Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Warning: This investigative report contains graphic contents that some may find
disturbing – Editors
by Ruwan Laknath Jayakody, Kavindya Chris Thomas and Kavindya Perera-Apr
19, 2018
Apr 19, 2018
( April 19, 2018, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) The prosecution of six high
ranking officials previously attached to the Ministry of Defence, the State
Intelligence Service, the Prisons Department and the Sixth Gajaba Regiment of the
Army in relation to the Welikada Prisons incident of November 2012, has been
recommended by a Committee of Inquiry which probed into the matter.
The Committee of Inquiry into the Prison Incident Welikada – 2012 (C.I.P.I) has
recommended charging former Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa, former
Head/Director of the State Intelligence Services and the Terrorism Investigation
Division (TID) Senior Deputy Inspector General of Police (SDIG) Chandra Nimal
Wakishta, former Jailor and Officer-In-Charge (OIC) of the Prisons Intelligence Unit
Indika Sampath, former Commissioner General of Prisons P.W. Kodippili, then
Brigadier of the Army Shantha Dissanayake and former Superintendent of the
Magazine Prison and an incumbent Commissioner of Prisons (Rehabilitation)
(covering up duties) Emil Ranjan Lamahewage under Section 162 of the Penal
Code, which deals with public officers who disobey the directions of the law with
the intent of causing injury to persons or the Government.
The C.I.P.I thus recommended charging the relevant aforementioned Public
Servants (Rajapaksa, Wakishta, Sampath, Kodippili, Dissanayake and
Lamahewage) under Section 162 of the Penal Code, whereby public servants by
way of their conduct disobeys the directions of the law in a manner which intends
or knowingly causes injury to a person or the Government. Conviction for the
charge carries a term of simple imprisonment for a maximum of one year and/or
a fine. Also, the C.I.P.I noted that the aforementioned Officers owed a duty of
care to the victims and that they were ideally positioned to foresee the
catastrophic consequences of their acts of commission and omission.
f the
weapon.
At around 7.47 a.m. there was no T56 weapon close to the bodies of P. Harsha
Manjusri Manukeerthi Perera alias Nilame, Asarappulige/Asarapodige Jothipala
alias Ponna Kapila, and Kankanage Malindra Nilendra Palpola alias Malan (photo
numbers 8881-2) {A photograph courtesy of Madushanka taken prior to
Gunawardene shows the absence of a weapon near their bodies at around 4 a.m.
and 5 a.m.}.
At 9.33 a.m. on 10 November, 2012, there was a T56 (number 21532857) 78cm
away from the body of Mohamed Wijeya Rohana alias Gundu Mama where
empty casings were found.
A Magistrate is shown at 1.30 p.m. examining the scene where the body of
Susantha was.
And the photographs (numbers 9118-9) depict the scene visit of the Magistrate
for the conduct of the inquest at around 1.44 p.m., where now a T56 is seen close
to the bodies of Manjusri aka Nilame, Jothipala aka Ponna Kapila, and Palpola aka
Malan.
The C.I.P.I noted that this goes beyond reasonable doubt that the four T56s were
a “subsequent introduction”. According to the C.I.P.I, the introduction of the
weapons was to project the view that the inmates had used them, thereby
justifying their execution.
Selective Killings
As per section 5.4.1.1 of the report, since the evidence placed before the C.I.P.I
discloses the alleged involvements of Rangajeewa and Lamahewage in the alleged
selective killings, it is also recommended that this aspect of their complicity be
gone into fully. Lamahewage’s alleged involvement, as per the eyewitness
accounts of inmates, in the picking up of inmate Malith Sameera Perera aka
Konda Amila, amongst many others, and making him kneel down (done by the
Army) in front of the Welikada Prisons Superintendent’s Office in the wee hours
of 10 November, 2012, morning, must be investigated. This is in the context of
the deceased having previously lodged a complaint (confirmation of an alleged
threat to life) with the Borella Police and the Human Rights Commission of Sri
Lanka against Lamahewage. The C.I.P.I pointed towards a likely motive of
revenge.
