ENB - தமிழீழச் செய்தியகம்

சென்ற வாரம் இலங்கை-சண்டே ரைம்ஸ்

Sensational arrests highlight nexus between politicians and criminalsFamily source says charges are fabricated to silence senior Rajapakshe; deliberate leak of audio recordings to the media casts a shadow on investigationsPresident vows to continue fight against corruption; defends ministers and senior officers leading the campaign; opposition alleges double standardsOpposition on warpath after Government sidesteps debate on judges’ retirement age; speculation rife about draft amendmentFurther boost for US-Lanka ties as President and top US officials attend ceremony to hand over ten helicoptersBy our ST Political Desk 28-06-26The nexus between politicians and criminals, particularly those engaged in the illicit drug trade, has long been an open secret, but the long arm of the law has often failed to reach them given the big money, power and influence they often yield. The law enforcement authorities in the country too have all too often been accused of being hand in glove with those engaged in the drug trade, while there have been instances where judicial officers too have been targeted and attempts made to influence them by these often shadowy forces. The 2004 killing of Colombo High Court judge Sarath Ambepitiya is a case where a senior judicial officer was murdered due to a ruling he had given in connection with a well-known drug dealer, Mohammed Niyaz Naufer, alias ‘Pottu Naufer’, who, along with five others, conspired in the killing.This week there was the sensational arrest of Rakitha Rajapakshe, the son of former minister Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe, and Charith Abeysinghe, the organiser of the Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) for Horana. They were arrested by the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption (CIABOC) over alleged links with the underworld.Rakitha Rajapakshe and Charith Abeysinghe being taken to courts after they were arrested by bribery com. officialsThe two men are suspected of soliciting and accepting a bribe from a woman by the name of Madhushika Madhuwanthi, who is said to be the wife of Nandun Chinthaka Wickramaratne, alias “Harak Kata”, in 2023 while in Dubai. Nadun Chintaka, a notorious criminal with alleged links to the drug trade, was arrested in Madagascar and extradited to Sri Lanka in March 2023. He faces multiple charges, including an attempt to escape from custody.The link between Nadun Chinthaka and Rakitha Rajapakshe and Charith Abeysinghe, according to the CIABOC, stems from an alleged demand of Rs. 500 million by the two suspects made in 2023 in exchange for arranging the removal of ‘Harak Kata’s’ detention orders, transferring him from the high-security Boossa Prison to another prison and securing his release from investigations and related legal proceedings. Later the amount demanded as a bribe had been reduced to Rs. 200 million. It is alleged that an advance payment of Rs. 120 million was paid to the two suspects.Based on these findings, the Bribery Commission stated that its officers had made the arrests. They were later produced in court and remanded by the Colombo Chief Magistrate’s Court till July 3.This is one of the highest profile arrests so far linked to the drug trade in the country and has had a mixed reaction. Given that Wijedasa Rajapakshe is a senior politician and a President’s Counsel, the news that his son has alleged links with criminals is unsettling for many. That Mr Rajapakshe served as minister of justice from 2022 to 2024 makes the allegations even more serious. He has been portrayed as a crusader against corruption in the public eye, and that his son faces such serious charges will make the public question the credentials of any public figure and will do little to enhance public confidence in politicians in particular.President Dissanayake attending the function at the Ratmalana airbase to mark the hand over of US helicoptersMr Rajapakshe visited his son at the CIABOC soon after his arrest but has not made any public comment on the matter so far. However, a source close to the family said Rakitha Rajapakshe is being framed to silence his father, Wijedasa, who of late has been growing more vocal in his criticism of wrong moves by the government. “The audiotape linking Rakitha Rajapakshe is a fabricated one being used to silence his father,” the source said, adding that the arrest of opposition politicians, including Sugeeshwara Bandara, the former personal secretary to ex-President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, is part of the plan.