| Interview conducted by our correspondent in Colombo
Edited by Sian Lee
( June 13, 2012, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) Many statements and publications have been issued expressing the sentiments of government officials and civil society toward the Sri Lankan police. But how do the Sri Lankan police conceive of their role in society? How do they perceive themselves, particularly in light of their subordination to powerful political centres? And how have the police been affected by the distrust, anger, cynicism and accusations with which civil society often reacts to the high occurrence of custodial deaths and the police force's practice of torture? In this exclusive interview with Gamini Gunawardane, retired Senior Deputy Inspector General of Police in Sri Lanka, we present readers the unique perspective of someone who has been a part of the Sri Lankan police force.
Question: The Ministry of Justice is shortly to present a bill amending the Criminal Procedure Court allowing the police to detain a suspect for up to 48 hours before producing him before a magistrate. This is opposed to the 24 hour cap specified by the Criminal Procedure Code. What are your views?
This is long overdue. In fact we were asking for this since the 1970s, mainly to avoid allegation of the use of 3rd degree methods by the police. My view is that 48 hours is hardly enough. It should really be 72 hours. The main reason for application of 3rd degree methods sometimes was due to the facts that police were rushed unnecessarily and unfairly to interrogate a suspect, verify his statement and recover any stolen property and to confront other suspects that may warrant arrest – all within a matter of 24 hours! Don’t they need to sleep? Crimes are reported daily. As a safeguard against allegations of assault, we suggest that a suspect be produced before a medical officer as soon as he is arrested. We also instructed our officers to produce him before a magistrate from whom a police custody order could be obtained. The suspect could also be produced for a medical examination at the end of the 72 hours before being produced before the Magistrate for further remand. The investigative advantage obtained by this provision would be vitiated by the provision for a suspect to meet his lawyer during 48/72 hrs because the suspect could then be advised on how to make a selectively statement that would coincide with stories told by the other suspects. This possibility was pointed out in a recent article in 'The Island', a daily based in Colombo, by retired Inspector General of Police, Dr. Frank de Silva.
You see, there are two concepts at tension here. On one side, you deprive a person of his right to freedom of movement (legal principle of "innocent until found guilty before the law"). On the other hand, we are duty-bound to solve crime so society may be safe and ordered and where other peoples' right to life and property, etc. may to be secured. So how much of each of these rights is a society willing to trade off in order to have a reasonable degree of freedom to live in society, which again is everybody's entitlement, has to be decided by each society. And what price is a policeman called upon to pay for trying to maintain this delicate balance of these two freedoms? We are caught in the invidious position of executing the trade-off, yet our calculus is utilitarian.
Why should a police officer be put through all this hassle merely because he chose the profession, often at the risk of his own life? There appears to be an unsaid assumption that a police officer who is entrusted with ensuring one' safety cannot be trusted. Of course there is the matter of accountability. But it is another matter altogether to be treated as a potential criminal or as one likely to violate law and proper procedure. (Please look up my article titled: "Whose rights are we talking of?" that was published in 'The Island".)
Question: You retired as a senior deputy inspector general (DIG) of police; what was the satisfying moments in your service?
It is difficult to pin point one instance of satisfying moment in the Police. I would say that I loved every moment I spent in the police. However now that you asked me a pointed question, I will recall this instance. When I got into the witness box and presented myself for cross-examination in the Presidential Commission of Inquiry appointed by Mr. J.R Jayawardane in the case against Mr. Nihal Jayawickrame, former Secy. Ministry of Justice and others, defence lawyer Mr. S Nadesan, one of the cleverest lawyers in the Bar (nicknamed 'Jackal of the Bar') told the judges, "I have no questions to ask Mr. Gunawardane." Mind you, this is while imputing all kinds of villainy to the CID, of which I was a member.
Well, now that we started, other cases come into my mind, but to relate those incidents, I will be compelled to refer to some of the 'respectable' people still living among us and their progeny. That will not be proper.
Question: Tell us about the significant steps taken by you to provide security to the people?
