Winding up submissions on behalf of the prosecution in the ‘White Flag’ case against former Army Commander Sarath Fonseka, Deputy Solicitor General Buwaneka Aluvihare this week said that the remarks made by the former Army Commander were damaging at a time when the country was just emerging after a 30-year conflict.
He said that when The Sunday Leader Editor Frederica Jansz questioned whether Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa had ordered Major General Shavendra Silva to shoot the terrorist who were surrendering, Mr. Fonseka had responded saying he too had heard such a story from two former journalists.
 |
| Sarath Fonseka in court on Friday. Pic by Saman Kariyawasam |
Even if the prosecution evidence is not accepted it is clear that the accused spread a rumour.
Mr. Fonseka is accused with having stated in an interview with that newspaper that Defence Secretary had ordered not to spare any of the LTTE cadres surrendering even if they were coming with white flags during the last stages of the military assault on te guerrillas in May, 2009.
He is charged for making a false statement to The Sunday Leader, arousing communal and anti-government feelings among the public and creating disputes among them.
The Trial-at-Bar consists of Judges Deepali Wijesundara (President), W.T. M. P.B. Warawewa and M.S Razeen.
DSG Aluvihare said the court will have to decide whether Fonseka’s remarks were likely to create disturbance among the public.
He said the Defence Secretary in his evidence stated that the LTTE was made up of sections of the Tamil community living locally as well as overseas and the Bench should consider whether the remarks made by Mr. Fonseka could create fear or cause disturbance.
He said it was similar to the situation where the people protested when one of the suspects died in police custody.
Inciting communal feelings directly or indirectly or by reporting such things could be an offence.
We should not condone any attempt to create communal feelings after the end of a 30-year-old conflict.
During his statement to Courts the accused said that no persons came with white flags to surrender and no one was shot while he was trying to surrender. The question arises if knew that no such thing had happened why should he say that he too heard something quite contrary.
He said the evidence by DNA MP Anura Kumara Dissanayake cannot be accepted as he was campaigning alongside the accused while Mr. Karu Jayasuriya said that the reporting was out of context and not that it was false.
He said that the evidence by Mr. Sukumar Rockwood of the Sri Lanka Press Institute too could not be accepted as it did not prove anything about the complaint. Defense Counsel Nalin Ladduwahetti will make submissions on the next hearing on October 12. |
E-mail
