Connect with us

News

Indian Supreme Court orders release of Rajiv Gandhi murder convict

Published

on

India’s Supreme Court has ordered the release of one of the convicts in the 1991 murder of former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi, foreign media reports said.

A.G. Perarivalan was in jail for over 30 years. In 1998, he was sentenced to death, but it was later commuted.

Arrested at 19, Perarivalan was convicted of procuring batteries that were used in the suicide bomb that killed Gandhi. Gandhi was assassinated by a female suicide bomber as he addressed an election rally in Tamil Nadu state. Gandhi’s killing was widely seen as retaliation for sending Indian peacekeeping troops to Sri Lanka in 1987 when he was the Prime Minister.

Meanwhile, The Hindu, in a report published on its online edition, quoted former CBI Director, Kaarthikeyan, who probed Rajiv Gandhi assassination, as having said that he had been expecting for this verdict for a long time.

The Supreme Court verdict releasing, A.G. Perarivalan, one of the life convicts in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, is on expected lines, former Director Central Bureau of Investigation D.R. Kaarthikeyan said.

“I respect this verdict and it is on expected lines. We have to respect the Supreme Court judgment,” Kaarthikeyan, who led the Special Investigation Team that probed the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, told The Hindu on Wednesday.

However, Karthikeyan sought to dismiss claims that the convicts in the case were innocent. “We did an in-depth investigation, leaving no stone unturned. The team toiled for several months, collecting crucial evidence from all possible sources and finally managed to go from the crime to the criminal. Three eminent Supreme Court judges upheld the verdict after hearing the matter over three long months — perhaps the longest ever appeal heard in the apex court. It is not that any of them were innocent,” he said.

“This was not just another murder. It was not just the family of Rajiv Gandhi and others who died in the blast, who were aggrieved. It was a crime against the country. The whole nation was aggrieved. In all, 18 people, including nine policemen, were killed. The SP of the district Iqbal was killed on his birthday. What did Rajiv Gandhi do to any of them (the convicts)…he only did his duty as the Prime Minister in the larger interest of the people, according to the advice he received and acting on his own judgement,” he said.

The assassination of Rajiv Gandhi, conspired in Jaffna, was meant to be a mystery forever. Nobody knew how and where the killing of the former Prime Minister was plotted. “When the CBI Director called for a meeting, no officer was willing to take up the case. I was in Hyderabad when I was requested to investigate this case. I thought it was my duty to the nation and so agreed to take up the challenging assignment which, at that time, was considered totally impossible. It was expected to remain a mystery forever like the Kennedy Assassination case.”

Kaarthikeyan said he and his team took up the investigation with an open mind. Every piece of oral, scientific evidence and human intelligence was put together to build the case from the crime to the criminal. “Our investigation was independent and we did not allow any party or person to interfere.”

On whether life sentence should mean imprisonment till death, Karthikeyan said punishment had to be a deterrent to prevent grave crimes. With increasing number of terror acts, people expected stringent punishment to the wrongdoers. “It is up to Parliament to decide on whether the country is ready to abolish death penalty. As regards life sentences, prisons are reformation centres where there is scope for a convict to realise the mistake made and become a better person. Where the crime is premeditated against the nation and assumes the character of mindless killing of top leaders or innocent public, the only alternative to capital punishment should be employed — life sentence till the end of life,” he said.



News

Gul, Kharote spin Afghanistan to victory over Japan in Asian Games opener

Published

on

By

(File pic) Arab Gul took 4 for 8 in the opening match of the men's cricket competition ( Cricinfo)

Right-arm wristspinner Arab Gul,  took 4 for 8 on T20I debut and left-arm spinner Nangeyalia Kharote  picked up 3 for 19 as Afghanistan successfully defended a modest 129  against Japan   to open their Asian Games men’s competition  campaign with two points in Group A.

Two days after nearly beating India  in a rain-shortened game in Sano, hosts Japan made a steady start to the chase and reached 53 for 2 in the eighth over before losing their way.

Gul did much of the damage, taking two wickets apiece in the 12th and 14th overs as Japan slid from 60 for 4 to 63 for 8. Abdollah Ahmadzai and Kharote then finished off the lower order, with Japan bowled out for 81 in 19.3 overs.

Asked to bat first, Afghanistan had posted 129 for 6, with Mohammad Akram making 34, captain Darwish Rasooli 29 and Karim Janat 21.

But it was Mohammad Ishaq’s unbeaten 25 off 17 balls from No. 6 that provided the late impetus after Japan had kept Afghanistan to under six an over for the first 15 overs. Right-arm seamer Shoma Sugaya-Slater and offspinner Ibrahim Takahashi took two wickets apiece for Japan.

The two sides have games against Nepal lined up in Group A. The top two teams from the group will proceed to the quarter-finals.