“The President himself said some days ago that those who shout the loudest will be the first to be arrested, so this shows there is a clear attempt to silence political opponents,” he said.While government efforts to crack down on bribery, corruption and criminal groups are a positive move, in this case too, the attempts to politicise the issue do not help. Just hours after the arrests of Rakitha Rajapakshe and Charith Abeysinghe, an audio recording was leaked online linked to the bribery investigation. The recording, which spread across social media platforms rapidly and was picked up by the mainstream media, is purported to contain conversations involving the two men and the wife of Nadun Chinthaka. It includes a conversation relating to the soliciting of a bribe to influence official proceedings involving the detained gang leader. While the authenticity of the audio recording could not be independently verified, the fact that it was leaked on the same day, just hours after the arrests of the two suspects, casts a shadow over the investigation. That whoever was in possession of the audio tape chose the particular day to leak it cannot be a coincidence. It appears to be a well-thought-out move to influence the public. While such moves may score political points in the short term, it’s unlikely to make the case stronger for the CIABOC when it comes to securing a conviction of suspects.While Rakitha Rajapakshe may have his father’s connection to shield him to some extent, for Charith Abaysinghe, a former actor turned politician, his arrest may have put an end to his budding political career, at least within the ranks of the SJB.Soon after his arrest, the SJB announced that it has decided to immediately suspend the party membership and all positions held by Charith Abeysinghe following his arrest and remand in connection with an alleged Rs. 120 million bribery case.In an official statement, SJB General Secretary Ranjith Madduma Bandara said that as of 2023, Charith Abeysinghe had neither functioned as a member of the party nor served as an organiser and was not holding any position within the SJB at the time the alleged conversation took place.Mr Madduma Bandara also stressed that the SJB does not oppose the full implementation of the law or judicial action against individuals involved in corruption or illegal activities.That the SJB sought to distance itself almost immediately from Charith Abeysinghe shows the party is keen to build a clean image.President addresses ParliamentPresident Anura Kumara Dissanayake alluded to the arrests of Mr Rajapakshe and Mr Abeysinghe when he addressed Parliament on Thursday (25) during the adjournment debate moved by the government on “combatting the drug menace”. Without mentioning names, the President spoke of the nexus between politics and organised crime. Money was taken both to have criminals killed without being brought before the courts and, conversely, to spare them from death, he said. “There was a history of ransom being demanded in exchange for sparing individuals from death. The secrets surrounding the group arrested this morning will come to light shortly. I do not know whether such individuals still remain within your parties,” he told the opposition.Thursday’s speech was the first time President Dissanayake had addressed Parliament since April 7, a fairly lengthy absence given the frequency with which he had been speaking in Parliament over the past 18 months. He spoke for more than 40 minutes and again insisted his government will bring the corrupt to justice. He defended the director of the Criminal Investigation Department, Deputy Inspector General of Police Shani Abeysekara; the Director General of the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption, Ranga Dissanayake; the Secretary to the Ministry of Public Security, Ravi Seneviratne; Public Security Minister Ananda Wijepala; and Additional Solicitor General Dileepa Peiris of the Attorney General’s Department – all of whom he claimed were being branded as “enemies of the opposition” owing to their work.Nevertheless, the President failed to acknowledge that serious questions of impartiality have been raised regarding some of the names he has mentioned, particularly Shani Abeysekara and Ravi Seneviratne, owing to them having actively campaigned for the National People’s Power (NPP) on the campaign stage. He also made no mention of the scandal surrounding the missing USD 2.5 million from the Treasury, despite it increasingly looking as if the public will have to pay for the missing funds out of their own pockets. Some in the opposition benches also pointed out that though the President attacked the opposition over corruption allegations, his own party had so far taken no action against former Speaker Asoka Ranwala, who was caught lying about his higher education qualifications, or former Energy Minister Kumara Jayakody, who was indicted in March by the Bribery Commission over corruption charges for causing a loss of over Rs 8.8 million to the government by misappropriating funds belonging to the Lanka Fertiliser Company in 2016.The government on its part will continue with its anti-corruption crusade, hoping that high-profile arrests will distract people from the many hardships they are facing, particularly with the high cost of living, farmers’ and fishermen’s agitations, etc. But economic woes will always overshadow almost all other concerns for the public given that if there is no food on the table and no roof over their heads, it’ll be a matter of time before the public discontent with the government grows.Controversy over judges’ termEarlier this month, this column reported on the furore that had