Eyewitness accounts of inmates have mentioned the removal and picking up of or
more precisely the selecting of Jothipala aka Ponna Kapila, Manjusri aka Nilame,
Palpola aka Malan, Thushara Chandana aka Kalu Thushara, Mohamed Wijeya
Rohana aka Gundu Mama, Atapattu, and Susantha for selective killing.
Forensic Analysis
Post-mortem examinations conducted by the Colombo Chief JMO’s Office
revealed that the causes of the deaths were due to injuries from rifle firearm
related gunshots from a distance (of beyond three feet).
A Consultant JMO Dr. Prasanna B. Dassanayake stated that a blackening wound
on the body of Mohamed Wijeya Rohana aka Gundu Mama was suggestive of
close range fire of six to 12 inches.
When shown photographs taken by Prison Guard Madushanka and the Official
SOCO Photographer of the scene where the bodies of Manjusri aka Nilame,
Jothipala aka Ponna Kapila, and Palpola aka Malan were, which in the background
showed marks portraying the flow of the blood stains and splatter, and the bullet
marks on the wall, and asked for an opinion, Colombo Chief JMO Dr. Ajith
Tennakoon opined that going by the distance of the blood stains on the wall from
the ground, the height of the deceased seen on the right side of the photograph,
and the gunshot injury to the upper torso, he was either seated or leaning against
the foot of the wall. Adding further that, going by the position of the three bodies
on the ground and the gap between the three blood stains on the wall, it could be
confirmed that the three persons were close to each other at the time of the
shooting. Further, the three blood stains show a downward trend of the flow of
the blood stain.
Elsewhere, swabs taken from the palms of 10 deceased inmates and forwarded by
the Colombo Chief JMO’s Office to the GA, with the view of finding the presence
of gun powder/spent smokeless powder residue, tested negative on all accounts,
suggesting that the said dead inmates had not fired a firearm on the day.
Previously, the SOCO teams that recovered and examined the T56 weapons had
found no presence of gun powder odour. Officer-In-Charge (OIC) of the SOCO
Colombo Central Sub-Inspector H.M. Sumanalatha had stated that a T56 (number
21534010) found from near the bodies of Manjusri aka Nilame, Jothipala aka
Ponna Kapila, and Palpola aka Malan was not loaded (no magazine inserted into
the weapon).
Additional Fingerprints Registrar of the Crimes Records Division of the Police Chief
Inspector Senaka Kaluarachchi who examined the said four T56 weapons and
other weapons recovered from the Prisons compound, found no palm prints or
fingerprints.
The SOCO when further queried by the C.I.P.I, stated that it was reasonable to
conclude that there had been an excessive use of firearms than necessary to
control the situation and that based on the large number of empty casings
recovered from outside the immediate environs of the Prisons complex, there had
been extensive firing from outside towards the inside of the complex.
On the subject of ballistics, it was the view of Deputy GA P.G. Madawela that the
attack was one of high intensity, more commonly identified with an attempt to
“counter a terrorist attack or capture an enemy camp”. This, as the C.I.P.I notes in
section 4.2.1.1 of the report, constitutes the unjustifiable and excessive use of
firepower (according to Godewatte, 1,060 numbers of high calibre AK (7.62 x 34)
ammunitions had been expended by his troops, a figure which is in addition to the
firepower used by Army Colonel Liyanawadu on the night of 9 November, 2012) in
this situation.
Lapses In The Police Investigation
The C.I.P.I in section 4.1.10.1 of the report noted that delays in the CCD and the
CID taking charge of the weapons used by the STF including the tear gas related
equipment, had resulted in the presence of firearm residues diminishing. It is also
noted by the C.I.P.I that the said weapons had been subsequently cleaned and
oiled by the relevant parties subsequent to firing.
Police Medico-Legal reports of the injured could not be traced.
Furthermore, the C.I.P.I states that the investigations were not comprehensive in
that they did not cover aspects pertaining to the necessity of the conduct of the
search, the STF’s actions, the use of firepower and the motive if any for the killing
of selected inmates.