Bindunuwewa massacre

Bindunuwewa Rehabilitation Centre was one of three centres run with substantial overseas funding to rehabilitate LTTE suspects and surrenders. On Oct 25th in 2000 a mob of Sinhalese stormed the camp and massacred the inmates while 60 police officers stationed that night to protect the inmates stood by. 28 inmates died and another 14 were seriously injured.

Bindunuwewa Rehabilitation Centre was one of three centres run with substantial overseas funding to rehabilitate LTTE suspects and surrenders. The government of Sri Lanka ran these centres. It was shown off as a model for the rehabilitation of former LTTE members thus accumulating a lot of merit points for the government.

On Oct 25th in 2000 a mob of Sinhalese stormed the camp and massacred the inmates while 60 police officers stationed that night to protect the inmates stood by. 28 inmates died and another 14 were seriously injured. There were nine survivors. Two inquiries, one by the Sri Lankan Human rights Commission (SLHRC) and another Presidential Commission of Inquiry (PCI) followed. A criminal proceeding also was initiated. In June 2005 the court proceedings were completed. No one was convicted for any offence.

The massacre as told by the survivors to SLHRC - 3

On October 24, the detainees were raising some complaints they had with the Officer in Charge. Their complaints were that letters to and phone calls for them were not being passed onto them; and they were being detained for more than a year rather than the three-nine month period. There were some arguments and seeing that the detainees were agitated a policeman fired in the air. The situation calmed down and the detainees went to bed.

Next morning when the detainees woke up they saw large crowds and a large number of policemen outside. The crowd started to attack the detainees and set fire to their residences. 28 Tamil detainees died and 14 were injured at the end of the carnage. Nineteen victims were identified and nine victims were not identified because their bodies were burned beyond recognition. The names of those identified as released by the police are:

1. Gunapalan Jeyavarthanam, Mannar
2. Antony Jonh, Kallady, Batticaloa
3. Karunakaran Ramasamy, Santhacholai, Vavuniya
4. Rubeshkumar Visvaparan, Vepankulam, Vavuniya
5. Senthuran Vinayamoorthy, Vantharumoolai, Batticalo
6. Mohan Sinnathurai, Aananthapuram, Trincomalee
7. Ravitharan Kanapathipillai, Lingapuram, Manalaru
8. Vijeyenthiran Visvalingam, Navatkadhu, Batticaloa
9. Alakumar Marimuththu, Pullaveli, Batticaloa
10. Mathiyalakan Puniyamoorthy, Mutur, Trincomalee
11. Selvarajah Thurairajah, Thampanai, Jaffna
12. Mukunthan Sivayokarajan, Karaveddi East, Jaffna
13. Vipulanantharajah Sivayokarajan, Thrukovil, Amparai
14. Kokulamani Sajeevan, Kallady, Batticaloa
15. Perinpanayagam Nimalraj, Batticaloa
16. Somasuntharam Sellarase
17. Sivan Kubendran, Arayampathi
18. Vaisvaparan Rubeshkumar alias Sinnathamby, Urmila Kottam Vavuniya
19. Ramasamy Karunakaran, Santhacholai, Vavuniya

Interim Report by the SLHRC on November 1st 2000 [3]

This report by the SLHRC through its name suggests that there will be another report following it but there was no further report from SLHRC on this matter. Major points raised in this report are:

1. When the detainees who were being attacked tried to run for safety one of them was shot down by police officers. His body had three bullet wounds. One of the survivors lost two fingers as a result of the shooting by the police officers.
2. The 60 odd police officers at the scene failed to take any action to stop the carnage. Yet the SLHCR did not lay any criminal responsibility on the police officers rather they were found guilty for the minor offence of dereliction of duty.
3. There was substantial organizing and poster campaign against the inmates between the time the detainees protested and the time they were attacked by the mobs.

