News

No eyewitnesses, but suspects in remand for three years – defence counsel

Published

4 years ago

2021/12/27

Attacks on Buddha statues case before Kegalle Trial at Bar

The accused in the case pertaining to attacks on some Buddha statues at Mawanella are completing three years in state custody, though there is not a single eyewitness who had seen any of the accused in this case attacking any of the Buddha statues. They are in remand custody without the availability of any judicial recourse to bail under the draconian provisions of the PTA, in violation of the principles laid down in the 2006 Supreme Court case of Sumanadasa and 205 others vs Attorney General.

President’s Counsel, M M Zuhair, made these submissions Thursday (23) before the three-member Kegalle Trial at Bar, before whom 16 accused stand indicted for causing damage to Buddha statues in Mawanella and other places. 45 suspects arrested in connection with the alleged attacks in Didulwatta, Mawanella on 26th December 2018, are in remand custody, 16 of whom have been indicted before the Trial-at-Bar hearing the case.

The Kegalle High Court Trial-at-Bar comprising H C Judges Jagath Kahandagamage (Chairman), Jayaki de Alwis and Indrika Kalingawansa heard submissions that the accused who are in State custody for nearly three years be enlarged on bail and to ensure a fair trial.

We have filed a record in this case, a list of 44 cases of attacks on objects of religious worship in the country, giving the names, places and dates of such attacks. Twenty of these attacks were in 2018, before the reprehensible Didulwatte attack. Of these 20 attacks 18 were against several Mosques, 1 against a Buddha Statue and 1 against a Hindu Kovil, all in 2018 prior to the Mawanella, Didulwatta attack in December 2018.

Zuhair PC asked how the Attorney General selected, out of a large number of similar incidents in the country involving accused mostly belonging to the majority community, only the case allegedly involving minority Muslims to be indicted under the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act in the High Court and that too at a Trial-at-Bar.

The list shows, he said, nearly 58 persons were arrested, all from the majority community for the attacks on the 18 Mosques and the Malmaduwa Buddha statue in Kegalle, all of which preceded the Didulwatte incident, but all 58 suspects were soon enlarged on bail, unlike in this case.

Similarly, the list filed with the written submissions for bail in this case shows 24 attacks in 2019 and 2020 on objects and places of religious worship. 118 suspects were arrested and all of them bailed. Two of these cases were referred by Courts to Mediation Boards and settled.

None of these attacks were investigated under the PTA or prosecuted under the PTA. It is disturbing, he said, that the Attorney General has not consented to bail under the PTA for these persons in custody for three years. This is a clear case of discrimination, unequal treatment before the law and unequal protection of the law contrary to Article 12(1) and 12(2) of the Constitution. How can there be then a ‘fair trial’, a fundamental right required to be ensured by this Court by Article 13 of the Constitution? This Court is obliged not to permit the violation of the fundamental rights of the accused. This Court is mandated by Article 4 of the Constitution to “respect, secure and advance” compliance with the fundamental rights of the citizens, Zuhair PC said.

The accused in this case are also in remand without a valid judicial order contrary to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Weerawansa vs Attorney General, the President’s Counsel submitted further.

Senior State Counsel Wasantha Perera submitted that this is a case in which the accused had been conspiring over a period of time at different places in the country and that the attack had been carried out in furtherance of that conspiracy and that he objects to the accused being granted bail as the trial dates have now been scheduled. The High Court Trial-at-Bar reserved order on the application for bail.

Sasika Perera for the 3rd, 4th and 14th Accused raised a preliminary objection to the Indictment that certain counts in the Indictment were not in conformity with the Code of Criminal Procedure Act as there were more than three incidents covering a period of more than one year and that the Indictment in the present form cannot be maintained in law. Court reserved order on the objection for 23/02/2022.

SSC Wasantha Perera with SC Harindra Jayasinghe, SC Udara Karunatilake and SC Sajin Bandara appeared for the prosecution.

M M Zuhair PC with M C M Muneer, M I M Naleem and Rizwan Uvais appeared for the 1st, 2nd, 5th, 12th, 13th and 16th Accused. Sashika Perera with M Mubeen appeared for the 3rd, 4th and 14th Accused. Sampath Hewapathirana with Avdan Singh appeared for the 15th accused. Gazzali Hussain with Thushari Warapitiya appeared for the 9th Accused. Rushdhie Habeeb with M Imtiaz appeared for the 6th, 7th, 8th, 10th and 11th accused as Counsel assigned by the State.

All News Advertisement

News

INS Airavat makes port call in Colombo

Published

17 hours ago

2026/06/4

Priyan

The Indian Naval Ship (INS) Airavat arrived at the Port of Colombo for Operational Turnaround on 01 Jun 26. The visiting ship was welcomed by the Sri Lanka Navy (SLN) in compliance with time-noured naval traditions.

INS Airavat is a Landing Ship Tank, commanded by Commander IP Patil.

During their stay in the island, the ship’s crew is scheduled to take part in a series of professionally enriching events and camaraderie-building programmes organised by the Sri Lanka Navy.

The Indian naval personnel will also tour several historic and prominent tourist attractions across the country before the ship concludes her deployment.

News

BASL asks govt. to abandon plan to raise retirement ages of CA and SC judges

Published

21 hours ago

2026/06/4

Sahan Weerasooriya

… tells Prez such arbitrary change neither necessary nor desirable

The Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) has urged President Anura Kumara Dissanayake to abandon the controversial plan to increase the retirement age of the judiciary, including the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court.