Here again, my entire career, daily bread, was providing security to people. So it is too numerous to mention all the things I have done in the course of my career. It was a case of making "Bhayappatthaa ca nibbhayaa" as the Buddha said; this is broadly translated as "ensuring safety of people, relieving their fear." You see, living in fear all the time is a terrible thing. I consider it a great privilege in my life that my full time role in life was one of making people feel safe. Anyway two major incidents come to my mind:
1. In Galle as SP, I quelled the Sinhala-Muslim riots, an annual affair, until I took over Galle Division after I was thrown out of the CID in 1978. Later, on allegations made by Muslim people that the police were partial against the Muslims, Mr. JRJ appointed a One Man Commission - retired Supreme Court Judge Alles. I started giving my evidence here, and after my 3rd day in the witness box, the Commission wound up on orders of JRJ himself, or so I was told, at the request of the very Muslim people who made the allegation! Have you heard of anything like that?!
2. The other was in Nuwara Eliya District when I was DIG Central Range in 1986, when the entire district exploded with a huge communal clash. It was calmed with great effort and I undertook a station-wide peace programme with the assistance of the Srvodaya Chief, Dr. Ariyaratne, which culminated in an annual pilgrimage by all nationalities together to Sri Pada. Over a hundred thousand people participated over three years. I have great satisfaction today that the harmony that this effort brought about is still holding out in this region, despite a war in the North. I presented a paper on this success at Harvard University in 1988 in one of my courses and it was given an 'A' grade. In fact, I addressed several audiences in police and other organizations in the United States to share this experience with the police officers there.
Question: What are the difficulties that you faced during the office?
I wouldn't call them 'difficulties'. I would rather describe them as 'challenges'. In fact a police officer's life is one filled with challenges. I loved it. These challenges made up the adventure in police life.
I will just relate one incident that comes to my mind at this moment. In 1984/5, August I was posted to Jaffna as the Coordinating Superintendent. It was shortly thereafter that the Tamil Terrorist Groups jointly declared war on the Sri Lankan government. We in the police force had to bear the brunt of it, despite having no military training. The government itself was still not mentally prepared to take on this situation. I lost 43 of my men; that was disastrous. An explosives-filled truck drove into Chavakachcheri police station killing around thirty men, including the Officer-in-Charge. The STF faced the first land mine blast at Thikkam and lost four men. Many others were injured. I was ordered to close down vulnerable police stations. The situation was very bleak. I told myself we could do nothing much but hold our ground, so I had all my men put through military crash courses with the help of the army. We dug in and held our ground.
Question: Please tell us about the political interferences to police department in Sri Lanka?
I have written enough on this and I do not want to repeat myself. However, just to answer very briefly, I think it started the day Sri Lankans started governing themselves from 1948. They could not do that before because there was Ceylon Police of the British Colonial Government. From independence, political influences began creeping gradually into police administration. Soon those influences crystallised into full-blown political control of the police forces, who were ordered around and manipulated as if they were the private security forces for and doormats to the politicians in the ruling government party. The first IGP who fell to political power was Mr. Osmund de Silva, in 1958 (?) because he was not amenable to SWRD. Today it is not Sri Lanka Police but Sri Lanka Political Police. This situation of partiality and lack of autonomy in the police has been going from bad to worse with each government outdoing its predecessor. Things may still worsen, if there could be anything worse than this current situation!
Question: What are the difficulties faced by every policemen during their duty?
A: All the real difficulties, or dilemmas, faced by policemen in Sri Lanka today can be attributed to the politicisation of the police! All other practical, day-to-day difficulties are manageable in comparison by an independent and professional police service.
Question: Why do police resort to sub-human treatment and torture of the suspects after they were arrested?
A: Assuming that they do, YOU tell me why do you think decent human beings who have joined to police do it? If you had joined the police, how would you have performed your duties? Yes, why do the police do such things assuming that they do as you say? Get more money? Get promotions? Get sadistic satisfaction? To feel good? Because they are always drunk or doped? Because they are keen to lose their jobs? Losing whatever jewellery their wives have to defend themselves in court? Because they are keen to lose their jobs? Losing their future and all their opportunities to collect bribes?
Incidentally, are all people arrested by police subject to such treatment? On what basis do they discriminate?
If your daughter/wife or sister was molested and the offender if treated "humanely" in accordance with all his human rights, would you think that because police took bribes the man was softly dealt with? How exactly are the police expected to administer justice and compassion with the same tools when the very people they deal with, both victims and offenders, desire different things?
What I am trying to drive at is that this is a research subject ill-suited to sweeping statements. A lot of research has been and is being done on this. It is too much for a brief Question & Answer session such as this.
