Sri Lanka’s transitional justice: Genuine move or red herring?

Sri Lankan prison officials escort Tamil journalist J. S. Tissainayagam-The award was presented to Tissa by Gwen Ifill, senior correspondent for "The PBS NewsHour."

Sri Lankan Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera. Pic: AP.

by JS Tissainayagam -28th November 2015

SRI LANKA’S Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera met with civil society organisations (CSOs) on October 29 to discuss public consultations for setting up a transitional justice project to deal with the mass atrocities committed during the country’s civil war. Despite this seemingly democratic practice, questions remain as to whether in its implementation this project is going to shortchange the worst affected – the war’s victims.

Sri Lanka’s Transitional Justice Genuine Move or Red Herring by Thavam Ratna

 

Budget Allocation for Northern Rehabilitation is Totally Inadequate – R.Sampanthan

(Speech made by The Hon. Rajavarothiam Sampanthan – Leader of the Opposition)

Last journey of Senthuran-28/11/2015 

“The devastation that has occurred in the North and the East, Mr. Speaker, consequent to the war over a long period of time, is extensive – unbelievably extensive. Tens of thousands of families have been rendered destitute. They have lost all their possessions, their houses, their livelihood; all means of such livelihood, all their equipment – agricultural equipment, fishing equipment, livestock equipment. Some of them are unable to return to their residential and occupational lands. Very much needs to be done. The Hon. Minister of Finance has allocated a sum or Rs. 14,000 million for this purpose ” says TNA leader and the leader of the opposition R. Samapanthan.

Budget Allocation for Northern Rehabilitation is Totally Inadequate – R.sampanthan by Thavam Ratna

Families of the missing and disappeared protest in Jaffna

28 November 2015

Families of Tamil the missing and those who were disappeared after being detained by the Sri Lanka military protested on Saturday in Jaffna demanding all details of their possible whereabouts to be released. The protest is the latest in a series of such demonstrations on missing persons and the continued detention of Tamil political prisoners. Holding photographs of their missing children, mothers wept, urging the government to release the details of where they may be. Last week a Tamil family that had 'disappeared' after surrendering to the Sri Lankan military in May 2009 was released after being in custody for more than six years. See more here. Earlier this month, the United Nations Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances  (UN WGEID) announced that it had discovered a “secret underground detention cum torture center” located in Sri Lanka and called on the government to reveal the existence of other such centers if any existed. See more here.

HRC SL Calls for Release of PTA Detainees In Custody for Long Years

28/11/2015

Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka has called for the immediate release of those held in detention or remand for a long period of time without charges and against whom there is no credible evidence under PTA. The Commission has further called upon the Attorney General to review the cases of those indicted and to withdraw those cases which are solely based on confessions made to Police officers, cases where no credible evidence exist and cases which are relatively minor.

The press release is reproduced below.

Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka : PRESS COMMUNIQUE

The Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka has written to the Honourable Attorney General Mr. Y.J. W. Wijayatilake, PC conveying to him its grave concern about the rights of the detainees and remandees under the Prevention of Terrorism Act and the Emergency Regulations, and called upon him to take necessary measures to ensure the protection of the rights of these detainees and remandees.

The Commission has called for the immediate release of those held in detention or remand for a long period of time without charges and against whom there is no credible evidence. The Commission has further called upon the Attorney General to review the cases of those indicted and to withdraw those cases which are solely based on confessions made to Police officers, cases where no credible evidence exist and cases which are relatively minor.

In respect of accused indicted under the PTA and Emergency Regulations against whom there is credible evidence but who have been in detention and/or remand for long periods of time the Commission has expressed its view that arrangements should be made to release such persons on bail immediately.

The Human Rights Commission has also communicated to the Attorney General its concerns about the rehabilitation process to which detainees and remandees will reportedly be subjected.

The Commission has shared these concerns with the Attorney General in the hope it will be able to engage in dialogue with, and extend its support to, the Attorney-General’s Department in order to seek an urgent resolution to this critical issue. The Commission views prolonged administrative detention or remand of persons as a serious violation of the fundamental rights guaranteed to them under Articles 12 and 13 of the Constitution of Sri Lanka as well as under Sri Lanka’s human rights obligations under international law

Adopting A Province: Impactful Devolution & Growth

By Lal Keerthie Fernando –November 27, 2015

Lal Keerthie Fernando

Two political parties had decided to do the ”Tango”: three persons proposed an idea, and others, accepted it as a good idea. They are now doing a political Tango. Ideas are relevant for compromise; vision, remains a guidance to force an exit of what was defunct and hopeless over the years.

