policy, is required to prevent and combat torture and other ill treatment – ensuring accountability for perpetrators would be a first step, said the ICJ.

Contact:

Frederick Rawski (Bangkok), ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Director, e: frederick.rawski(a)icj.org

Reema Omer, ICJ International Legal Adviser for South Asia (Lahore), t: +923214968434; e: reema.omer(a)icj.org

 

India: “Encounter killings” are not justice for sexual violence and murder

India: “Encounter killings” are not justice for sexual violence and murder

The ICJ called on the Indian government to conduct an independent and impartial investigation into the apparently unlawful killings by Telangana Police of the four men accused of raping and killing of Dr. Priyanka Reddy on November 27, 2019.

The men had been in police custody for over a week at the time of the killings.

“The rape and killing of Dr. Reddy is a heinous crime, and sadly only the latest in a pattern of rampant sexual violence that plagues India. The perpetrators of such acts must be held accountable,” said Frederick Rawski, ICJ Asia-Pacific Director.  “However, the unlawful killing of suspects in custody helps no-one. It denies victims true justice, rewards unlawful behavior by the police, and generally undermines the rule of law.”

On November 27, Dr. Priyanka Reddy, a veterinarian, was returning home when she was gangraped. Her body was subsequently burned by the perpetrators. The next day, four suspects were arrested. According to the police, they remained in custody until Friday, 6 December, when all four were shot and killed after they allegedly attempted to take weapons from the police and tried to escape during a re-enactment at the crime scene. Details of the incident remain unclear, though it has the appearance of a custodial execution.

“The suspicious circumstances of these deaths in custody, and the history of the use of extrajudicial killings in India, demands a thorough, independent and impartial investigation,” said Rawski. “The nationwide alarm at the trend of sexual violence is completely warranted. However, celebrating the unlawful behavior of police will not ultimately protect women from sexual violence or address their lack of access to justice.”

Several Indian women’s rights activist groups have also condemned the killings. A statement by the All India Progressive Women’s Association’s statement pointed out that “This is not justice. This is a ploy to shut down our demand for accountability from the police, judiciary, governments, and justice and dignity for women.”  The National Human Rights Commission of India has also called for an investigation into the circumstances of the killing.

According to international standards including the International Convention of Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which India is a party, States have a duty to investigate allegations of extrajudicial executions with due diligence and good faith, regardless of whether or not there is a formal complaint. The investigation of extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions must be thorough prompt, impartial and independent, towards establishing the crime committed and prosecuting those responsible for the crimes. This has been reiterated by the Supreme Court of India, which has condemned encounter killings, and set out guidelines for their investigation.

The ICJ urges the Indian Government to conduct a thorough and impartial investigation into the killings by the police, in line with the Supreme Court’s decisions, and India’s constitution and international obligations. The ICJ calls upon the courts to ensure that police officials who conduct unlawful killings are held accountable. It also calls upon the Government to take immediate steps to address the lack of an effective response from police personnel to allegations of rape and sexual violence, and to take effective lawful measures to prevent the unacceptable attacks upon victims of rape and other sexual violence seeking a remedy in the courts.

Contact

Frederick Rawski, ICJ Asia-Pacific Director, t: +66 64 478 1121; e: frederick.rawski(a)icj.org

Maitreyi Gupta, ICJ India Legal Adviser, t: +91 77 560 28369 e: maitreyi.gupta(a)icj.org

Translate »