news
AG’s coordinating officer pleads for legal representation
… given time till Monday
By Rathindra Kuruwita
Shavindra Fernando, PC, who represented Deputy Solicitor General Azard Navavi, on Thursday night, urged the PCoI investigating the Easter Sunday attacks to name State Counsel Nishara Jayaratne, the coordinating officer to the Attorney General, guilty of contempt of the commission.
Fernando made this request expressing his displeasure at the way Jayaratne had responded to his questions. Earlier, the PCoI too had advised Jayaratne to mind the manner in which she responded to Fernando’s questions.
AG Dappula de Livera’s Coordinating Officer, State Counsel, Nishara Jayaratne, was ordered to appear before the PCoI following a request made by Shavindra Fernando, PC, on 15 December 2020. On that day, it was revealed that the Attorney General had recommended disciplinary action against Deputy Solicitor General Azard Navavi and State Counsel Malik Azeez, who had been entrusted with a file on National Thowheed Jamaat (NTJ) and its leader Zahran Hashim, for lapses on their part in handling the case. A preliminary inquiry by a three- member committee has also been concluded and its report including the charge sheets had been sent to the Public Service Commission (PSC) and Additional Solicitor General, Sumathi Dharmawardena, yesterday, told the PCoI.
The report had been sent on 27 November 2020, through the Secretary to the Ministry of Justice, but there had not been a response so far, he said.
On 05 December, Deputy Solicitor General Navavi said that the Attorney General’s Department had paid attention to the file on NTJ leader Zahran Hashim, sent by the Terrorism Investigation Division (TID) seeking their advice, only three weeks after the Easter Sunday attacks. Chairman of the PCoI asked Navavi what the AG’s Department had done about the file on Zahran, sent by the TID for legal advice. Navavi said that he had received the file on 07 June 2017 and tasked State Counsel Malik Azeez, who was under him, with the handling of the file. Both men insisted that the TID had not furnished the information they had about NTJ and Zahran until 2019.
Additional Solicitor General Sumathi Dharmawardena was called before the PCoI to shed more light into the matter. Dharmawardena is also in charge of administration at the AG’s Department.
Dharmawardena said that in 2019, he had testified before the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) on the Easter Sunday attacks on the file TID had sent.
Dharmawardena added that he had brought Attorney General Dappula de Livera’s attention to the final report of the PSC on or around 24 February 2020. The following day, de Livera had recommended that an inquiry be conducted in respect of Navavi and Azeez. Initially, the investigation was to be conducted by Deputy Solicitor General, Susantha Balapatabendi.
However, on 13 March 2020, a three-member committee consisting of Senior Additional Solicitor General, Sarath Jayamanne, Balapatabendi and Senior Deputy Solicitor General, Mayadunne Corea was appointed. Jayamanne had resigned from the committee on 29 May 2020 and on 01 June 2020, Additional Solicitor General, Priyantha Nawana had been appointed the head of the Committee, Dharmawardena said.The committee had finalised the investigation in July 2020 and sent it to him, Dharmawardena said. The report also contained draft charge sheets. It had been given to Acting Solicitor General, Sanjay Rajaratnam for further recommendations. On 27 July 2020, Rajaratnam also recommended disciplinary action, Dharmawardena said.
Shavindra Fernando, PC, who appeared for Navavi then brought Dharmawardena’s attention to a letter the AG sent to acting IGP on 18 June 2020. In the letter de Livera has said law officers of the AG’s Department had done nothing wrong.
Fernando: “On 10 June 2019, the Coordinating Officer to the AG repeated the claim in a press release. It is obvious that AG didn’t think Navavi and Azeez did anything wrong.”
Fernando then asked the PCoI to summon State Counsel, Nishara Jayaratne as she was responsible for issuing press releases.
Jayaratne appeared before the PCoI on Thursday and told the Commission that the press release on 10 June 2019 had been issued in response to a statement given by Ven. Magalkande Sudantha Thera on a file sent to the AG’s Department by the TID on Hashim and the NTJ.
Jayaratne said: “We issued the statement in response to false allegations the Thera made. He arrived near our office and said that the TID had handed over a 300-page file on Zahran and the NTJ to our department on 07 July 2018. However, we had only received the full set of documents, on 06 May 2019, after the terrorist attacks. Based on that allegation, the AG sent a letter to the acting IGP on 18 June 2018. He asked me to issue the press release prior to sending the letter.”
Chairman of the PCoI:
“Does this press release say that law officers of the AG’s Department had done nothing wrong with regard to the file sent by the TID?”
Jayaratne said: “It says so. When the AG sent a letter to the Acting IGP, the internal investigation on Azeez and Navavi had not commenced. We also didn’t issue this statement to explain whether we had done things right or not. This was only a response to allegations levelled by the Thera.”