It is the demand for compromise and laying standards has now come to be the norm. Reconciliation is a part and parcel of that. At this stage: Development and a compromise, is the talk of the day, everywhere. Why not do another Tango?

Over the years, SL foreign policy continued to dialog for bi-lateral and multi-lateral aid programmes. Bi-lateral programmes, especially from the west carried with them groups of NGOs who remained, doing the good or the worse. There was a free hand given in their selection and on their activities. Classification of the NGOs at that level was defunct and their activities not scrutinised. Many of the programmes of the latter also had the guest countries private sector participation; they too were equally not tolerable and un-answerable to none, owing to their dependence of state funds and pomp from the guest states as donors. They would pick and choose a country, pack and run away, un-noticed during crisis. Their presence was dictated, infact NGOs as well by the donor countries foreign policy. This irrefutable policies had a strong impact on sl during the crisis: None uttered the good side of SL when making profits, while ours very own said nothing about their good side either, in and out of parliament. Doing business in silence? What for?

With vision for development all being laid, what is now required is the presence of new participants. This has to be the new group in participatory development at private level; sort of joint venturists, the latter is here to stay. Previously, it was a mandate from the government and its favourites, chose the guest country for development or projects in their areas. Although, this method reflected selfish gains, especially, politically, it certainly deprived other areas in provinces etc. of its share of the cake. Heavy infrastructural projects carried weight ignoring development at the periphery.

Problem was that it was the hierarchy in Colombo deciding where investments ought to proceed. To add much to surprises, private investments, especially from abroad had to fall in line with such decisions. This again deprived the provinces, although, majority politicians were from far away places. The inequality in disbursements in investments will have to be replaced, thereby, promoting governments vision for fair play and equity which is now more needed. The present governments appointment of a Ministerial portfolio for “Wayamba” has set some precedence for acceptance, the need of the hour based on difference. Other provinces too could easily have strong leadership earmarked for development and investment happenings than politics alone. This again paves the way for devolution and management at the periphery.Read More

Commonwealth elects first woman Secretary 

General

2015-11-28
Baroness Patricia Scotland from the UK was elected secretary general of the Commonwealth at the Commonwealth summit in Malta by leaders of the 53-nation bloc. 

She was one of three contenders for the post and will officially take office in April next year as the sixth Commonwealth secretary general. 

Born in Dominica, the 60-year-old, is a former attorney general in Britain and will be the first woman to occupy the post. 

Ms. Scotland and the other contender, Mmasekgoa Masire-Mwamba from Botswana, are the only two women to have ever contested the Commonwealth’s top post. The third candidate was Sir Ronald Sanders from Antigua and Barbuda. 

The election took longer than expected with sources describing a hot contest between the two women. 

Maltese Prime Minister Joseph Muscat said after a "thorough discussion" Baroness Scotland enjoyed "unanimous support". 

In her first comments she said it was "a huge privilege" to occupy an important role. 

"The 53 countries have within them the ability and capacity to create something the world desperately needs," she said. (Times of Malta)

The need for ‘hard’ questioning of the state

Sunday, November 29, 2015

Even with all the crestfallen realism which now informs the public mood close upon one year into the classic curate’s egg performance of the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe government, there is some cause for optimism.
‘Hard’ questions of democratic governance are forcefully and publicly interrogated as opposed to earlier discussions which took place in elite circles with little impact on national debate.

Exposing the ugliness
One of these excruciating questions concerns the role and performance of the Office of the Attorney General. Increasingly impatient with theoretical pontifications, the focus now is rather on the accountability of the Office. This is particularly so in the wake of public conflicts between senior officers of the Department as to whether or not to prosecute Avant Garde, the controversial maritime security company.

This week we are informed that the corrupt tentacles of this company reach not only across the political divide but also include journalists on its payroll. It may be good if the bandage on this festering wound is just ruthlessly stripped away to let the public take precise stock of the ugly nature of gargantuan profiteering.

