brand logo

Convention Against Torture Act is a dismal failure: Sumanthiran

06 Jul 2021

By Aazam Ameen Responding to the amendments proposed to the Convention Against Torture And Other Cruel, Inhuman Or Degrading Treatment Or Punishment Act and the Code of Criminal procedure act by Minister of Justice Ali Sabry in Parliament today (06), MP M. A. Sumanthiran of the Illankai Tamil Arasu Kadchi (ITAK) stated that while on paper such moves are welcome, he expressed that the Convention Against Torture Act has been a dismal failure. The proposed amendments to the same seeks to make it obligatory for magistrates to visit police stations and other detention centres and examine whether the detainees are properly treated, particularly with a view to ensure that there is no torture or other cruel inhumane treatment. “When was the last time a magistrate performed such visits, I’m asking the Minister of Justice. How are you going to enforce this? How will you enforce a magistrate to visit police stations and other detention centers, when there is no mechanism to do that? Even if you have a mechanism to enforce it, if magistrates are not conscientious enough to do what the law requires them to do, can you force them to do so?” he asked the Minister of Justice. Referring to these amendments as “window dressing” Sumanthiran alleged that such moves are mere facades to fool people. “Various researches have been made with regard to the efficacy of this act. For 26 years since it was passed, we have seen 9 convictions, 6 of which are under appeal. A very recent publication by the Law and Society trust says that only 47 prosecutions have been made which accounts for less than 0.1% of complaints made,” Sumanthiran said. Sumanthiran further alleged that even the complaints made are only about 10 to 20 percent of the actual happenings and people fear to come forward due to reprisals and further mistreatment of family members. “This act in operation has been a dismal failure. A general calculation will show that only 0.06% of the complaints result in any conviction. How is that to be compared with article 10 and 11 of the Constitution? They are two provisions that cannot be abridged or restricted. We have a situation where time and again, the Supreme Court finds police officers guilty of the most inhumane methods of torture. The Minister of Justice knows this very well. You have the act to show people around the world that torture is an offence in this country. Today you are enhancing the fine. What is the purpose if you don’t prosecute the guilty?,” he added. Sumanthiran alleged that as far as torture in this country is concerned, the system is broken, adding that it cannot be fixed by passing laws. With regard to the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA), he is of the view that torture became an epidemic in the country because of the provision that allowed for confessions made to police officers to become admissible evidence. “The investigative skills of police officers disappeared long ago. All they have to do is beat someone up until they get a signature, while the real culprit is on the street. Your concern about national security is gone when the one who actually committed the crime is free,” he argued. He also stated that the PTA cannot be amended as it has to be repealed. “The foundation of the law is flawed. It was only brought in for 6 months. We agree that we must have laws to deal with terrorism, but not in this manner. There must be a balance. With article 10 and 11 of the Constitution, you cannot allow for even one man to be tortured,” he said. With regard to the missing persons issue, Sumanthiran questioned the government as to how they refer to these instances as “allegations” when it was the commissions appointed by the government itself that have provided the numbers of missing persons. “When your own commissions have said that tens of thousands have gone missing and not one has been traced and not one person has been prosecuted, what's the point in saying that people are alleging. Why can't you investigate at least one case?,” he asked. In conclusion he stated that preaching that the government will protect the dignity of everyone is an attempt at “window dressing” for the European Union. “How do you make ends meet? This is window dressing for the EU. I want the EU and the world to know that this is a weak and feeble attempt by the government to show that they are compliant with international human rights. You will not succeed in this false effort,” Sumanthiran stated.


More News..