Untitled - International Commission of Jurists

the legal profession. The Bar Association decided to boycott the ceremonial sitting of
the Supreme Court in the new Courts Complex and determined that no member
should appear for any police officer until the matter was settled and the killers
charged in court. Public pressure resulted in police investigations and the prosecution
of three junior police officers from a police station in Sri Lanka’s Southern province,
where Liyanaaratchi had been kept and tortured.
Three police officers, including then Senior Superintendent of Police, Tangalle
Division SP Karawaitage Dharmadasa, were charged and tried in the High Court of
Colombo in 1989. They were convicted of wrongfully confining Liyanaaratchi but
were acquitted of his torture and murder on the basis of insufficient evidence. DIG
Udugampola, who had given orders for the arrest, was not charged. His evidence at
the trial was roundly disbelieved by the Colombo High Court, which noted the
“highly incriminating circumstantial evidence” 162 against the DIG. The orders
authorising Liyanaaratchi’s detention were found to have been fabricated after the
mutilated body of Liyanaaratchi was moved from Tangalle to Sapugaskande. He was
admitted to hospital on the next day, where he died.
Meanwhile, notwithstanding the Court’s view of his role and testimony, Udugampola
continued to serve as head of the Bureau of Special Operations in Colombo. It was
only in 1992, when he learnt that his contract was not going to be renewed, that he
went underground and released a number of affidavits on death squad killings. 163 The
government’s response was to bring a case in the High Court against him and against
the newspapers that published the interviews on the basis that the government was
brought into disrepute. After returning to the country subsequent to a period overseas
and being assured an amnesty under the caretaker government of President D.B.
Wijetunge, Udugampola filed a further affidavit retracting the disclosures in his
earlier affidavits. This was prompted by the understanding that if the allegations made
by him were withdrawn, the charges against him would also be withdrawn. The
allegations were then withdrawn and never investigated. Later, he was appointed as
Vice-Chairman of the Ports Authority.
The second case involves the extrajudicial killing of Richard de Zoysa, a journalist
acclaimed for his reporting on human rights abuses. He was abducted from his
Welikada, Rajagiriya home in the early hours of February 18, 1990. A day later, his
mutilated body was washed up on the Moratuwa beach. He had been shot twice at
close range in the neck and in the head. The police investigations into his murder were
negligible. Crucial documents such as the report of the investigations and a summary
of witness statements were not filed at the magisterial inquiry despite repeated
requests by the magistrate.
In a sworn affidavit, De Zoysa’s mother, Dr Manorani Savaranamuttu, identified a
Senior Superintendent of Police as having been among those who had abducted her
son. The magistrate ordered the arrest and detention of the named police officer, SSP
Ronnie Gurusinghe. However, with the backing of the Attorney General’s office, the
162 Wijedasa Liyanaaratchi’s Case, H.C. Case No. 3718/88, High Court of Colombo, H.C. Minutes
18.03.1991.
163 Ludicrously, this police officer also appeared on national television, affirming that his conscience is
clear, that he had done his duty by his country and that he would act in the same way again if called
upon for the sake of the nation.
56