That apart, those preoccupied with disputes concerning the transparency of the Attorney General’s Office may take heart from the fact that similar perplexing questions are being discussed in the region. For instance, the role and function of the Attorney General of India (AGI) in regard to the Indian Right to Information (RTI) law is now gripping public interest across the Palk Strait with the judiciary itself indicating different opinions on the matter. Interestingly enough, this has surfaced as a result of efforts by the AGI to claim exemptions from the reach of the RTI law following an application filed in the public interest.

The role of the AGI and RTI
Ruling on the dispute initially, the Indian Central Information Commission (CIC), which oversees the performance of state authorities under the RTI law, held that the AGI is a lawyer for the State and was therefore not covered by RTI. On appeal to the High Court, this stand was contested on two distinct points. First, that the office of the AGI is established by virtue of Article 76 of the Constitution of India and that the AGI is therefore answerable to the people of India. Second, that the right to information is a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India. Consequently the RTI Act must be interpreted in furtherance of that right.

Upholding the appeal, a single judge Bench of the Delhi High reversed the decision of the CIC this year, affirming that the AGI is a ‘constitutional authority’ and discharges public functions. The Court took pains to emphasize the fact that the AGI is not only a constitutional functionary but is also an ‘authority’ in that it is an office that is conferred with statutory and constitutional power. Writing for the Court, Vibhu Bhakru J in an admirably reasoned order, pointed out that ‘merely because the bulk of the duties of the AGI are advisory, the same would not render the office of the AGI any less authoritative than other constitutional functionaries.’ The expression “authority” in the Indian RTI law cannot be read as a term to exclude bodies or entities which perform advisory functions. Whatever exceptions claimed by the AGI relating to legal opinions delivered to the government and so on must be covered under general exceptions to the RTI law. Special privileges cannot be allowed.

Immediately challenged by the Central Government, a Divisional Bench of the same Court stayed the operation of the order and fixed the matter for further consideration. The dispute has led to intense public debate between legal practitioners, judges and RTI activists. Disconcertingly, this is in the context of formidable challenges currently posed to the Indian RTI movement including what are alleged to be politically partisan appointments to the Information Commissions. For long a powerful advocate of RTI as a peoples’ tool, India is now facing the undermining of that very movement from within.

The accountability of the AG
These are discussions that are relevant for Sri Lanka as the country anxiously expects the tabling of its own and long promised RTI Bill in Parliament. It is a matter of general principle that no one Department of the State can claim blanket immunity from the public right to know. There can be little debate about that.

Other misapprehensions persist. Foremost among these is that the Attorney General is immune from legal review. This is not the position of the law at all. Traditionally, this discretion has been reviewed only in exceptional circumstances. But this old principle of judicial non-interference in the English law has long since yielded to harsher scrutiny of prosecutorial authorities. Thus if the state law officer acts in abuse of the legal process or behaves oppressively, the court would intervene. In Canada, expert committees are set up to lay down guidelines for the exercise of prosecutorial discretion.

Sri Lankan judges have asserted that judicial review of prosecutorial discretion exists where the evidence is plainly insufficient to justify that decision. The decision to indict or not to indict must be taken reasonably and not arbitrarily. Applying theory to practice therefore, the AG’s failure to indict in the Avant Garde case is legally challengeable. It however needs a court that is both courageous and possessed of considerable jurisprudential capacity to respond. This is the core concern that Sri Lanka currently faces whether in regard to addressing corruption or war time accountability.

Looking back honestly at past failures

Regardless, we need to see informed and measured debates on the role of the Attorney General, not only in regard to the contemplated RTI law but also in general. We have the Bar Association issuing warnings about the ill wisdom of summoning senior state law officers before Parliament. On the other hand, ruling parliamentarians wax eloquent that Parliament is supreme and can summon any official. But verbal duels of sound and fury signifying precious little and with character assassination thrown in for greater crudity do not help
Evaluation of the performance of the Attorney General must be part of solid institutional reform, looking back honestly enough at past monumental failures of justice. Without such ‘hard’ questioning, all the progressive laws in the world will certainly not help us.