Chairman of the PCoI:
“If the AG’s Department has recommended the Public Services Commission (PSC,) on 27 November 2020, to take disciplinary action against Azeez and Navavi, doesn’t that contradict the press release you sent?”
Jayaratne said: “The press release was issued before a three-member committee carried out an internal investigation.”
Fernando, PC appearing for Navavi, then commenced cross examination. He asked Jayaratne whether the opinion of the AG in June 2019 was that Azeez and Navavi had done nothing wrong about the files sent by the TID.
Jayaratne said that the letter the AG sent to the acting IGP was a letter offering advice and that it did not reflect his opinion. “If you are trying to make me say these two officers have done nothing wrong, I won’t say that.”
Fernando asked: “Who is in charge of your discipline?”
Jayaratne said: “I came to give evidence about a press release. I am not sure that these questions are within the mandate of this Commission. Do I have to answer these questions?”
Chairman of the PCoI:
One of the objectives of the commission is to find out if the irresponsibility or negligence of state officials contributed to the terror attacks. The AG’s Department first issues a letter and a press release saying that the two law officers had done nothing wrong about the TID file. Later, your department urged the PSC to take disciplinary action against the two men. So, you must answer these questions. You are a witness. You can’t argue the questions posed by lawyers. If you want to you can have legal representation.”
Jayaratne said:
“I came alone. I don’t need legal representation.”
Fernando, PC asked the witness again whether the press release she sent reflected the AG’s opinion that the two law officers had done nothing wrong.
Jayaratne said that the letter had been prepared by the AG and that she was in no position to make a statement on his opinion. “If had I prepared the letter, I could have commented on it.”
Chairman of the PCoI then stated that although Jayaratne had said she had come alone, the attendance registry of the PCoI stated that a lawyer had come with her.
Chairman of the PCoI:
“I am giving you a final warning. Answer the questions posed by the lawyer. You have come with a lawyer, you can get his assistance.”
Attorney Tenny Fernando, who was present there rose and stated that he did not represent the witness and that he had only arrived as a friend.
Fernando, PC, then said Jayaratne was not answering his questions and that she had arrived to ensure that Azeez and Navavi would be further inconvenienced. Therefore, he urged the commission to declare the witness guilty of contempt.
Jayaratne said she had never intended to cause an affront to the PCoI. “I also have no intention of inconveniencing Azeez or Navavi. They are my colleagues. It is not fair to allege that I am guilty of contempt of the PCoI because he is not getting the answers he wants. I now feel that I need legal assistance and for this I need to request the AG. So please give me another appointment?”
Chairman of the PCoI:
“The witness initially said that she didn’t need legal representation. But now she says she needs to. So, I order her to appear at the PCoI again on Monday at 10 am with legal representation.”
Author
- News Advertiesment
See Kapruka’s top selling online shopping categories such as Toys, Grocery, Flowers, Birthday Cakes, Fruits, Chocolates, Clothing and Electronics. Also see Kapruka’s unique online services such as Money Remittence,News, Courier/Delivery, Food Delivery and over 700 top brands. Also get products from Amazon & Ebay via Kapruka Gloabal Shop into Sri Lanka.
Author
-
sdfsdf sdf sf sf sdf sf sdf
Author
PCoI on Easter Sunday attacks:
By Shamindra Ferdinando
Attorney General Dappula de Livera, PC is not bound by recommendations made by the Presidential Commission of Inquiry (P CoI) into the 2019 Easter Sunday carnage, or presidential directives in that regard, according to authoritative sources.
They said that the AG couldn’t under any circumstances initiate legal proceedings until he had received the full PCoI report.
President Gotabaya Rajapaksa received the PCoI report on Feb 1. The President’s Office delivered a set of PCoI reports to Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena on Feb 23, a day after the report was presented to the cabinet of ministers. The Island raised the matter with relevant authorities in the wake of a section of the media reporting the PCoI recommending punitive measures against former President Maithripala Sirisena, Defence Secretary Hemasiri Fernando, IGP Pujitha Jayasundera, Chief of State Intelligence Senior DIG Nilantha Jayawardena, Chief of National Intelligence retired DIG Sisira Mendis and All Ceylon Makkal Congress (ACMC) leader and Samagi Jana Balavegaya MP Rishad Bathiudeen et al over the Easter Sunday carnage.
Sources pointed out that due to the inordinate delay in sharing the PCoI report with the AG, the department hadn’t been able to take preliminary measures required to initiate the proceedings. Sources said that a team of officers would take at least six weeks or more to examine the report before tangible measures could be taken.
With the AG scheduled to retire on May 24, 2021, even if the AG Department received the P CoI it would be quite a tough task to initiate proceedings ahead of retirement, sources said. However, in terms of the 20th Amendment to the Constitution enacted in last October, both the AG and the IGP could receive extensions beyond 60 at the President’s discretion.
