To ascertain conditions of the detainees:

HRC visits Boossa camp

A high powered team attached to the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka (HRCSL), Inquiries and Investigations Division visited the Boossa Detention Camp recently in order to ascertain the conditions of the detainees at the Camp.

The HRCSL team comprised 12 officers - HRCSL Monitoring and Review Deputy Director Jagath Liyanarachchi, Matara Regional Coordinator D.M.R. Dissanayake, Legal Assistant Ms. Mirthula Kumari; four Investigations Officers: J.M. Foumi, Samagisena Perera, Ms. R. Magtiakaracy and Wijitha Weerasinghe; Special Programmes Division: Education Officer K. Kapilan Willawarajan; four Investigations Assistants: N.L.A. Kalam Lareef, Sulari Liyanagama and Nihal Widanapathirana. Most of the HRCSL team visited could communicate in Tamil. Two of them are Lawyers. Most of the detainees are Tamil speaking people.

It was revealed that on November 29 2007, the Sri Lanka Police and the Three Forces had conducted a joint round-up operation in Colombo and suburbs. The operation had been conducted under the Emergency Regulations. According to media reports over 2,000 persons had been arrested during the operation on suspicion.

Arrest

This was the highest number of arrests made under the Emergency Regulations recently. According to the security information office, most of the arrested persons had been detained at the Boossa Camp.

When discharging its functions, the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka has the ability to exercise its power as stated under Article 11 of the HRCSL Act No. 21 of 1996.

Accordingly - Section 11 (d) of the Act states that the Commission may - “Monitor the welfare of persons detained either by a judicial order or otherwise, by regular inspection of their places of detention, and to make such recommendations as may be necessary for improving their conditions of detention.”

Section 28 (2) of the HRCSL Act states that - “Any person authorised by the Commission in writing, may enter at any time, any place of detention, police station. prison or any other place in which any person is detained by a judicial order or otherwise and made such examinations therein or make such inquiries from any person found therein, as may be necessary to ascertain the conditions of detention of the persons detained therein.”

All detainees in this camp are detained on the orders of the Secretary to the Ministry of Defence. The Terrorists Investigation Division (TID) administers this camp. Most of the investigations connected to these detainees are being conducted the TID.

After completing investigations against the detainees the TID files reports before relevant courts. Those who are not subjected to further investigation will be released and the others will be further remanded pending the completion of TID investigations.

Relatives

The close relatives of the detainees are allowed to visit them at the camp on Mondays to Saturdays from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. The relatives are requested to visit with the Grama Sevaka Certificate certifying the relationship of the detainee to the visitor, with a Police Certificate from the Officer-in-Charge (OIC). Visiting time is limited only to 30 minutes.

All detainees are permitted to exchange letters through the ICRC. Those letters are supervised by the TID officers.

Lawyers have access to detainees to hold legal consultations with the permission of the Director TID in Colombo.

The TID authorities have provided a meeting place for consultations. All consultations are being conducted before a TID officer.

The Galle Magistrate visits the camp monthly.

The HRCSL team had observed several complaints by the detainees- they are- the food provided is inadequate, time table to provide meals are very unfair (Breakfast at 5.30 a.m. - Lunch at 12 noon and Dinner at 5 p.m.). As a practice, the investigation Officers of the Head Office and Regional Offices including the Regional Coordinators make routine visits to police stations and other detention camps.

Officers of the Matara HRCSL Regional Office visit the Boossa camp at least once in two months.

General observations by the HRCSL officials -

The Camp authorities have improved conditions after the prevailing situation was highlighted by the HRCSL Officials from Matara Regional Office.

Underage (under 18 years) detainees are commonly detained with their adults.

Some of the detainees are detained under the Detention Orders and the others are detained pending detention orders.

All confessions and statements are recorded in Sinhala language with the assistance of translators.

Authorities of the camp had produced record books to HRCSL Matara Regional Office complying with Section 28 (2) of the HRCSL Act. Nevertheless, these records do not carry sufficient information.

Most of the detainees claimed that they were arrested without any specific reasons. Most of the detainees said that they are unable to ascertain the reason for their arrest.

Talks

Most of the detainees are tortured outside the camp. But no complaints had been made to that effect against the authorities.

There is no evidence to prove the legality of the establishment of the Boossa Camp under Section 19 (2) of the Emergency Regulations (2005).

The Camp authorities had taken steps to inform the relatives of detainees about their arrest within 24 hours.

As a practice, the Police informs about the detention of a suspect, but not the arrest.

It is observed by the HRCSL team that the correct procedure is not followed by the authorities.

The Commission is to hold talks with the relevant authorities to revise the methods being used.

Overall observation is that the detention camps are not up to the required internationally recognised standards.

The Government alone cannot find solutions to some of the problems such as lack of resources and technical assistance. The cooperation and assistance is needed from the international community to upgrade the standards as Sri Lanka is a developing country.

Tackling corruption in the context of Sri Lanka

Speech by Justice Saleem Marsoof PC, Judge of the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka at the conference in Colombo organised by the Commission to Investigate Bribery and Corruption under the theme ‘Mainstreaming anti corruption - search for Strategies’ to mark International Anti Corruption Day recently.