Did a PM’s friend collect U$D 496,000 saying it is for the Prime Minister? 

Nov 27, 2015

These days according to UNP sources two people by the name of Kishan and Rifky are running round the city selling the Prime Minister’s name.

They say they can call the Prime Minister and discuss any project. They have developed a model where they take advance money from the client even before they talk.

Two foreign business people nearly got caught to their claims. Fortunately an honest official saved them. Our investigations revel that they work through a lady and a gent in the PMs office.

If they don't watch out we will expose who these people in the PMs office are?

According to energy sector sources we understand a friend of the Prime Minister of yesteryear who is not involved in the present set up is running round the city selling his connection to the PM.

We understand he had collected around 65 Million Rupees saying it is for the PM after an energy deal he did, went through.

More details of this energy deal will be exposed soon.

For Good Governance

90-Member Cabinet Cannot Eradicate Corruption: Sampanthan

November 29, 2015

The government should take effective steps to avoid waste and extravagance and also to eradicate corruption, says the Leader of the Opposition R. Sampanthan.

Leader of the Opposition R. Sampanthan

“I do not think that it is within the power of your 90-member Cabinet to achieve this. I think, a few persons of the highest integrity, with specialized knowledge and experience should be specially empowered to examine and analyze in detail all aspects of Government expenditure and come up with plans and proposals to reduce and remove waste and extravagance. Their recommendations should be implemented. It appears to me that whatever arrangements you have now are inadequate.” Sampanthan said yesterday.

The Leader of the Opposition R. Sampanthan participating in the budget debate said; “Corruption needs to be eliminated with a firm hand. Given the fact that corruption is deeply entrenched in governance in this country, we perhaps need special laws to deal with this menace – special offences even beyond what is now available, new provisions of law relating to detection, investigation, trial and sentence pertaining to corruption which will convey the message to the whole country that the Government will not tolerate corruption in any form, and that those who are corrupt will be very sternly dealt with. There is, in my view, a need for a new initiative and a new message from the Government. I ask you in the name of the people of this country, can you permit what happened at SriLankan Airlines to be repeated?”

Read the full speech here

                                    Read More

Editorial: Are we being diluted by President Sirisena?

Corrupted men and women contribute nothing towards in good governance but only dilute the leadership. Once the leader himself is diluted, he will take decisions out of the dilution. Decisions made out of dilution will not address the issues ordinary citizens craving for. It will only benefit those who in his immediate circle.

EDITORIAL  -

( November 27, 2015, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) An unfortunate curve in the political arena of good governance is emerging. This is evidenced by the recent press conferences held by the president in which only favoured “journalists” were permitted to ask questions. And, it was very obvious that they had been told what questions to ask, and more importantly, what questions not to ask. Indeed, it looks as if history is repeating itself, first as a tragedy then as a farce, so we’d get ready for it. However, we appreciate, those who have, quite courageously, openly questioned the president in the talk shows.

It is time to review the President’s foremost promise of abolishing the executive power of the President.

The majority of people in this country voted in the new government because they no longer wanted to be victims of the polluted political system. They wanted and expected a better future. The people were thirsty for justice and freedom where they could secure their civil liberty. They wanted the respect and dignity of every Sri Lankan to be restored.

President Maithripala Sirisena promised to abolish the excessive powers granted by the executive presidency in 1978. His promise was subsequently approved by the Cabinet and many media outlets started beating their drums and dancing around the subject.

However, the political superstar who is extremely shrewd in planning, Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera, did not hesitate to step forward and disclose the true timeframe of the abolishing of the Executive Power of the President.

He announced that President Sirisena will abolish executive power the very moment before his first term of the office is concluded. That moment is five years away.

We have heard similar promises from the last two presidents. The same crafty words of “abolishing the executive power and making the President accountable and transparent”, were spoken by each of them. But none of them was sincere to their people as the only thing they attempted to abolish was civil liberty. It was former President Chandrika Bandaranaike who expressed her guilt in failing to dismantle the political beast created in early 1978. President Sirisena himself is a result of her failure to halt the political decay in the country.