Scores:

Afghanistan 129 for 6 in 20 overs  (Mohhamad Akram 34, Karim Janat 21, Darwish Rasooli 29,  Mohammad Ishaq 25*; Reo Sakurano Thomas 1-05,  Shoma Sugaya-Slater 2-18, Ibrahim  Takanashi 2-19) beat Japan 81  in 19.3 overs (Reo Sakurano- Thomas 23, Kendel Kadowwaki Fleming 14, Benjamin Ito Davis 17; Arab Gul 4-8, Abdullah Ahmadzai 2-13, Nangeyalia Khan 3-19, Najibullah Zadran 1-07 ) by 48 runs

(Cricinfo)

Continue Reading

News

BASL calls for conscience vote on 22nd Amendment

Published

on

The Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) yesterday called on all political parties, represented in Parliament, to allow their members to vote on the proposed 22nd Amendment to the Constitution according to their conscience, stressing that the responsibility for deciding whether the Bill should be enacted now rests with Parliament.

In a statement issued after the Supreme Court’s determination on the 22nd Amendment Bill, BASL President Rajeev Amarasuriya and General Secretary Nalin de Silva have said the SC’s determination should not be interpreted as an endorsement of the proposed constitutional amendment as a matter of policy.

The BASL has said the SC’s jurisdiction, under Articles 120, 121 and 123 of the Constitution, was to determine the constitutional requirements for the enactment of the Bill, including whether the Bill, or any of its provisions, required approval at a referendum under Article 83.

“The determination is therefore not a determination as to whether the proposed amendment is good or bad policy, desirable or undesirable, wise or unwise, or whether Parliament ought to enact it,” the BASL said.

Full text of the BASL statement: The Supreme Court has now delivered its Determination on the Twenty-Second Amendment to the Constitution Bill and determined that the Bill does not require the approval of the People at a Referendum.

In terms of Articles 120, 121 and 123 of the Constitution, the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in relation to the Bill is to determine the constitutional requirements for its enactment, including importantly whether the Bill, or any provision thereof, requires the approval of the People at a Referendum by virtue of Article 83.

The Determination is therefore not a determination as to whether the proposed Amendment is good or bad policy, desirable or undesirable, wise or unwise, or whether Parliament ought to enact it.

This distinction is also evident from Sri Lanka’s previous constitutional amendments. During the 48 year history of the second republican Constitution there have been many amendments which passed constitutional muster but nevertheless had a negative effect on democracy, constitutionalism, the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law.

The question that now arises is whether Parliament ought to enact the proposed Amendment. That responsibility rests with Parliament and with each individual Member of Parliament when they vote on the Bill.

In making that decision, Members of Parliament should be mindful of the possible and probable consequences the 22nd Amendment will have on our nation. They should also consider the lack of transparency and a proper consultative process in the introduction of the 22nd Amendment. As representatives of the people they should also consider the concerns that have been expressed in relation to the proposed Amendment by a broad cross-section of society including the Maha Nayakes of the Three Nikayas, the Catholic Bishops’ Conference in Sri Lanka, the Church of Ceylon, the Bar Association of Sri Lanka, the Judicial Service Association, the Commonwealth Lawyers Association, LAWASIA, the International Association of Judges, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, the French National Bar Council, and more than 40 Professional Associations and Unions, including the Government Medical Officers’ Association and other leading professional bodies.

Accordingly, the Bar Association of Sri Lanka calls upon all the political parties in Parliament to allow the Members of Parliament to speak and vote on the 22nd Amendment according to their conscience.

The responsibility now lies with Members of Parliament, when called upon to vote, to take a principled position according to their conscience giving due consideration to their constitutional responsibility, their representative capacity and most importantly their duty to the sovereign People of Sri Lanka.

Continue Reading

News

IMF: Sri Lanka on course for 2027 market return

Published

on

SL to regain access to international financial and capital markets next year in line with IMF projections

Sri Lanka is on course to regain access to international financial and capital markets around 2027, in line with the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) current economic projections, IMF Mission Chief Evan Papageorgiou said yesterday.

Papageorgiou said the IMF’s core assumptions under Sri Lanka’s economic programme continued to envisage the country returning to international capital markets in 2027.

“Our previous assumption that Sri Lanka will go back to capital markets still stands. We still have a good trajectory to achieving this in 2027 or thereabouts, and that should be the goal,” he said.

Papageorgiou stressed that Sri Lanka could not rely solely on domestic sources of financing to build long-term economic resilience and would need a diversified funding strategy.

“Every country needs to have a good ability to access funds both in domestic markets, as it already has, as well as international markets for eurobonds and other modes,” he said.

He said a return to international capital markets would have significant implications for Sri Lanka’s external debt composition, while strengthening foreign exchange reserves would remain essential as the country prepares to meet future debt-servicing obligations.

The IMF’s assessment comes amid improving international investor sentiment towards Sri Lanka and positive developments in the country’s sovereign credit ratings.

Papageorgiou cited Fitch’s recent upgrade of Sri Lanka’s credit rating as a positive development, saying global investors were increasingly viewing the country from a more constructive perspective.

Sri Lanka remains under the IMF’s Extended Fund Facility (EFF) programme, which is scheduled to continue until March 20, 2027. Regaining access to international capital markets remains a key milestone under the country’s broader economic recovery.

The IMF has stressed the importance of rebuilding Sri Lanka’s foreign exchange buffers and maintaining stability in domestic financial markets as the country approaches substantial external debt repayments.

A sustained improvement in these areas would help strengthen the country’s capacity to return to international markets while safeguarding macroeconomic stability, the IMF has indicated.

Continue Reading

Trending