Question: Custodial death is not rare in Sri Lanka. You can’t just deny this statement because there were many cases were reported, as we all know. What are the reasons for such custodial deaths?
Who denied that? Why do you pre-judge that I would deny it? Custodial deaths are not peculiar to Sri Lanka only but are a worldwide phenomenon in all police services in the world. So there is no question of denying it.
Here are the reasons:
1. Natural causes.
2. Suicide by prisoner.
3. Injuries suffered prior to arrest.
4. Injuries suffered by prisoner in resisting arrest or trying to run away from arrest.
5. Violence used by police.
6. Prior excessive consumption of drugs.
Question: Why are Sri Lankan police still unable to an initiate proper/genuine investigation procedure instead of resorting to physical abuse against suspects?
Another question where an essay has to be written for a complete answer. But here are some snippets.
Why do you assume that proper/genuine investigation procedure are STILL not implemented? If such investigative procedures are not in place, how did the police conduct successful investigations for the last 125 years? Why do so many Supreme Court decisions contain praise for police investigations? You must read them. Read the Mathew Peiris case. Read the numerous books written by Justice Alles on cases resulting from successful investigations. Suspects are convicted daily by judges and Juries in various court houses. Do you think they are out of their minds to convict the accused if they were not satisfied with the investigations? Some cases are solved even before the suspects are arrested, the most recent being the Trinco cricketer's case. How was it possible without a proper investigative procedure? What do you think senior officers do if they do not supervise and guide investigations to their conclusion? Sometimes, it is a pleasure to peruse even a simple case investigated by a young police constable done so methodically. What do you think police are doing with forensic medicine, DNA testing, fingerprint science, medico-legal examinations, government analysts' tests, and lately with telecommunication, investigative methods, electronic identification systems, close circuit TV surveillance and automated criminal records systems?
In the face of all of this, what is the basis of your question in the first place? Is such a question, which presumes Sri Lankan police incapable of proper investigative procedures, warranted? Are you not insulting the police of your country when you should be proud that they are performing such acts of service despite being themselves subjugated by politicians, some of whom are criminals themselves or former jail birds?
Question: It was six years ago you wrote an article on police reform where you pointed, “the fundamental problem with the police today is that it lacks credibility. People believe that the police are powerless to act on their own as they used to be.” There is no improvement still even after six years, what should be done and where can we start?
Answer: Police has lost credibility because it is perceived that they are controlled by political authority. Remedy: Remove political strangle hold on the police.
The second part of last line of your question is very important. “Where can we start?" Right here with US - the People. If the people are really desirous of an independent, impartial, people's police, it is the people who must pressure the politicians till they relent. But the question is, do people really want an Independent, impartial honest police where even the Traffic cop will let you off w/o taking a bribe?! It may be a scary idea for many people. will someone say then it will be a police state? But this really is quality of life, not bridges or super highways. It costs the government nothing!
Question: My last question is concerning what we have to achieve today to create “a people-oriented police’ instead of a ‘politically-oriented police’. This is a matter you have highlighted many times. We are now talking about a collapsed institute because of various reasons; now the institution itself has lost its dignity. What is your message to the authority who can re-structure the police department?
Answer: There is no need to re-structure the Police department. The Colonial Police structure is sound enough. The only 'shaping' required is to prune down the plethora of DIGs and SPs posts that have been created for political and other reasons. We need to streamline the police institution to become 'lean & hungry' as required in Organizational Management, what it was, to meet today's requirement.
My message to authorities I have given in many of my articles if they will only read them! In my article entitled "Can the police reform itself?" I recall having given about ten basic things that needed to be done. I would further cull it to five essentials for the purpose of our discussion:
- Release the political stranglehold on the police department and allow it function as an Independent Police that will be held accountable for their commissions. I believe the police department is quite capable of doing this.
- Help the police develop professionally and grow a sense of pride and honour in that professionalism.
- Set up a corruption control unit in the police, as the governments in Australia and other advanced countries have done.
- Allow the police to switch to community-oriented policing instead of being chained to politics-oriented policing. The police have a moral and legal mandate to serve the people, not politicians.
- Return the Sri Lankan police their SELF RESPECT!
 Many statements a...){kind=link}
Post a Comment