Police Children and Women Bureau – Matara Division OIC Waruni Bogahawatta, who was once praised for her work in the field of preventing and catching perpetrators of child abuse, was fined Rs. 100,000 by the Supreme Court for detaining a 15-year-old girl last Wednesday (12). The young girl was taken in for questioning after an alleged tip-off the Police received about the girl being sexually assaulted, which according to the girl, never took place. Speaking to The Sunday Morning, Police Media Spokesman SP Ruwan Gunasekara stated that disciplinary action will be taken against OIC Bogahawatta. “She has violated the disciplinary code of police officials, which cannot be excused,” said Gunasekara. When asked whether this issue may result in the public losing confidence in the law enforcement authorities, Gunasekara stated: “This is only one police officer out of 85,000 officials who are working for the betterment of our people.” The girl’s mother, Chulangi Wijesinghe, filed a fundamental rights (FR) petition under Article 126 of the Constitution against OIC Bogahawatta, the Inspector General of Police, and the Attorney General. According to the FR petition, the 15-year-old was at home preparing for her term exams when six police officials, including OIC Bogahawatta, visited her home at 3.30 p.m. It was revealed from the statement that the girl was alone at home at this point and the first respondent, Bogahawatta, was interested in the girl’s capabilities of reciting instant rhythmic verses, and requested the girl to do so. The girl had complied with the police officials and recited a verse, during which the neighbours gathered around the house because of the police jeep which was parked outside and the sound of her voice. Bogahawatta had then publicly questioned the girl about whether she was molested by the Akuressa Pradeshiya Sabha (PS) Chairman, and the girl had denied it. As per the application, Bogahawatta had insisted the police officials received intelligence that the girl was abused, which the girl had once again refuted. Afterwards, the girl’s parents and grandmother had arrived at home. Bogahwatta had once again questioned the girl in the presence of her parents and she had once again answered negatively. At this point, Bogahwatta had insisted that the girl be taken into the Matara Police station for further questioning. The statement stated that upon arriving at the police station, the girl was taken into the OIC’s office where she was allegedly shouted at and threatened to divulge the truth about the her alleged relationship with the Akuressa PS Chairman. She was allegedly shown inappropriate photos during her interrogation. At 10 a.m. the following day, the girl was taken to the Matara General Hospital where she was subjected to a series of examinations and kept for eight days with the incessant presence of a female officer. The records revealed that the results of the examinations came back negative, indicating that no sexual assault had taken place. However, the girl was still kept in the hospital for the period of eight days, after which she was discharged and once again taken to the Matara Police station where she was made to wait till afternoon before being allowed to return home. Speaking to The Sunday Morning, former Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) President Attorney-at-Law U. R. De Silva stated: “Bogahawatta’s objective was to get her convictions done by threatening the witness if they’re not behaving in a way she deemed suitable. In some of the cases, she had manipulated and tampered with evidence; if the witnesses were not willing to give her what she wanted, she would threaten and harass these victims.” According to the FR petition filed by the 15-year-old girl and her mother, the girl was detained in a cell along with another female detainee without any food or water after denying the allegations of her alleged affair with the Akuressa PS Chairman. At around 9.30 a.m. the following day, the girl was taken into the first respondent’s office and was told that she would face serious consequences if she refused to divulge the “truth”. She once again denied the claims made by the OIC, after which the girl was made to sign a document, the contents of which were not revealed to her. However, Bogahawatta claimed she did not disallow the parents from accompanying their daughter and stated that it was the girl’s mother who had refused to accompany the daughter due to their other child suffering from influenza. She had further denied using aggression, holding the girl in a cell, and making her sign a statement. “She had detained girls and proceeded with cases in the past. There had been only one complaint so far, but to my knowledge, she has been practicing this unethical behaviour for some time. However, when these incidents happen, victims often don’t come forward due to powerlessness and poverty,” said De Silva. The lawyer also claimed that Bogahawatta was well protected by the “police hierarchy”. As per the FR petition, according to the first respondent’s (Bogahawatta) narrative, she had arrived at the girl’s house at 7.30 p.m. when the girl’s parents were at home. However, affidavits presented by witnesses indicate seeing a police jeep parked outside the victim’s residence at 4 p.m. The respondent had also claimed that she visited the victim’s house after receiving orders from the former IGP. De Silva further informed that there was another pending inquiry into Bogahawatta’s alleged unethical behaviour and revealed that these incidents all took place in a particular period when she wanted to show her capabilities and had a desire to appear as the “saviour of children”. He further added that Bogahawatta had given false testimonies on the affidavits which were given by her. “The Supreme Court has come to the conclusion that Bogahawatta has violated the fundamental rights of the victims,” he said. A landmark story Encouraging the actions taken by the girl’s mother of coming to Colombo to file a FR petition, De Silva said that this will prove to be a landmark case in Sri Lanka that will encourage victims who have been bullied at the hands of the law enforcement authorities to come forward. “As far as the compensation awarded to the victim by the Supreme Court goes, this is a good chance for the victims to go forward and claim their rightful sum from the witness protection authority,” De Silva stated. De Silva observed that the Government must encourage all victims who were subjected to similar situations to come forward to the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka and file a FR petition with the Supreme Court. To encourage the forthcoming nature of victims, De Silva also addressed the need for FR jurisdiction for the provincial high courts.