Focus on Rights

Securing justice for women whose lives have been destroyed by conflict is an insuperably difficult question in Sri Lanka. The tactic resorted by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in using women as suicide bombers following thorough mental and physical indoctrination, has resulted in women of Tamil ethnicity being placed in the centre of the storm as it were. This week, the newspapers reported the extraordinary story of Nalini, accused number one in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination who had just completed her three year long Masters’ course in computer applications from the Indira Gandhi Open University from the special camp for women in the Vellore prison.

Nalini's story and the plight of others

The picture attached to the news story showed a fair, sharp featured woman who, on a cursory glance, appears to be as far distanced from a possible suicide bomber as can be. Yet Nalini was the 'back-up human bomb' (as the news story went), in case Dhanu the woman who activated herself, thereby killing Gandhi, failed for whatever reason. Nalini's aptitude for her studies has apparently been marked; she could well be among the first batch of convicts to receive a post graduate degree and attend a convocation for that purpose.

The questions therefore are complex and countless but some predominate; namely in what way can these aggressively competing stories of one personality be reconciled? How many more women have undergone and are yet undergoing Nalini's plight, caught up in the mindless terror tactics of the LTTE who do not hesitate to use even disabled women to engage in self immolation as was evidenced just a few weeks back in the attack on EPDP politician Douglas Devananda?

For women generally of Tamil ethnicity who belong to the marginalized category, living in Sri Lanka is a stupendously high risk proposition. Used mercilessly by the LTTE on the one hand, they are also subjected to physical and sexual harassment by state actors, particularly soldiers and police officers in areas of the conflict as well as in the capital. The directive requiring female officers to be present for the purpose of frisking women at checkpoints is not uniformly followed and failure to comply with this directive does not lead to any consequences. An earlier proposal that women and children's desks should be established in police stations in conflict areas, headed by female personnel who have the language skills needed to deal with complaints and the training needed to handle cases of sexual violence and other forms of gender-based violence and who work together with local citizens' committees has also been limited to verbiage only.

Impunity for perpetrators of sexual violence

Indeed, widespread impunity that continues to be enjoyed by perpetrators of rape and other forms of violence committed against such women provides strong evidence of systematic discrimination. The consequences of this impunity are devastating for individual victims who are effectively denied access to criminal and civil remedies including reparations. Instead, at the most, perpetrators are transferred away from their stations. In most cases, witness intimidation results in the collapse of the case half way through the trial. The basic requirements of prosecution of rape cases including medical examinations are often subverted. One classic example of this was in the Vijayakala Nanthakumar and Sivamani Weerakoon case which arose out of an incident in Uppukulam in March 2001 when the two women were allegedly raped by members of the Mannar police's Counter-Subversive Unit (CSU).

Despite the initial report of the District Medical Officer to the magistrate that he had examined the women and that there was no evidence of rape, there was a further examination later due to public outrage and an appeal made by the Bishop of Mannar. The victims then stated that they had not been subjected to any medical examination and further, that they had been threatened by the police not to consent to an examination or provide any evidence to the magistrate concerning the torture. The second examination, eighteen days after the alleged rape, concluded that there were several injuries consistent with the allegations of torture. Police investigations commenced and twelve police officers and two navy officers were arrested. However, in a pattern symptomatic of these cases, the accused were later released on bail.

Other common patterns were evidenced. The trial was fixed not in Vavuniya but in Anuradhapura at the request of the accused. Indictment was filed, (after the women moved the Supreme Court on a rights violation), only years later against three CSU police officers and nine Navy officers in the Anuradhapura High Court. This trial is still pending. After being constantly threatened and intimidated, the women (who were stubborn for many years in their desire to see justice done) have now succumbed to the pressure with one victim fleeing to India.

Ineffective judicial interventions

This is just one case which is indicative of the general pattern. While impunity continues for members of the forces who engage in blatantly unconstitutional actions under the PTA and Emergency Regulations, interventions by the courts have not been able to stem a change of the general pattern of impunity behind which members of the forces take refuge for their actions. Such interventions have been able to correct injustices only in very exceptional situations which are more the exception rather than the rule. The Krishanthi Kumarasamy case some years back, where the rape and murder of a fifteen year old school girl and the subsequent murder of her mother, brother and neighbour who went in search of her, by eight soldiers and one policeman on duty at the Chemmani check point, resulted in the conviction of some junior army officers but this remains a unique case which has not been replicated in many other similar instances.

In some instances, women have been fortunate enough to obtain justice from the Supreme Court but these too, have been few and far inbetween. In August 2001, the case filed by Yogalingam Vijitha of Paruthiyadaippu, Kayts, against the Reserve Sub Inspector of Police, Police Station, Negombo and six others (SC FR No. 186/2001, SCM 23.8.2002) was a case in point where the Supreme Court ordered compensation and costs to be paid to a Tamil woman who had been arrested, detained and brutally tortured. The Court pointed out thus; 'As Athukorala J in Sudath Silva Vs Kodituwakku 1987 2 SLR 119 observed 'the facts of this case has revealed disturbing features regarding third degree methods adopted by certain police officers on suspects held in police custody. Such methods can only be described as barbaric, savage and inhuman. They are most revolting and offend one's sense of human decency and dignity ….."

The Attorney General was also directed to consider taking steps under the Convention Against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment Or Punishment Act No. 22 of 1994 against the respondent police officers and any others who are responsible for the acts of torture perpetrated on the victim. To the best of my knowledge, this has not yet happened. The lack of seriousness in which Act No. 22 of 1994 has been utilised with regard to members of the armed forces and police who commit serious human rights violations remains a problem.

In the light of the above, there is an urgent need for a legal process geared towards dealing with the violations of the rights of life and liberty of women during the conflict, which would put into place strong structures of witness protection and examine current legal obstacles that impede such a process. In this context again, we are not being apprised of the contents of the proposed Witness Protection Bill in its final version and stay in continued apprehension of another 'half baked' law, akin to the recently passed so called International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) Act which indeed, shames the very Covenant itself from which it is so presumptuous as to borrow its long title.

Meanwhile, none of the proposals put forward by the major parties in Sri Lanka have recognised this issue as being of primary concern. Instead, if at all, the focus has been in increasing women's representation in the political process which as laudable as it may be, does not go far enough to recognize the many faceted problem of women in conflict and examine their demands for justice. Guaranteeing of joint ownership rights in land where state lands are concerned and the devoting of special attention and staff to issues affecting women such as the clearing of land, rebuilding damaged houses and practical livelihood challenges facing the numerous female headed households, also remain of paramount importance.

Women's demands for justice in Sri Lanka