says those named by PCoI on Easter Sunday carnage must not be considered for top post

The Lawyers’ Collective has strongly condemned the fourth extension granted to C. D. Wickremeratne, who passed the mandatory retirement age eight months ago. The group alleges that the extension has been granted unconstitutionally without the concurrence of the Constitutional Council.

The Lawyers’ Collective is an umbrella organization of several groups of legal professionals, individual lawyers and legal academics protecting democracy, the rule of law and judicial independence.The following is the text of the statement by the Lawyers’ Collective:

“The Lawyers’ Collective expresses deep concern over the failure to appoint an Inspector General of Police according to the Constitution and its profound impact on the Police Department and the criminal justice system. Over the last eight months, the President has repeatedly extended Mr. C D Wickremeratne’s tenure, even after he has surpassed the age of compulsory retirement. Yet another purported extension, without approval of the Constitutional Council, appears to have been made by the President on or about 3rd November 2023.

The failures of leadership have contributed to a significant erosion of public confidence in the Sri Lanka Police over the past few decades. Issues such as a lack of independence, politicization, torture, custodial deaths, and a lack of professionalism have all played a role in diminishing trust in the police.

The recent Supreme Court case of Mohammed Rashid Fathima Sharmila v K.W.G. Nishantha and others (SCFR 398/2008- S.C.M. 03.02.2023) highlighted the loss of credibility within the police force, stating, “It only highlights the utterly unprofessional approach to duty by the personnel who man it, and as a consequence, people are increasingly losing trust in the police.

It had lost the credibility it ought to enjoy as a law enforcement agency.”

In these circumstances, the Lawyers’ Collective emphasizes the critical importance of restoring public confidence in the Sri Lanka Police for the administration of justice and the rule of law.

In accordance with the Constitution, Article 41C, the President has a duty to nominate a candidate for the IGP position and shall only appoint a candidate approved by the Constitutional Council. Both the President and the Constitutional Council are entrusted with the sacred duty of ensuring that the appointed individual possesses an exemplary service record, is free of any blemishes, and has the capability to rebuild trust in the police.

The Lawyers’ Collective reminds that the highest norms and standards of good governance guaranteed by the Constitution must be upheld by the Executive in the selection of the Inspector General of Police. It is of paramount importance that individuals who have been found to have violated fundamental rights or perpetrated illegalities or criminal acts, against whom there are fundamental rights or criminal cases pending and against whom allegations of involvement in unlawful activities, including torture and police brutality, or serious negligence in their duties including in relation to the Easter Sunday massacre should not be considered for this appointment. The Collective emphasizes that seniority is but one consideration and that the appointment to this office demands that the most suitable candidate be nominated.

Furthermore, the Lawyers’ Collective suggests that prior to the approval of the Inspector General of Police’s appointment, the Constitutional Council adopt rules for the procedures and processes governing the performance and discharge of the Council’s duties and functions, as provided for by the Constitution, to ensure a rigorous process and merit based and accountable decisions.”