Report by the Presidential Commission of Inquiry (PCI)

The report by the Presidential Commission of Inquiry appointed in March 2001 handed its report to the President in early 2002. It was never made public. In any case it was not mandated to inquire and recommend any prosecution. Other papers written on the topic however, has published parts of the findings in this report.

The Commission finds clear evidence that a significant degree of organizing took place in the twelve to fourteen hours between the initial protest in the camp and its violent destruction.

The crowd outside initiated the violence as stones were thrown at the inmates. The inmates reacted to the provocations by exploding a gas cylinder within the camp. While this initially succeeded in frightening the crowd, its ultimate effect seems to have been to further inflame things, as the crowd soon thereafter stormed the camp as the police looked on.

That there was an utter failure on the part of the police stationed around the camp is beyond dispute. The Commission report strongly criticizes the two most senior police officers in the area – ASP Dayaratne and HQI Seneviratne – for a series of failures.

Even at the last moment, the inmates could have been evacuated from the camp.

The prosecution

Criminal Investigation Department (CID) carried out its own inquiry and indicted 41 suspects including 10 police officers. There were flaws in the prosecution at many levels. Some of which are:

1. Although both inquiries have strongly criticised that there were substantial prior organization before the mob stormed the camp there was no attempt to investigate the “organized nature of the massacre”.
2. There was no attempt to lay charges for the criminal conduct of the police in allowing the massacre to continue while they stood by. Nor was the police shooting of the fleeing inmates investigated.
3. There was a systematic destruction of evidence. Bullets from the body of the detainee who was killed by police shooting was removed and was not available as evidence.
4. Though two higher-ranking officers were clearly identified in the inquiries they were never charged of any crime. All the police officers who were charged are middle and low ranking officers.
5. The charges that were brought on the suspects were for murder and attempted murder. The prosecution did not lay any lesser charges for which there would have been a greater possibility of conviction.

Despite such blatant criminality the Sri Lankan justice system has allowed all the culprits to go free. This is also not the only time this has happened.

The outcome of the Bindunuwewa trial is part of a continuing pattern of justice handed out to the Tamils. The history of human rights violations against Tamils in Sri Lanka at the hands of the state’s security forces is so long and dates back to the 1950’s. Only a handful of the serious violations against Tamils by the Sri Lankan security forces have been subjected to investigations by the government. The chronological order in which these investigations were conducted is listed below.

The Sansoni Commission appointed in investigate the 1977 progrom recommended compensation to the victims. It said, “incidents which occurred during the specified period were of such an extreme nature and so widespread that an exception should be made as regards the payment of compensation”. The committee appointed by the government on this recommendation to assess the compensation never sat.

The court case on the Krishanthi mass rape and murder in 1996 in Jaffna was completed 1998. Five low ranking soldiers are in prison awaiting death sentence and a further six soldiers were sentenced to life imprisonment. This is the only case in which the Sri Lankan courts found persons from the state security force guilty for crimes against Tamils. This was due to the extreme pressure brought on the government by local and international human rights organizations. There was also criticism that the resulting high profile of this case has marred many other equally gruesome rape and murder of Tamil women by the state security forces.

During 1996 large-scale disappearances of Tamils took place within a period of few months. Presidential Commission of Inquiry into the disappearances in the North between 1990-1998 started its work in 1995 and issued its final report in 2003. This investigation has failed to investigate the cases of disappearances in Mandaitivu in Jaffna all together. Also no substantive steps have been taken following the issue of the report.

Chemmani mass grave was identified as a place where many of those who have disappeared may be buried. It was first revealed in the courts by one of those convicted of Krishanthi’s rape and murder. Under heavy international pressure, exhumation was conducted in the presence of foreign experts. Four army personnel and a police officer were arrested in March 2000 on suspicion. The five were released on bail in June 2000. The case is still on going five years later.

The outcome of all of these investigations indicates a continuation of a pattern. Even when investigations are initiated under heavy pressure they are being stalled at every stage.

22 November 2006

Print this

Email this