Dappula de Livera received an Acting appointment as the AG a week after the Easter Sunday carnage whereas his predecessor Jayantha Jayasuriya, PC, was elevated to Chief Justice.
Responding to another query, sources said that the Attorney General two weeks ago requested Secretary to the President for a copy of the P CoI. However, the AG was yet to receive one, sources said. In spite of the AG not receiving a P CoI copy, the AG had instructed the IGP to obtain a copy of the report when he requested the police to complete investigations into the Easter Sunday carnage. The AG issued specific instructions after having examined police files pertaining to the investigations.
The IGP, too, hadn’t received a copy so far though some sections of the report were in the public domain.
Agriculture Minister Mahindananda Aluthgamage displayed at a live political programme on Derana a copy of the P CoI report he received at the cabinet meeting earlier in the day.
Sources said that the Attorney General’s Department couldn’t decide on a course of action in respect of the Easter carnage on the basis of a section of the report. In terms of the Commission of Inquiry Act (Section 24), the AG enjoyed significant powers/authority in respect of investigations; sources said adding that the Department urgently required both the P CoI report and police investigations report. The Attorney General’s Department has raised the delay in receiving a P CoI report amidst the Catholic Church attacking the government over the same issue.
Sources said that ministerial committee appointed to study the P CoI report couldn’t decide on how to proceed with the recommendations and the matter was entirely in the hands of the AG. Sources pointed out that the delay on the part of the government to release the report had received the attention of sections of the international media, including the New York Times. Public Security Minister retired Rear Admiral Sarath Weerasekera having met Malcolm Cardinal Ranjith at the Bishop’s House on Dec 8, 2020 said that the AG would get a copy of the P CoI report once the President received it. Minister Weerasekera said that the CID had handed over the relevant files after having completed investigations into eight blasts. Referring to the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) report on the Easter Sunday carnage, the former Navy Chief of Staff said that all such documents would have to be brought to one place and considered before initiating legal proceedings. Acknowledging that there could be delays, lawmaker Weerasekera said that on the instructions of the Attorney General a 12-member team of lawyers was working on the case. The minister vowed to expose the mastermind behind the Easter Sunday attacks. Investigations continued while some of those wanted were overseas, the minister said.
The minister acknowledged that the Attorney General couldn’t proceed without the P CoI report. Minister Weerasekera reiterated that once the President received the P CoI report, it would be sent to the Attorney General. The minister said that there were documents two to three feet high that needed scrutiny. The minister assured comprehensive investigation. The minister said that investigations pertaining to eight blasts had been completed and the reports handed over to the AG. However, the Attorney General had found shortcomings in those investigations.
Author
By Saman Indrajith
The Presidential Commission of Inquiry on the Easter Sunday bombings had failed to identify the mastermind of , the JVP said yesterday.
Addressing the media at the party headquarters in Pelawatte, JVP Propaganda Secretary MP Vijitha Herath said that the PCoI report had levelled accusations against former President Maithripala Sirisena, former IGP and head of intelligence for their dereliction of duty, shirking of responsibilities and not taking action to prevent the attacks and negligence. There were reference to the causes of the terror attacks and actions to be taken to avoid such attacks and the influence of extremist organisations. “However, there is no mention of the mastermind of the attacks, the handlers of the attackers and those whose interests the carnage served. It is also not mentioned whether there has been any foreign or local organisation behind those attacks. As per the PCoI report the attack took place as a result of culmination of extremism.
“According to the PCoI the extremist activities were a result of the prevailing political situation then. The entire nation was waiting to see who was responsible and who masterminded those attacks. The PCoI has failed to identify the true culprits responsible for the terror attacks. The report says that the leader of the suicide cadres killed himself in the attacks and it was a puzzle. That means those who are actually responsible for the attacks are still at large. The report does not provide exact details of the sources of the attacks. The PCoI had sittings for one year and five months. It summoned various persons and got their statements but it has failed to shed any light on the terror attacks. Everybody knows that the top leaders of the government and heads of security and intelligence establishments failed in their duties. Ranil Wickremesinghe was the second in command and he too is bound by the responsibility but the PCoI report fails to identify him as one of the persons against whom legal action should be instituted. The PCoI has treated Wickremesinghe and former President Maithripala Sirisena differently. We are not telling that this report is a total failure but we cannot accept this as a complete report. The PCoI handed over its report to the President on Feb 1. After 23 days it was sent to Parliament. Now, a copy of the report is there in the parliamentary library for the perusal of MPs.”
Herath said that the PCoI did not have powers to take punitive action. “It only has powers to name those responsible and recommend action to be taken against those named.
