Author: TELO Admin

Civilians have the right to self-defence in the event of an unprovoked attack from a police officer, police spokesman DIG Ajith Rohana said.

Speaking to the privately owned Swarnavahini this morning, Rohana said members of the public may resort to self-defence if their life is threatened by the actions of a uniformed police officer abusing his or her powers, as per sections 92 and 93 of the penal code.

The police spokesman, who is also an attorney-at-law, was commenting on the brutal assault on a lorry driver by a traffic police officer in Pannipitiya yesterday (29). Footage of the incident went viral on social media yesterday afternoon and the constable, who is attached to the Maharagama police station, was promptly arrested later in the evening amid public outcry about police brutality.

Investigations have revealed that the lorry driver in question had accidentally knocked down the Traffic OIC (officer in charge) of the Maharagama police at the Pannipitiya junction on the High Level Road. Footage showed the enraged constable, who was on duty at the junction, shoving the driver to the ground and leaping onto him, not unlike a professional wrestler. (Incidentally, the constable is a former athlete, according to Rohana).

Asked if civilians who find themselves in such situations can retaliate in order to defend themselves, Rohana said a civilian who is unarmed and not showing resistance can use provisions in the penal code to defend themselves in such a situation.

“The law is the same for everyone. It’s fair. And the civilian has the right to self defence in that situation,” he said.

Section 92 of the penal code reads:

There is no right of private defence against an act which does not reasonably cause the apprehension of death or of grievous hurt, if done, or attempted to be done, by a public servant acting in good faith under color of his office, though that act may not be strictly justifiable by law.
There is no right of private defence against an act which does not reasonably cause the apprehension of death or of grievous hurt, if done, or attempted to be done, by the direction of a public servant acting in good faith under colour of his office, though that direction may not be strictly justifiable by law.
There is no right of private defence in cases in which there is time to have recourse to the protection of the public authorities. Extent to which the right may be exercised.
The right of private defence in no case extends to the inflicting of more harm than it is necessary to inflict for the purpose of defence.
Explanation 1

A person is not deprived of the right of private defence against an act done, or attempted to be done by a public servant, as such, unless he knows, or has reason to believe, that the person doing the act is such public servant.

Explanation 2

A person is not deprived of the right of private defence against an act done, or attempted to be done, by the direction of a public servant, unless he knows, or has reason to believe, that the person doing the act is acting by such direction ; or unless such person states the authority under which he acts, or. if he has authority in writing, unless he produces such authority, if demanded.

Section 93:

The right of private offence of the body extends, under the restrictions mentioned in the last preceding section, to the voluntary causing of death or of any other harm to the assailant, if the offence which occasions the exercise of the right be of any of the descriptions hereinafter enumerated, namely –

Firstly- Such an assault as may reasonably cause the apprehension that death will otherwise be the consequence of such assault;

Secondly- Such an assault as may reasonably cause the apprehension that grievous hurt will otherwise be the consequence of such assault;

Thirdly- An assault with the intention of committing rape;

Fourthly- An assault with the intention of gratifying unnatural lust;

Fifthly- An assault with the intention of kidnapping or abducting;

Sixthly- An assault with the intention of wrongfully confining a person, under circumstances which may reasonably cause him to apprehend that he will be unable to have recourse to the public authorities for his release.

The key factions in the government are yet to reach an understanding over the Provincial Council Elections, especially about how the election will be held.

General Secretary of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party Dayasiri Jayasekera speaking to reporters said the SLFP wishes to contest the polls as per the Mixed-Member electoral system.

However, the SLPP says the method of holding the election will be decided by the Cabinet of Ministers.

Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna General Secretary Attorney-at-Law Sagara Kariyawasam speaking to reporters said the cabinet would analyze the requests made on the method of holding the elections and then reach a decision.

However, many factions that assisted in bringing the incumbent government to power believe the Provincial Councils must be abolished.

In 2020, Venerable Medagoda Abhayatissa Thero said Provincial Councils pave the way for separatism in the country while it is also a waste of money.

Yet, Sri Lanka’s neighbor India, continues to call for the implementation of the 13th Amendment to the Constitution and to call for Provincial Council Elections.

At the recent UN Human Rights Council session, India supported the call by the international community for the Government of Sri Lanka to fulfill its commitments on the devolution of political authority, including through the early holding of elections for Provincial Councils and to ensure that all Provincial Councils are able to operate effectively, in accordance with the 13th Amendment to the Sri Lankan Constitution.

During the weekend, Sri Lankan President Gotabaya Rajapaksa said the recent UNHRC resolution against Sri Lanka was the doing of “local and foreign forces” which do not want the country to progress and vowed that his government would not succumb to such pressures.

In his first public comments since the UNHRC resolution, Rajapaksa said: “We will never succumb to (such) pressures (UNHRC resolution); we are a free nation. We will not be a victim of big power rivalry in the Indian Ocean.”

Chinese President Xi Jinping on Monday said China is willing to work with Sri Lanka to enhance Belt and Road cooperation and contribute to the economic revival of Sri Lanka in post-pandemic era.

Xi made the remarks during a phone call with Sri Lankan President Gotabaya Rajapaksa.

Xi said China will continue to provide necessary assistance to Sri Lanka, conduct cooperation in areas including aviation and education and explore other potential cooperation areas.

Xi said China will never forget Sri Lanka’s support for the restoration of China’s lawful seat in the UN, and is willing to continue working with Sri Lanka to support each other on issues of mutual concern, safeguard each other’s legitimate rights and promote global justice and fairness.

Rajapaksa congratulated China on the 100th founding anniversary of the Communist Party of China and spoke highly of China’s achievements in fighting the pandemic and its economic recovery.

Rajapaksa said Sri Lanka hopes to learn from China’s experience in poverty reduction and rural revitalization and is willing to expand cooperation in infrastructure construction, tourism and so on, so as to benefit Sri Lanka’s economic development and its people.(CGTN)

Five more COVID-19 fatalities have been recorded in Sri Lanka, raising the death toll to 566.

The Director General of Health Services in a statement said all five deaths were confirmed from the Western Province.

Accordingly, a 45-year-old male from Colombo 15, a 55-year-old male from Kalutara South, a 63-year-old male from Kandana, a 67-year-old male from Colombo 13 and a 70-year-old male from Ethul Kotte have passed away after contracting the novel coronavirus.