Untitled - International Commission of Jurists

much affected by the awareness that State officers are investigating into
complaints against officers of State. 371
The Commission strongly advocated an independent prosecutorial body in this regard
though its suggestion that the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka (HRCSL) be
allowed to establish a prosecuting arm is subject to criticism due to the manifest
lacunae in the law under which the HRCSL functions, as observed previously. The
recommendation of the 1994 Western, Southern and Sabaragamuwa Disappearances
Commission that an Office of an Independent Prosecutor be established with
appropriate constitutional safeguards 372 is a preferable approach.
4.5. The Batalanda Commission
A great deal of publicity was generated by the findings of the Commission in regard
to the prosecution of those found implicated of criminal culpability. However, what
actually transpired was a good example of the manner in which commission findings
are made nugatory as a result of the politicized establishment of these bodies. The
primary police officer implicated in the findings, SSP Douglas Pieris, did not appear
before the Commission, having fled the country by that time while an affidavit later
submitted by him was rejected on the grounds of it not being authentic.
The other police officers who had been found implicated indirectly were arrested and
detained on the basis of threats received by the Batalanda Commission, risk of flight,
and the possibility that these officers could inflict violence on witnesses before the
Commission, and, indeed, on the Commissioners themselves. In response to their
petition, the Supreme Court held that their detention was in clear breach of
constitutional safeguards. 373 This ruling buttressed the perception that the
Commission had been engaged in something resembling a political witch-hunt against
particular police officers, rather than an impartial inquiry into practices of torture and
illegal detention during a previous political regime. Though these findings by the
Supreme Court may have been overcome later by a good faith investigation and
prosecution of the alleged responsible police officers, this opportunity was also
squandered.
In a later prosecution, former SSP Douglas Peiris along with four other policemen
were convicted of the offence of abduction of two men and one schoolboy and
keeping them at the Batalanda “torture chamber” with the intent of causing murder
during the late 1980’s, and sentenced to five years rigorous imprisonment by the
371 Report of the 1998 All-Island Disappearances Commission, Sessional Paper No. 1, 2001, at p. 16.
The Commission went on to suggest that the Human Rights Commisison of Sri Lanka be allowed to
establish a prosecuting arm which suggestion however is inherently problematic as observed
previously.
372 Final report of the 1994 Western, Southern and Sabaragamuwa Disappearances Commission,
Sessional Paper No. V, 1997, at p. 83 in particular.
373 I. Jayaratne v. de Silva and others S.C. (FR) No. 609/1996, SCM 21.09.1998. The three member
bench of the Court comprised Justices Mark Fernando, A.R.B. Amarasinghe and D.P.S. Gunesekera.
The Court pointed out as follows; “It is true that allegations of misconduct against police officers must
be dealt with promptly and effectively and that the respondents purported to be acting in order to
prevent the subversion of the course of justice before a Commission inquiring into unlawful arrests and
unlawful places of detention. However, it is distressing and disturbing that the entire process of arrest
and detention of the petitioners has been contrary to basic constitutional safeguards.”
105