Asian Human Rights Commission [Ed. Note: An exhibition of photographs depicting cases of torture in Sri Lanka was held in Colombo from May 16 to 18, 2002, at an exhibit jointly organised by Janasansadaya ¡X Sri Lanka and the Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC). Captions for the photographs provided the names of the torture victims as well as the names of the alleged torturers.] Sri Lanka has been engulfed in a pathology of violence, a fact which is acknowledged and lamented by everyone. There are many people, however, who are committed to finding ways out of this predicament. This exhibition is another moment during which this important theme will be reflected. The cause of the violence in Sri Lanka is the State¡¦s unwillingness to bring an end to a tradition and culture of torture and other cruel and inhuman punishment that is embedded in its law enforcement agencies. It is an old and hardened tradition, and there has not been a real commitment to terminate it. The signing of the international covenants and conventions, including the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, have not been followed by any determination to implement them. Though torture is a serious crime in Sri Lanka under Act No. 22 of 1994, there have been no prosecutions for this crime. Unfortunately, this crime is a very common one, and hundreds of complaints and even Supreme Court cases are available for anyone who is willing to prosecute them. Many U.N. agencies, international human rights groups and foreign governments have urged action, but prosecuting someone for torture has become more difficult than moving a mountain. Why such resistance to the elimination of torture? Obviously it is not just a matter of individuals that is behind this obstruction but a built-in pathology of violence. The result of this pathology is that it creates reactions beyond its own control by its victims. The cycle of violence in Sri Lanka needs close examination, not merely from a psychological point of view, but from the point of view of legal responsibility of the State to create a peaceful society. The State cannot ascribe this responsibility to others under any circumstance. A failure to meet its international obligations does not in any way help to end the situation. No, responsibility for changing the present situation lies with the State. It must take the initiative boldly and resolutely. By the very nature of things, non-state actors will not be able to continue their violence if the State does its duty to end torture. The way the State can meet its obligations to the international community and its people is simple: it only has to implement its own law, that is, Act No. 22 of 1994. The responsibility for this action lies with the attorney general and the investigation team that is attached to his department. Many investigations are already completed, and there is enough evidence for other prosecutions. Now it is the will of the prosecutor on whom the burden currently rests to act decisively against the country¡¦s pathology of violence. This is something that CAN BE DONE NOW. In the long term, there are many other things that can be done. Many commissions appointed by the government have created numerous recommendations. Unfortunately, no attention has been paid to these recommendations. Now that the Constitutional Council has been appointed and several commissions will also be appointed soon in terms of the 17th Amendment to the Constitution it may be possible to make suitable arrangements for a serious study of these recommendations and to develop suitable ways to implement them. Thus, now is the time for all democratic-minded people to ensure that the Constitutional Council and other commissions live up to the expectations of the people. A push from below will determine what ultimately happens to improve things. As for now, all eyes must be turned to the attorney general. Will the attorney general implement Act No. 22 of 1994, which lays down Sri Lanka¡¦s law on torture? Very much is at stake on what the attorney general will do. He can help to decisively end the nation¡¦s pathology of violence.