Sivaram killing: Will the case be dragged on and
dropped
As we all know by now from the copious reporting in the press, Sivaram was
abducted at 10.30 p.m. on 28th April after having drinks with three others at
Bambalapitiya Junction. He had moved away from the bar with one companion to
board a bus when he, fighting back, was pushed into a vehicle by ruffians and driven
away. His body was found in the morning across the strip of water from the
Parliament, along the Japan-Sri Lanka Friendship Road. He had been killed with a
blow to the head and shot at. According to the post mortem report he was not
tortured.
Following the discovery of Sivaram’s body even spokesmen from leading political
parties seemed less interested in a thorough professional investigation than in
scoring political points, and appeared to take it for granted that the Police were
incapable of doing it. If we were serious about impunity, would not many leading
politicians be behind bars, and what then would happen to peace with the LTTE?
Several parties were treated as likely suspects in Sivaram’s abduction and murder --
most notably , Karuna’s forces, Military Intelligence, the LTTE Vanni Faction, and the
Sri Lankan police themselves (with or without the help of Sinhala nationalist groups).
All were plausible suspects; circumstantial evidence pointed more strongly to the
involvement of a section of the state intelligence.
Persistent rumours from the LTTE in Vanni suspecting Sivaram of having
encouraged Karuna to raise issues against the leadership, and accusations along
these lines by persons close to the LTTE, made many convinced initially that it was
the LTTE that killed Sivaram. Further, his brother-in-law an academic from the
Eastern University was taken in by the LTTE and interrogated and released. He had
seen many others in chains in the LTTE prison. The academic decided to leave
Batticaloa. But in the current context, there were good reasons for not regarding the
LTTE the prime suspect. Nearly all LTTE actions in Colombo indicate that the hit
squads engage in careful monitoring over a period of time to find out the intended
victim’s habits and movements, and where the victim would be at a given time. The
place and time of action are pre-ordained. The attacks on Lakshman Kadirgamar,
Neelan Thiruchelvam, C.V. Gooneratne (though intended for G.L. Peiris), President
Kumaratunga, Douglas Devananda (miscarried), President Premadasa, A.
Thangathurai, Mayor Sivapalan, Rajiv Gandhi, and Rajani Thiranagama all fall into
this category. A close similarity in modus operandi over many years is evident.
Unlike these others, Sivaram’s presence at the bar in Bambalapitiya was not pre-
planned. His movements and the meeting were spontaneous. The possibility of
Military Intelligence involvement cannot be ruled out. Given Sivaram’s position as a
well-connected veteran military analyst, it is not unlikely they knew something was up.
If killing Sivaram was the only objective, Police intelligence have the useful Tamil
scapegoats and the ‘expertise’ to carry it out without involving such a politically
problematic force as Karuna. The Sri Lankan security forces have used Tamil
militants from groups hunted by the LTTE for nearly 20 years. Take for example the
following report ‘Death at noon creates crack in Sri Lanka's defences’ from TamilNet
about the group around PLOTE Mohan, who was killed in Colombo on 31st July
2004:
“Mohan was also a key person in counter intelligence operations against the Tigers
in Colombo. As such he worked with the Terrorism Investigation Division (TID) of the
Police in Colombo. That his death is a serious blow to Sri Lanka's military and
intelligence establishments was quite evident from the number of apparently anxious
senior Police and military officers who rushed to the spot where Mohan was shot
dead at noon on Saturday.” The report by someone familiar with Batticaloa, evidently
Sivaram, described Mohan as one protected and used by the security forces (lately
the TID) having a notorious record, and an association with other operatives such as
the notorious Captain Munas. (See UTHR(J) Reports 7 to 11 of 1991-1993.)”
TamilNet’s evolution since Karuna’s split, from a biased, but informative news
provider to an overt propaganda tool made Sivaram’s position with the intelligence
forces more tenuous amidst the continuous spate of killings. Many came to believe
that Sivaram worked closely with LTTE intelligence. A particular instance was the
drugging and killing of about eight cadres from the Karuna group in a house in
Kottawa during the night of 24th July 2004, supposedly by a mole. The identity of
Karuna lieutenant Kuhanesan, the leading victim, was first broken in the morning by
TamilNet citing ‘Batticaloa sources’, when the Police denied knowledge of the
incident. TamilNet’s reference to Batticaloa sources in breaking the story is
journalism, whatever those sources are. At the same time here was a security culture
used to acting on impressions with considerable impunity, becoming increasingly
impatient with what was in effect a one-sided ceasefire, while suddenly given the nod
to loosen up.
Shortly after Sivaram was killed, there were rumours in ex-Tamil militant circles that
friends of PLOTE Mohan were involved in the killing. In June the Police produced a
member of the PLOTE for an identification parade, but the result was negative. On
the subject of Sinhalese speaking persons witnesses identified with the abduction of
Sivaram, the authorities have maintained a complete silence. Four months after the
killing and stalled investigations, it appears very likely that the killing was done by the
state intelligence services, assisted, as is widely believed in Tamil circles, by a
section of the PLOTE having links with them. It can be predicted that the case will be
dragged on for some time and dropped, as is the norm in Sri Lanka.
[Report by the University Teachers for Human Rights (Jaffna)]