Columns

The adjournment debate on the final report of the Commission of Inquiry (CoI) into Political Victimisation commenced this week in Parliament with the Opposition decrying it as a blatant attempt to subvert the judicial process.

The debate was held on Thursday and Friday. On Wednesday, a heated argument had erupted between the Government and Opposition MPs after both wanted to move the adjournment debate.

Chief Opposition Whip Lakshman Kiriella insisted that the Opposition should be allowed to move the debate as it had requested for it first. Leader of the House Dinesh Gunawardena however, said that it had been agreed at the Party Leader’s meeting that their MP would move the adjournment motion.

The day before the debate: Uproar in House when Harin Fernando made statement about Easter Sunday attack

When the debate eventually got underway on Thursday, it was Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) MP Nalin Fernando who moved it in the House. He alleged that the United National Party (UNP), together with the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) and several other parties aligned with the Yahapalana Government, had conducted a systematic programme to politically victimise its opponents. “I know this personally since I was a State employee who was put in prison on five occasions during this period,” said Mr Fernando, a former Chairman of Lanka Sathosa. “They sent me to prison because I refused to falsely incriminate Johnston Fernando, who was my subject minister at the time. My father died while I was in prison. He had no medical issues. He died because he was deeply distressed at what they had done to me,” an emotional Mr Fernando told the House.

Seconding the motion, SLPP National List MP Jayantha Weerasinghe, alleged that many of those who had been arrested during the previous government had been intimidated into making false confessions implicating members of the Rajapaka family. “They had told them to single out people such as Basil, Namal and Gotabaya Rajapaksa over various crimes. Those who refused were remanded,” claimed Mr Weerasinghe, who noted that he had represented various members of the Rajapaksa family as legal counsel in some 15 court cases filed against them under the previous Government.

Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) MP Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka though, noted that the CoI into political victimisation, headed by retired Supreme Court Justice Upali Abeyratne, had recommended the withdrawal of many court cases it reviewed and even recommended that judgements handed down by courts should be re-examined. “This shows the Government has taken the law into its own hands and is ridiculing the judiciary.”

Field Marshal Fonseka also questioned whether the Government intends to go ahead and strip him and other current and former MPs named in the CoI report as having “violated the Constitution” of their civic rights if the special Presidential Commission of Inquiry (PCoI) appointed to look into the report of the CoI into political victimisation recommended it. “This is bankrupt politics, and though many Government MPs have told us privately they won’t support such a thing, we have our suspicions,” he remarked.

The Commission was given the task of receiving complaints from public officers, employees of public corporations, members of armed forces and police. Instead, they went above their mandate and accepted complaints from various other persons who don’t belong to any of these categories, pointed out Tamil National Alliance (TNA) MP M.A. Sumanthiran. “The original mandate was later expanded to include the CID (Criminal Investigation Department) seriously undermining the criminal justice system in our country that goes back over 100 years,” he stressed.

He also pointed out that the Abeyratne Commission was a Commission of Inquiry and not a special Presidential Commission of Inquiry. A CoI has no right to recommend the deprivation of rights of anyone, he noted, pointing out that nevertheless, it has still gone and done so.

The Yahapalana Government spent heavily on its Anti-Corruption Secretariat to politically victimise those from the then Opposition, State employees and members of the Rajapaksa family, State Minister Shehan Semasinghe noted. “They spent Rs 13.4 million in 2015, Rs 14 million in 2016 and Rs 6.2 million in 2017. They spent Rs 33.6 million in public funds. What purpose did it achieve? They are charging us with trying to get cases dismissed, but even cases filed by police as a result of the activities of this Committee were dismissed by courts even during their own time as they were purely meant to politically victimise,” he noted.

Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa likened what the Government is intending to do using the report to the infamous “Night of the Long Knives,” which saw Hitler destroying his enemies over one night. “Hitler purged the country of his enemies in one night. This Government is trying to do the same with one report by wiping out its political opponents from politics. This Commission should be renamed as the Commission to destroy political enemies. The Government is sorely mistaken if it believes that it can destroy its political opponents by depriving them of civic rights. The best examples are in this House. One is S.B. Dissanayake and the other is Sarath Fonseka. Both were deprived of civic rights, but the court of public opinion vindicated them,” Mr Premadasa noted.

He added that the political figures being targeted by the CoI report are the masterminds of the 2015 presidential election victory.