The new government is the result of a non-violent democratic revolt by the people, in general, which was geared up by former President Chandrika Bandaranaike, along with true activist such as late Rev. Maduluwawe Sobitha Thero. It was indeed interesting to read what her private secretary disclosed to the media recently, on how he struggled to find President Sirisena, then a Cabinet Minister, to have his consent to run the for Presidency.

The more things change the more they remain the same. Those who actively worked for social change are gradually being sidelined. Those who were encouraged former President Rajapaksa in his wrongdoings are as disgusting as Sirisena’s buddies. This is indeed an indication of future threats of the leadership and the country in general.

Corrupted men and women contribute nothing towards in good governance but only dilute the leadership. Once the leader himself is diluted, he will take decisions out of the dilution. Decisions made out of dilution will not address the issues ordinary citizens craving for. It will only benefit those who in his immediate circle.

Let’s discuss just two examples out of the dozens that have occurred within the walls of the Presidential office.

First, there is the well-known exposure of the behaviour of the President’s younger brother, Mr Kumarasinghe Sirisena, who was appointed as the head of Sri Lanka Telecom. It is not just blatant nepotism but also a deliberate action of ignoring the commitments of those who elected the President. By and large, this can be compared to how the former President Mahinda Rajapaksa granted immunity to his younger brother Gotabaya Rajapaksa. Whether appreciated or reviled, Gotabaya Rajapaksa had the professional experience to hold the office as the defence secretary, but in the case of President Sirisena’s brother, the president is well aware of the truth.

Second, the little known, but slowly coming to light, the modus operandi of Former Commander of Navy, Admiral (Retired) Jayantha Perera, who was appointed as the President’s adviser on Maritime Affairs.

We have reliably learnt, that Admiral Perera was under the payroll of the Avant Garde Maritime Service Ltd., just after he retired as the Navy Commander. In the same time, he was appointed as the President’s advisor on Maritime Affairs. The President was taking steps to appoint him as an ambassador. But, it was learnt, that there were few concerned officials who prevented the move. However, the “silent coup” continues.

Is President losing his sense of good governance or he is deliberately diluting the people?

Good Governance will be turned into farce sooner if the president has no mechanism to remove the cunning culture in the bureaucracy and the putrid tradition in politics while destroying the dreams of countrymen.

Not only will good governance be impossible but also abolishing the executive power of the President will also just be a smokescreen.

Mr President, please don’t pull this nation from Kablen Lipata (from the frying pan into the fire)! We still have trust and believe that you are not diluting the public to conceal schemes but that you will be a man of accountability and transparency. Just, a matter of five years!

Mystery out as to how Ranil lost presidency in 2005!

Nov 28, 2015

Finance minister Ravi Karunanayake and a group of UNP backbenchers have asked prime minister Ranil Wickremesinghe to immediately investigate as to whether money had been given to the LTTE to change the public opinion in the northern province at the 2005 presidential election, where Mahinda Rajapaksa and Ranil Wickremesinghe were involved in a tight contest.

PM Wickremesinghe has agreed to hold an investigation.

At that election, Rajapaksa won with a majority of only 186,000 votes.

Nearly 300,000 voters in Jaffna, Wanni and the eastern province abstained as a result of the LTTE’s boycott call.

This has had a decisive impact on the election outcome, and had the voters been allowed to vote in freedom, the final result would have changed.

Sripathi Sooriyarachchi

The late MP Sripathi Sooriyarachchi revealed in parliament on 21 July 2007 that the Rajapaksa side gave money to the LTTE in order to change the election result.

Sooriyarachchi said he, together with Basil Rajapaksa, met LTTE representatives before the election and Rs. 200 million was given and after the election, billions of rupees more was given through various means.

The RADA housing project too, was one of those means, he revealed (utube has the video of his statement – Sripathy reveals money transactions with LTTE -

Tiran Alles

Later, ‘Mawbima’ newspaper owner, ex-MP Tiran Alles, revealed this deal, with an exposure of the persons involved, at the media conference he held at his home soon after it was targeted in a bomb attack (utube has the video of the statement – Mahinda Rajapaksa gave money to LTTE – Tiran.

Representing the LTTE in this deal was its campaign chief Emil Kanthan, who had once been the business partner of Alles. It was the two of them who had expanded Dialog’s services to northern province in 2002.

