New turn in monk’s vehicle deal case

The controversy over JHU monk Ven. Ellawala Medhananda Thera’s car permit being made use by a businessman, has taken a new turn with the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) launching a probe into allegations of murder against the businessman, without any probe on the vehicle deal. The passport of businessman Hemantha Nishantha was impounded on a Court order after the CID informed court that allegations against the businessman were being investigated.

CID Deputy Inspector General D.W. Prathapasinghe told The Sunday Times that his officers were investigating the allegations against the businessman.“We have to carry out a full investigation,” he said. Mr. Nishantha denied the charges and said he was not aware about the investigations in progress.

The investigations came less than three days after Nishantha disclosed more details at a press conference about Ven Medhananda’s duty free vehicle permit being sold and submitted a copy of a Rs. 12 million cheque which had been made use of to make the payment for the vehicle transaction.

Mr. Nishantha said he had full details of the abduction threats allegedly posed by JHU members including Minister Champika Ranawaka demanding the vehicle be returned to the monk. However police have so far not launched any investigations about the abduction claims made by the businessman.

Ven Medhananda Thera declined to comment on the issue of the vehicle permit saying the matter has been handed over to Mr. Ranawaka and Mr. Udhaya Gammanpila to be dealt with. Mr. Gammanpila said the JHU maintains the position that the vehicle was handed over for a short period to a businessman and there was nothing illegal in it.

Meanwhile Mr. Ranawaka claimed that 44 UNP members had sold their duty free permits and he would disclose details shortly, However UNP sources claimed that at least seven JHU MPs had sold their permits and they hope to take up the issue with the Customs.

Under the Customs Ordinance on duty waivers, a person selling such a permit is liable to a fine of three times the value of the vehicle which could be forfeited. Action could also be taken against the person who has purchased the vehicle.