erupted over alleged plans by the government to extend the retirement age of judges of the superior courts by two years through a constitutional amendment. Under the Constitution, the current retirement age of a judge of the Supreme Court (SC) is 65, while the retirement age of the Court of Appeal (CA) is 63. Opposition political parties as well as several organisations in the legal sector, including the Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL), came out strongly against any plans to raise the retirement age of the judges. In response to the controversy, the government stated that such a constitutional amendment has not been discussed by the Cabinet as yet.Still, the controversy has persisted, amid reports that such an amendment is in the final stages of being drafted. Opposition parties continue to raise issue over the matter, pointing out that as many as eight positions in the superior courts are currently vacant (four vacancies each in the CA and SC). This has already hampered work on the country’s two highest courts, they claim. Those who oppose introducing an amendment to increase the retirement age of the judges of the superior courts point out that such a move is a blatant attempt to interfere in the independence of the judiciary.Matters such as vacancies in the superior courts and the alleged attempt to increase the retirement age of the judges of these courts were among issues the SJB had been hoping to highlight in Parliament this week, when, before proceedings began on Tuesday (23), a group of the party’s MPs handed over a letter to Speaker Jagath Wickramaratne. The letter requested an urgent adjournment debate on “structural issues” that have arisen in the judicial sector.The letter, which had the opposition’s adjournment motion attached, sought a debate to discuss a matter of urgent public importance under Standing Order 19 (1). The English translation of the text of the motion is as follows:“Due to the existing vacancies in current judicial institutions, serious practical issues have arisen regarding the efficient, independent, and systematic execution of the duties of those institutions. As a result, the backlog of cases and delays in trials have increased, and the failure to deliver fairness and justice to the public within a reasonable timeframe has become a significant crisis. This situation is also adversely affecting public confidence in the judicial system, and it is gradually developing into a serious social problem.“Therefore, considering this as a matter of utmost urgency and priority, we propose that a parliamentary debate be held regarding the vacancies in judicial institutions, case delays, and the structural and administrative issues that have caused them and that necessary steps be taken to implement swift and effective solutions to these problems.”SJB parliamentarian Ajith P. Perera, supported by other party MPs, raised the matter when parliamentary sessions began, requesting that two hours be set aside for the debate after the conclusion of the day’s scheduled debate. Holding such an urgent debate was extremely important since it was Parliament that held the judicial power of the people, Mr Perera said.House Leader Bimal Rathnayake, though, said he did not see a reason why the government should accede to the opposition’s request and interrupt the debate that had already been scheduled for the day. He also took a dig at Mr Perera’s comment about the people’s judicial power being vested with Parliament. “It was by stating that Parliament held the judicial power of the people that they tried to set up a parliamentary select committee and summon judges to testify before it not too long ago. We are a government with a two-thirds majority. You should think about what would happen if we also started thinking like that,” Mr Rathnayake said. Stressing that the government was opposed to the motion, the Leader of the House requested the Speaker to hold a vote on whether to hold the adjournment debate proposed by the opposition.The government’s response provoked a furious reaction from the SJB ranks, as they demanded that the Speaker allow the debate to go ahead, insisting that under Standing Orders, the Leader of the House had no say in deciding whether a debate could be held or not. As tempers flared, Speaker Wickramaratne announced that previously scheduled government business should be given priority on the day. This led to pandemonium breaking out in the Well of the House as several SJB MPs came down from their benches to protest the Speaker’s ruling, demanding that a debate be held on the issues within the judicial sector. Mobile phone video shot inside the Chamber showed officials from the office of Parliament’s Serjeant-at-Arms being forced to form a barrier and resist multiple attempts by some SJB MPs to remove the ceremonial mace from its position in an effort to halt parliamentary proceedings. The disturbances eventually forced the Speaker to briefly suspend proceedings. When proceedings resumed, the Speaker announced that the adjournment motion presented by the opposition should be put to the next meeting of the Committee on Parliamentary Business so that a date can be decided to debate the motion.Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa argued that the opposition had followed due procedure when requesting that the adjournment motion be taken up as a matter of urgent business. He condemned Speaker Wickramaratne’s decision to reject taking the motion up for debate, accusing him of acting arbitrarily on the matter instead of safeguarding democracy, as he was duty-bound to do. The episode was yet another example of the SJB voicing its discontent with the conduct of the Speaker, whom the party has repeatedly accused of favouring the government.Referring to the vacancies in the superior courts, Mr Premadasa claimed that many were of the view that, on the one hand, the number of vacancies was subjecting judges to enormous pressure, while on the other, they were also serving as a psychological bribe. Keeping positions in the superior courts vacant for a prolonged period, as well as raising the mandatory retirement age of the judges, are both acts that threaten the independence of the judiciary, the opposition leader reiterated.Responding to Mr Premadasa, Justice Minister Harshana Nanayakkara insisted that the government had no intention of breaking the rule of law. “We have no intention of using any post as carrots for promotions. I believe the honourable opposition leader presumed a lot of things that we were not even intending to do, and then he made comments on that,” said the minister. Whatever the government chooses to do, Mr Nanayakkara stressed, “will be lawful and constitutional, and it’ll be debated before this parliament.”President Dissanayake also addressed the controversy surrounding the judiciary, including the appointment of judges to the superior courts, when he spoke in Parliament on Thursday. The President said he had sought clarification from the Chief Justice, who provided him with a detailed explanation. According to the CJ, the issue is not simply about a single judge retiring from one court; rather, it concerns the sustainability of the entire judicial system.“Today, several magistrates’ courts remain closed. The Attorney General has requested the establishment of three-judge high courts, yet there are insufficient judges available to constitute them. In some instances, judges appointed to existing three-judge benches are already overburdened with work. Consequently, there are significant vacancies in the lower courts. We must therefore proceed by filling those positions first. The Judicial Service Commission has already approved the recruitment of fifty new magistrates. To my knowledge, interviews are currently underway, and thirty-three candidates have been shortlisted. I cannot say how many will ultimately be selected after the interviews, but we must bring into the system those who possess the necessary capacity and qualifications. Accordingly, decisions regarding appointments to the superior courts must be made without allowing the lower courts to collapse. We have even been compelled to close several additional magistrates’ courts. All of these factors must be managed carefully. The Chief Justice has provided a comprehensive explanation on these matters,” President Dissanayake explained.There is also a clear roadmap regarding future appointments, the President added. “Therefore, I believe the vacancies in the superior courts can be filled within a relatively short period. I noticed some claims suggesting that these vacancies are being deliberately kept open as a form of leverage to influence judicial decisions. Nothing could be more insulting to our judges. We must not demean our judicial system in that manner, nor should we insult the integrity of our judges,” he said, emphasising that his government has “absolutely no desire to control the judiciary”.Opposition MPs, though, dismiss the President’s insistence that the NPP government is not seeking to control the judiciary and are determined to keep the matter in the public eye. On Friday, a group of MPs led by Mr Premadasa took steps to sign a motion seeking permission from the Speaker to table a substantive motion and hold a debate under Standing Order 83(1) of Parliament. The motion highlights Parliament’s responsibility and accountability regarding the failure to fill more than eight vacancies in the apex court for over six months. According to a statement issued by the Office of the Leader of the Opposition, the motion underscores the resulting impact on the rule of law and the consequences for the public’s fundamental rights and access to justice and emphasises the urgent measures that must be taken to fill these vacancies.The opposition is fixated on the matter of judicial independence because there was a pattern during previous governments when presidents and justice ministers “got together and worked to appoint their own people to the benches in order to ensure that the rulings of the courts are in line with the wishes of the rulers,” claimed a senior government source, speaking on grounds of anonymity. “We are not prepared to do that,” he insisted. He pointed to the remarks made by the President on there