The preliminary discussion on giving money to the LTTE took place at the Rosmead Place office of Alles. It was attended by Basil, Emil Kanthan, former secretary to the president Lalith Weeratunga and Alles.

After the discussions in November 2005, a sum of Rs. 180 million had been exchanged in order to build trust between the two parties. The money was brought in large travelling bags and Basil gave them to Emil Kanthan in front of him, said Alles.

Later, Wijedasa Rajapaksa revealed that Rs. 784 million had been given before the presidential election.

This money was given from the millions of dollars received through the Singapore embassy for Rajapaksa’s campaign after being changed into rupees. The money was brought by a powerful minister of the government at the time and the head of a business establishment.

No LTTE connection

However, LTTE diaspora representatives who met two leading ministers of the government in London recently said the LTTE did not get that money.

They had pointed out that the election boycott was due to a political decision taken in order to defeat Wickremesinghe, as he had been trying to break the LTTE into two at the time.

This revelation raises the question as to who had received the money then.

Therefore, Karunanayake has pointed out the need to find out exactly as to what had happened to the money, adding that he is in the possession of several evidence in that regard.

Emil Kanthan

The business establishment head and Emil Kanthan, who is now in Dubai, are reportedly ready to reveal as to whom the money had gone if an investigation is conducted.

Also, one of the partners in this deal had received a big financial gratification from a foreign spy service, which had been invested in a media institution.

(Sathhanda – Subhash Jayawardena)

Rajapakses’ contract killers (ex) DIG Vaas Gunawardena and son sentenced to death along with four others !

(Lanka-e-News -28.Nov.2015, 9.00 PM) Ex DIG Vaas Gunawardena the ‘licensed underworld killer’ who did a number of contract  killings for cash rewards (blood money) during the Rajapakses’  most brutal and corrupt era, for and on behalf of the Rajapakses was sentenced by High court to death on one case of murder of the many.

This murder relates to the killing of Mohomed Shyam ,a footwear businessman of Bambalapitiya by shooting on 23 rd May 2013 after abducting him on the 22nd of May.The victim was abducted at Colombo and murdered at Dompe by shooting to his head and chest.

It was inside information division of Lanka e news always first with the news and best with the views that exposed this gruesome murder by Vaas Gunawardena for blood money amounting to  Rs. 3 million collected beforehand.This was reported by Lanka e news on 1st June 2013 ,when we  also revealed that Vaas Gunawardena has similarly committed 14 such murders. 

The Rajapakse regime a byword for lawlessness , however conducted the investigation pertaining only to this murder .This invetsigations was necessitated because  a relative of murdered Shyam was a close friend of Mahinda Rajapakse . All the other murders committed by Vaas on the instructions of Gotabaya were never investigated.

Be that as it may , in this case the three judge panel who heard the trial passed death sentences on all the six accused including Vaas and his son Ravindu Gunawardena.

It is noteworthy  , this is the first  time in Sri Lanka ‘s (SL) police history a death sentence was passed on a DIG of the police. The judgment was contained in 802 pages.Since the day the indictments were served on the accused on 31 st March 2014 , the trial continued to be heard .135 witnesses gave evidence . 

The president of the three judge bench delivered the verdict. The bench comprised Lalith Jayasuriya (president), Kusala Sarojini Weerawardena and Amendra Seneviratne . 

In addition to the death  sentence passed on Vaas Guinawardena ,  he was sentenced to 10 years rigorous imprisonment (RI) and  a fine of Rs. 10.000.00 too  was  imposed on him. His son and the other accused were each sentenced to a year RI plus  a fine of Rs. 5000.00 was imposed. 

The former Attorney general (AG) Palitha Fernando T at that time instructed  ex chief justice (CJ) Mohan Peiris to consider this as a special court    case , and to hear it  sans jury by a special three judge panel of the high court.Following the consent received from the ex CJ , the case was heard before this special three judge bench.
   
The  ex AG filed action  against all the accused based on charges of conspiring with Mohomed Fouzdeen and Krishantha Koralage between 2013 -04-04 and 2013-04-22 to murder Mohomed Shyam .