If you feel that roads and other infrastructure facilities are not properly maintained despite money being voted for this purpose, that in admitting children to schools recruiting people for jobs, those who deserve are not selected, that the police and other law enforcement authorities do not act fairly, that you have to part with money ‘under the counter’ to obtain a building permit or a copy of court proceedings, or that your own elected representative’s vote can be bought for money, it simply means that you are living in a society in which corruption has reached alarming proportions.

Redressing these grievances is more difficult because corruption is, as described by Professor Barry Rider in his book entitled ‘Corruption: The Enemy Within’ (Kluwer: 1997), really the enemy within and is very deep rooted in society.

Latin

The word ‘corruption’ is derived from the Latin word ‘corrupts’ (which means ‘break completely’ or ‘destroy’), and it literally means broken object. Conceptually, corruption is a form of behaviour, which departs from ethics, morality, tradition, law and civic virtue, which has the effect of slowly but steadily destroying the fabric of society.

The classic definition, followed by the World Bank and Transparency International, views corruption as the use of one’s public position for illegitimate private gains. Abuse of power and personal gain, however, can occur in both the public and private domains and often in collusion with individuals from both sectors.

Although corruption is a global phenomenon, it has a greater impact on developing nations such as Sri Lanka than on more affluent countries. This is because of certain characteristics of corruption which makes its effects extremely destructive in the third world context, and these characteristics are noted below:

(1) In the third world, corruption occurs up-stream whereas in the developed world, it is more a ‘down-stream’ phenomenon. It has been said that “Corruption at the top distorts fundamental decisions about development priorities, policies, and projects. In industrial countries, these core decisions are taken through transparent competition and on merit, even though petty corruption may occur down stream.” (N. Vittal, Institutional Mechanism to Prevent and Eradicate Corruption: The Indian Perspective (Paper presented at the CAPAM seminar, February 2000).

(2) Most of the money gained through corrupt means in the third world is immediately smuggled out to safe havens abroad. Whereas there is some capital flight in the developed countries as well, in these a greater proportion of ‘corruption money’ is actually ploughed back into domestic production and investment, which is from a country perspective a less destructive process.

Corruption

(3) Third world corruption often leads to promotion, not prison. The big fish, unless they belong to the opposition, rarely fry.

In contrast, industrialised countries often have a process of accountability where even top leaders are investigated and prosecuted. For instance, the former Italian Prime Minister Bettino Craxi was forced to live in exile in Tunisia to escape extradition on corruption charges in Rome.

The most frustrating aspect of corruption in the South is that the corrupt are often too powerful to go through such an honest process of accountability.

(4) Corruption in the third world results in further impoverishment and the diminishment of dwindling resources. In most of these countries the per capita income of a large proportion of the population is far below poverty levels and national budgets have yawning gaps.

While corruption in rich nations may be tolerable, through reprehensible, in Sri Lanka and other Southern nations, it is political dynamite because while a few make fortunes through corruption, the majority of the population cannot meet their basic needs.

Corruption, if unabated, will lead to massive human deprivation and even more extreme income inequalities in these countries. Combating corruption in the region is not just about punishing corrupt politicians and bureaucrats but about saving human lives.

Horns

The pressing need to ‘take the bull by the horns’, so to speak, and to combat the menace of corruption cannot therefore be overstated. Sri Lanka’s commitment to eradicate corruption is seen in its ratification of the United Nations Convention Against Corruption. In consonance with Sri Lanka’s commitment under the Convention, there can be four basic strategies in the war against corruption. I call these strategies -

(1) Taking the profit out of corruption

(2) Strengthening the political will to fight corruption

(3) Strengthening governance and accountability; and

(4) Prevention is better than cure.

(1) Taking the profit out of corruption

The policy of corruption legislation as well as the prime strategy of an anti-corruption body would be to make corruption unprofitable by dealing with the menace while it is in ‘progress’. This presupposes a sound legal framework and an independent and efficient anti-corruption authority.

Sri Lanka can legitimately boast of the best anti-corruption laws in the entire third world. Initially, the Penal Code dealt exclusively with the offence of bribery. However, in 1954 the offence was brought within a special regime with the enactment of the Bribery Act No. 11 of 1954.

The Bribery Act and the Declaration of Assets and Liabilities Law No. 1 of 1975 are the primary enactments that deal with the offence of bribery in Sri Lanka.

The enactment of the Bribery (Amendment) Act No. 20 of 1994 and the Commission to Investigate Allegation of Bribery or Corruption Act No. 19 of 1994 brought about a significant change with regard to the law of bribery and corruption in Sri Lanka.

By the former Act, corruption was officially recognised, for the first time in Sri Lanka, as a cognizable offence. By the latter Act, the structure of the enforcement mechanism was subjected to a fundamental change by the replacement of the Bribery Commissioner’s Department, with an independent Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption.

The main objective of establishing the Commission, according to the Minister who introduced the relevant legislation in Parliament, was “to confer on the authorities... genuine independence which is at once apparent to society” and ensure that it would “not (be) accessible to the government” so that it “will be able to do its work impartially and equitably without any pressure of any kind exerted on them by the government in power.”

The seventeenth amendment to the Constitution of Sri Lanka (certified on 3rd October 2001) has given even more protection to the members of the Commission against external pressure and influence.

Members and officers of public sector institutions such as government and provincial ministries and departments, statutory bodies, public corporations and local authorities, as well as members of Parliament and members of the Judiciary, are subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery and Corruption.

To be continued