being 50 vacancies in the magistrates’ courts alone. These vacancies will have to be filled first. This in turn will enable the filling of vacancies in the high courts and, thereafter, the Court of Appeal. The Supreme Court will come after that. “The vacancies in the judiciary must be filled in an organised method from the bottom-up. We can’t follow the old method of filling such vacancies in an ad hoc manner.”The source also pointed out that the Constitution stipulates that the Supreme Court shall consist of the Chief Justice and of not less than six and not more than 16 other judges. At present, only four positions are vacant on the Supreme Court, he pointed out, arguing that accusations that the SC’s work has been hampered due to these four vacancies are without merit. “Nowhere in the law does it say that all these positions must be occupied at all times. If the SC does not have that many cases, why is there such undue haste to fill these vacancies?” the source queried.Previously, cases in the high courts were taken up only two to three days a week. However, under the current government, high court cases are heard on all five days. More than 1500 cases in the high court have already been completed in this manner. The superior courts too are hearing cases far quicker than previously, the source further claimed.A second senior government source echoed the views of a section within the government who seem to be in the camp of increasing the retirement age of superior court judges. Judges shouldn’t be appointed to the superior courts simply based on seniority, this source argued. “There are junior judges who have heard more cases and have proved their ability to handle multiple cases and a high workload. But unfortunately, they are on the brink of retirement when the time comes for them to be appointed to the Supreme Court. That is why there are requests for the retirement age for the judges to be increased,” the source said, though he was non-committal on whether the government was on the verge of introducing a constitutional amendment to increase the retirement age of judges in line with these “requests”.Meanwhile, away from the trivialities of everyday governance, President Anura Kumara Dissanayake joined the visiting U.S. Pacific Air Forces Commander General Kevin Schneider and U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Paul Kapur at an event held at the Ratmalana Air Force Base where the formal transfer of ten American-made TH-57 Sea Ranger (Bell 206) helicopters to the Sri Lanka Air Force took place.The Texas-built helicopters — transferred under the U.S. Excess Defence Articles (EDA) programme — were previously flown by the U.S. Navy for pilot training and utility missions. They will now serve as the backbone of a modernised SLAF training fleet, while also bolstering Sri Lanka’s capacity to respond to humanitarian crises and secure its maritime domain. “The Sri Lanka Air Force’s proven experience operating Bell helicopter platforms made these aircraft a natural fit — and with the TH-57 fleet in active U.S. Navy service as recently as last year, they arrive mission-ready,” the United States Embassy in Colombo said.The helicopter delivery is seen as a milestone that reflects the growing strength of the U.S.-Sri Lanka defence partnership, with U.S. Pacific Air Forces Commander General Kevin Schneider underscoring the point. “These American-made aircraft will help modernise Sri Lanka’s air capabilities and train the next generation of aviators. Most importantly, they stand as a powerful symbol of our steadfast partnership. Our shared commitment to peace, security, and prosperity across the region is resolute, and that incredibly strong, collaborative partnership with Sri Lanka is on full display here today,” he said at the event.There were more announcements about U.S. cooperation with the Sri Lankan military this week. The visiting U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs Paul Kapur announced that the United States will provide Fleet Broadband satellite communications technology to the Sri Lanka Navy, strengthening maritime connectivity along some of the world’s busiest shipping routes.The comprehensive Fleet Broadband system, valued at approximately $4 million (over LKR 1.2 billion), will be installed across the Sri Lanka Navy’s fleet of offshore patrol vessels. The system will enable the Sri Lanka Navy to maintain real-time connectivity with headquarters, aircraft, and other vessels across vast maritime areas, including remote regions of the Indian Ocean. “This capability will strengthen maritime domain awareness, improve operational coordination, support emergency response, help interdict vessels engaged in illicit trafficking, track sanctioned vessels, and protect critical supply lines that underpin regional and global commerce,” the U.S. Embassy said in a statement.

நிதி உதவி வழங்க !

இணைப்புகள்

இதழ்கள்

தலைப்புகள்

சென்ற வாரம் இலங்கை-சண்டே ரைம்ஸ்

US CENTCOM reports - Attacking targets in Iran

The next phase in the U.S.-China economic war

அண்மைப் பதிவுகள்

செய்திகள்

செய்தி

About

எங்களை தொடர்பு கொள்ள

eelamnewsbulletin@googlemail.com