Accordingly , the 2nd , 3rd , 4th , 5th and 6 th accused were charged with abducting Mohomed Shyam and killing him at Dompe, while Vaas Gunawardena was charged with aiding , abetting and giving authority  to commit the crime.

Former IP Lakmina Indika Bamunusinghe , ex PC Gamini Atapatu Sanathchandra  (51799) , Ananda Pathirage Priyantha Sanjeewa (68656) , Kelum Rangana Dissanayake (61816) were also  found guilty and sentenced to death.

The investigation into this murder was conducted by a special team of  CID officers including  ASP Shani Abeysekera, CI Ranjith Munasinghe and  SI Upali Bandara .The additional solicitor general  Ms. Ayesha Jinasena  on behalf of the plaintiffs addressed the court on ten days for 57 hours.

Incidentally , Lanka e news some time ago reported an incident involving Ravindu Gunawardena (sentenced to death today) , in which , following a conflict between Ravindu and another student (both of whom were studying in the Malabe IT campus at that time) , Ravindu’s father Vaas Gunawardena who was  in the CCD then  brutally assaulted the other student after bringing him to Vaas’ home . Vaas’s wife too had put that student down on the ground, trampled his head and attacked him.Lanka e news at that time also carried photographs of the sons of Vaas flaunting the blood monies collected from  contract killings of their father , as well as photographs of Vaas ‘s wife and sons undergoing firearm  training. 

Based on reports reaching Lanka e news , an appeal has not been contemplated against the judgment so far. 

It is most deplorable and despicable that even after Vaas was found guilty and punished by court over this gruesome ruthless murder  , the venal and disgraceful  media coolies in Sri Lanka are still sympathetic towards him. For instance, despite the High court delivering a judgment based on evidence of 135 witnesses , one media coolie who was present gave undue publicity highlighting  Vaas’ statement that he did not commit the crime. 

Truly speaking , in any  country where laws are duly respected and justice is held aloft  ,  reports of this nature of  media coolies will be treated as a contempt of court, for the court spent over one year of its precious  time to hear this case ,  and took so much  pains to deliver a judgment contained in 802 pages! In this backdrop some stray media coolie who digs garbage bins to pick up news coming on the scene and trying to whitewash the criminal who commited a most ghastly and ruthless murder for blood money should  certainly be held liable to charges of contempt of court. No media has any moral or legal right  to directly or indirectly cast aspersions on a court verdict.

---------------------------
by     (2015-11-28 22:50:31)

Shyam killing:Vas, son, 4 others sentenced to death

by Chitra Weerarathne-November 28, 2015, 8:51 am 

A High Court of Trial-at-Bar yesterday, unanimously convicted the former DIG Gajendra Vas Gunawardene, his son Ravindu Vas Gunawardene and four other persons of the murder, abduction and conspiracy to murder of a businessman named Mohamed Shyam and imposed the death penalty on all of them.

The bench comprised Colombo High Court Judges, Lalith Jayasuriya (President) Kusala Sarojini Weerawardene and Amendra Seneviratne.

The Trial-at-Bar said that the prosecution had established beyond reasonable doubt that the six persons indicted were guilty of all the ten charges including the major charges of murder, conspiracy to murder and abduction.

The prosecution evidence was accepted by the court. The defence evidence was rejected. The Deputy Solicitor General, Ayesha Jinasena, told the Court that, according to the evidence, placed before the court, the persons indicted were guilty of murder, and death penalty should be imposed. She added that the DIG, being a senior police officer should not have got involved in such a crime. The people had lost the regard for the Police Department as a result.

The indicted persons yesterday in their dock statement before the imposition of the penalty, denied all the charges against them.

Vas Gunawardene, the former DIG said that the CID had not carried out a proper investigation; it, he said, habitually harassed the persons arrested and made them give statements. He said he had done his official duties properly.

Ravindu Vas Gunawardene, the sixth accused, in the indictment, said that he was proud to be his father’s son, as his father had served the country well. He was proud to be in jail with his father, he said.

The other four convicts were, L.T. Bamunusinghem, Inspector of Police, G. Sarathchandra P. Sanjeewa and K.R. Dissanayake all three of them police constables.

The date of offence, had been around April 23, 2013 in the Colombo District, the court was told

The death penalty will be effective as permitted by the Head of State.