CCPR/C/113/D/2087/2011 the Moragahahena Police Station police report, “there [was] no entry whatsoever revealing the reason for which [Sunil] had been arrested by the police”. On 28 July 2003, the Additional Magistrate observed the victim’s body in the mortuary, and noticed, among other injuries, “an injury of about one inch slightly above the buttocks, on the left side of the back”. The procedure was then adjourned, at the request of Moragahahena Police Station, until 31 July 2003. 2.13 On 29 July 2003, a consultant judicial medical officer from Colombo conducted a post-mortem examination, and produced a report which was subsequently relied upon in the proceedings before the Supreme Court. The report documented ten pre-mortal injuries: four contusions, four abrasions, one periorbital hematoma (“black eye”) around the left eye, and one surgical incision, but not the injury on the left side of the back observed the day before by the Additional Magistrate of Colombo. The direct cause of Sunil’s death was identified as “acute subdural hemorrhage following a head injury caused by blunt trauma”. The report identified four possible origins for the fatal hemorrhage: (a) a heavy blow to the victim’s back with a weapon or from a kick with boots on; (b) a fall due to being pushed; (c) an accidental fall; or (d) a fit due to alcohol withdrawal or epilepsy.3 The report concluded that it was “possible” that the cause of death was a fall following alcohol withdrawal, a finding seemingly derived solely from the discovery of an “enlarged and fatty liver” in the deceased’s body. 2.14 On 31 July 2003, the Additional Magistrate of Colombo heard further witnesses who had been brought to the court in police vehicles; this was criticized by the author’s lawyer as possibly resulting in undue influence over witnesses by the police. The Additional Magistrate overruled the exception and decided to accept the witnesses’ testimonies. 2.15 On 8 August 2003, the Magistrate of Horana, to whom the inquiry was transferred from the Additional Magistrate of Colombo, directed the Senior Superintendent of the Panadura police to investigate and to produce the suspects before court, as the circumstances surrounding the victim’s death seemed suspicious. 2.16 On 29 April 2004, the Attorney General decided that no charges would be filed in connection with Sunil Hemachandra’s death, as there was no evidence of any assault against the victim. On 19 November 2004, the Magistrate of Horana removed the case from the roll, with sole reference to the Attorney General’s decision of 29 April 2004. 2.17 The authors’ petition, filed before the Supreme Court in September 2003, was only decided upon on 6 August 2010. The Supreme Court considered several grounds that might have served as a basis for Sunil Hemachandra’s arrest: his attempt to assault the police, his consumption of liquor, and his alleged assertion that he would commit suicide if the police arrested Chanaka. With regard to the cause of death, the Supreme Court dismissed the application, concluding that “the fall being due to a fit following alcohol withdrawal [was] highly probable”. It thereby endorsed the conclusion of the forensic report, and discarded the possibility of assault, for lack of conclusive evidence such as an injury. 2.18 The authors claim that they have no further remedy available. The criminal investigation led to the decision of the Attorney General of 29 April 2004 not to press charges, while the judgement rendered by the Supreme Court on 6 August 2010 was a final decision. The authors also stress that the proceedings lasted for over seven years, and were unduly prolonged. 3 The authors claim that there is no medical record showing that Sunil suffered from epilepsy. 5