“If indeed there are suspicions that the Government had interfered with the police and the AG’s Department, they should have called the former ministers in charge of Law and Order and Justice to testify. But none has been called. Only MPs who may prove to be a political challenge for the Government have been named by this Committee,” SJB MP Patali Champika Ranawaka told the House.

SJB MP Eran Wickramaratne noted that the Government has already brought a resolution to Parliament calling for the implementation of the recommendations in the CoI report. “The resolution firstly attacks the doctrine of separation of powers which is in Article 4 of our constitution. This is the first time we have seen such a resolution being brought to Parliament. We know that it is only the judicial bodies that can discharge or acquit those who are being accused. Nobody else can do this. This resolution is positively against the separation of powers,” he remarked.

“The independence of the judiciary is critical. We have a Commission of Inquiry; we have a special presidential commission of inquiry and now we have a resolution. This process faultily suggests that the judiciary did not arrive at its findings in an independent and impartial manner. This is what it is suggesting.”

About 90 cases in the report were instituted by the Attorney General and his department during that period, he said. “At that time the AG was His Lordship Jayantha Jayasuriya who is the Chief Justice of the country presently. What are we actually saying? By acting in such a way, we are actually indirectly moving a no-confidence in the current Chief Justice of the Country,” Mr Wickramaratne added.

The Government has no intention of depriving the civic rights of anyone, SLPP MP Premanath C. Dolawatte stressed. “Those mentioned by the CoI have already been rejected by the people. As such, there is no need to do anything. We urged this in our Parliamentary Group meeting. As such, I call upon Opposition MPs not to waste the time of this House by going on about the subject,” he elaborated.

In a hard hitting speech, National People’s Power (NPP) Leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake blasted the Commission’s conduct, noting that it had accepted complaints from many individuals close to the Rajapaksa Government who are not public officers and acted in clear violation of its mandate on many occasions.

“The deadline for accepting complaints was March 7, 2020, but they accepted complaints including from Yoshitha Rajapaksa on October 22 and 23, 2020. They heard the complaints on October 26, 27 and 29. The report was handed over on December 8, 2020, but Commission Chairman Upali Abeyratne then distributed the report to the complainants and asked them to write what they had not written in the original complaints. Then he submitted another interim report on January 7 this year. The Cabinet Paper presented by the President calls for the implementation of recommendations in the three volumes of the report and the interim report. Where is that interim report? It has no legal basis,” he told the House.

He also pointed out that among those whom the CoI had recommended that charges be dropped is Cabinet Minister Udaya Gammanpila, who is an accused in the case involving the sale of property belonging to an Australian couple using a forged power of attorney. “He is in the Cabinet and approved the proposal to withdraw charges filed against himself. He will do so in this Parliament too. In which country does someone vote to dismiss a court case filed against himself?”

The CoI report violates the separation of powers and rule of law, stressed Tamil National People’s Front (TNPF) Leader Gajendrakumar Ponnambalam. “If the recommendations are implemented, it will be a derogation of due process and fair trial rights. It undermines the independence of the several institutions including the judiciary and AG’s Department. Henceforth, no one will want to look into politically connected cases for fear of the precedent that you are setting today. Witnesses will be frightened to come and appear before future courts or tribunals. This sets a dangerous precedent to further entrench impunity in this country,” he warned.

“The Yahapalana Government removed then Prime Minister D.M. Jayaratne without so much as a No-Confidence Motion and dismissed Chief Justice Mohan Pieris through a letter from the President’s Secretary just after it came to power in 2015, reminded State Minister Kanchana Wijesekara, pointing to these as acts of political victimisation.

He further pointed out that the then Government brought laws to Parliament prohibiting dual citizens from entering Parliament and becoming President. “But they brought in a Singaporean citizen and made him Governor of the Central Bank. If their aim truly was to prevent dual citizens from holding senior posts in this country, then why did they limit the dual citizenship law to Parliament and the Presidency? They foresaw that Gotabaya Rajapaksa would be the main challenge to them and wanted to stop him. That was why they tried to prosecute him in cases such as the MiG deal. That is why they kept intelligence officers for more than a year in detention without charge, had their pensions cut and threatened to implicate Gotabaya Rajapaksa in wrongdoings,” he alleged.

The adjournment debate will continue when Parliament reconvenes on May 4.