Sri Lanka is currently confronting a deeply unsettling question: When the very institutions meant to protect citizens become the source of harm, where does a young person turn for justice? The Supreme Court is set to hear a Fundamental Rights petition on October 16 concerning the deaths of two youths in Kotahena police custody, a case that has thrust the issue of custodial deaths and police accountability back into the national spotlight.
A Crisis of Custodial Deaths
The scale of the problem is alarming. Between 2020 and March 2025, 49 individuals died while in police custody, with an additional 30 deaths occurring during encounters involving police. That represents 79 lives lost while under state protection. The Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka (HRCSL) has described this as “79 lives destroyed,” warning that public trust in law enforcement erodes when the police, entrusted with maintaining law and order, become violators of it.
The Kotahena Case: A Test of Accountability
The pending Supreme Court case stems from the arrest of two young men in connection with a shooting in Kotahena on March 21, 2025. According to police statements, the youths were taken to Mattakkuliya Crow Island to identify hidden weapons, where they allegedly opened fire on officers, prompting retaliatory fire that resulted in their deaths.
However, the Fundamental Rights petition filed by the father of one deceased youth challenges this narrative. It alleges that his son died while in police custody and seeks Rs. 10 million in compensation. The Officer-in-Charge of the Kotahena Police Station and several other officials have been named as respondents. The case will determine whether the deaths constituted violations of fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution.
Torture as an Endemic Practice
The Kotahena case is not an isolated incident. Human rights organisations have documented systemic patterns of abuse. The U.S. State Department’s 2024 Country Report confirmed that while the Constitution prohibits torture, there are credible reports that government officials employ such practices, particularly to extract confessions. The HRCSL received 737 complaints of torture in 2024, up from 546 in 2023 and 28 complaints in just the first quarter of 2025. In one recent Supreme Court case, a farmer was awarded Rs. 900,000 in compensation after police officers were found personally liable for applying crushed chilli paste to his body during interrogation.
When Children Are Victims
Perhaps most disturbing are cases involving minors. In August 2022, a 16-year-old boy arrested on suspicion of theft was subjected to horrific abuse by the Acting Officer-in-Charge of the Hatharaliyadda Police Station. The officer crushed nai miris (bird pepper) on a handkerchief, mixed it with water and squeezed the extract into the boy’s eyes. When the child refused to confess, the OIC mocked him, claiming his punishment would be “worse than that of Allah”. The Supreme Court later ruled this violated the boy’s fundamental rights, ordering the officer to personally pay Rs. 300,000 in compensation.
The Constitutional Framework
Sri Lanka’s Constitution provides strong protections. Article 11 guarantees freedom from torture, while Article 13(1) protects against arbitrary arrest. The Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed that “an arrest based purely on the subjective satisfaction of the police officer would be arbitrary and violative of Article 13(1)”. In the landmark 2019 case of Rathnayeke Tharanga Lakmali, the Court awarded Rs. 2.75 million to a widow whose husband died in police custody, holding that the state violated Articles 11 and 13.
What Needs to Change
HRCSL Commissioner Nimal Punchihewa has emphasised that “only the courts can punish people” and that police lack legal authority to administer punishment. The HRCSL has issued guidelines to the Police on preventing custodial deaths and is advocating for an independent mechanism to investigate such incidents, as the current system allows the same institution responsible for the crime to investigate itself.
The Supreme Court has also taken proactive steps. In the Hatharaliyadda case, it directed the Inspector General of Police to issue binding guidelines requiring that when a minor is arrested, parents or close relatives must be granted access to the child within six hours of arrest.
A Collective Responsibility
As HRCSL Commissioner Dr. Gehan Gunatilleke noted, custodial deaths “are not just a reflection of the Police but also of the society we live in”. For Sri Lanka’s young generation, the question of how the state treats its citizens in custody is not abstract, it is a matter of whether they can trust the institutions meant to protect them. The Supreme Court’s ruling in the Kotahena case will send a powerful signal about whether Sri Lanka is truly committed to upholding the constitutional rights of its youth, or whether impunity for law enforcement will continue to erode the foundations of justice.
Written By: –
Vindi Wandana De Silva
(General Sir John Kotelawala Defence University)
Designed By: –
Rtr. Pesandi Senawatta
(Senior Blog Team Member 2026-27)