In a statement issued by the BASL President Rajeev Amarasuriya and its Secretary Nalin de Silva, the BASL pointed out that the proposed increase of the retirement age of the judiciary would undermine the independence, integrity, dignity, and public confidence in the Judiciary, which is essential for the maintenance of the Rule of Law and democratic governance in Sri Lanka.

The text of the BASL statement: “The Bar Association of Sri Lanka (hereinafter referred to as “BASL”) notes with grave concern reports in the public domain that the Government is considering the introduction of an amendment to the Constitution to increase the age of retirement of Judges of the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court.

It is the considered view of the BASL that the age of retirement of the judges of the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court which has stood at 63 years and 65 years respectively from the promulgation of the 1978 Constitution, should not be changed arbitrarily and that such a change is neither necessary nor desirable.

To do so will result in the loss of public confidence in the integrity of the legal system and of the Government’s commitment to preserve and protect the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary. Members of the public are likely to question the motives of the Government in bringing in a Constitutional amendment solely for this purpose.

Your Excellency is no doubt aware that the cadre of the Judges of the Court of Appeal was increased from 12 to 20 Judges (including the President of the Court of Appeal) and that of the Supreme Court from 11 to 17 Judges (including the Chief Justice) by the 20th Amendment to the constitution certified on 29th of October 2020. With such enhancement, workwise, there cannot be a real requirement to extend the retirement ages of these judges.

Your Excellency is aware that altering the retirement age of judges of the apex courts would have to be done through a Constitutional amendment. For many years Sri Lanka’s Constitution has been subject to ad hoc amendments, sometimes in order to cater to the political needs of the government in power and often contrary to the interests of the rule of law, the independence of the judiciary and the judiciary.

Extending the retirement age of the sitting Judges of these Courts at this point of time is likely to be viewed by the public as a blatant attempt to interfere with the judiciary. We believe that to go ahead with such an ad hoc move will also be an affront to the Honourable Judges of those courts.

If the Government goes ahead with such a move it will set a dangerous precedent for future Governments too to introduce ad hoc amendments to the Constitution in respect of the functions of the Judiciary.

The independence of the Judiciary and the public confidence reposed in it, are indispensable pillars of the Rule of Law and the democratic framework of our Republic. In that regard, it is of paramount importance that the Judiciary must not only remain independent in fact, but must also be seen by the public to be wholly independent, impartial, and free from even the slightest perception of influence, favour, accommodation, or impropriety.

The Bar Association of Sri Lanka is therefore constrained, in the discharge of its duty to uphold and safeguard the Rule of Law and the independence of the Judiciary, to respectfully express its serious concern regarding any such proposed amendment, which is neither in the interests of the Judiciary and nor of the people.

In the circumstances, the BASL respectfully urges Your Excellency not to proceed with any proposed constitutional amendment seeking to increase the retirement age of the members of the Judiciary including Judges of the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court.

We remain confident that Your Excellency will give due consideration to the importance of preserving and protecting the independence, integrity, dignity, and public confidence in the Judiciary, which is essential to the maintenance of the Rule of Law and democratic governance in Sri Lanka.”

Govt. declines to respond

A member of the Cabinet yesterday declined to comment on the BASL’s letter to President Anura Kumara Dissanayake. The Minister said that he wouldn’t comment for the time being.

News

New US tariffs proposed on 60 countries, including Sri Lanka

Published

22 hours ago

2026/06/4

Sahan Weerasooriya

12.5% additional duties on goods imported from Colombo

The US has proposed additional duties of 10% or 12.5% on imports from 60 economies, including Sri Lanka, over their alleged failure to curb trade in ‌goods made with forced labour.

The proposal made by US Trade Representative’s (USTR) office in terms of Section 301 unfair trade practices investigation to be released, news agencies reported, pointing out that the Trump administration was seeking to rebuild its emergency tariffs, which were struck down by a US Supreme Court decision in February.

The USTR said it determined that it would impose 10% duties related to ⁠the forced labour investigation on imports from Canada, Ecuador, the European Union, Indonesia, Mexico, Pakistan, Argentina, Bangladesh, Cambodia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Indonesia, Malaysia, Taiwan and Britain.

The trade agency said it would impose additional duties of 12.5% on the remaining 45 countries that were investigated.

“The failure of our most important trading partners to address the importation of goods made with forced labour is unacceptable,” US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said in a statement. “This creates a dynamic where American workers are forced to compete globally on an unlevel playing field.”

According to the trade agency, the USTR found that Sri Lanka has failed to impose and effectively enforce a forced labour import prohibition.

The USTR noted that the results of its investigation indicate that the acts, policies and practices of Sri Lanka related to the failure to impose and effectively enforce a forced labour import prohibition are unreasonable and burden or restrict US commerce.

Accordingly, it has proposed to impose 12.5% additional duties on goods imported from Sri Lanka.

The USTR said it also was proposing a textile mechanism that would allow for a certain volume of apparel and textile imports ‌to ⁠enter the US at a reduced tariff rate, though the duties and volumes were not disclosed.

The announcement comes ahead of the July 24 expiration of a 10% temporary tariff imposed by the Trump administration on February 20, the day the Supreme Court struck down US President Donald Trump’s tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.

On Monday, the USTR proposed ⁠a 25% duty on many Brazilian goods as a result of a Section 301 investigation into the country’s digital trade practices and preferential tariffs. The trade agency is also expected to soon unveil the findings of another major Section 301 probe into ⁠the buildup of excess industrial capacity in 16 trading partners, including China.

In the forced labour findings, the USTR said it would exempt from the tariffs a number of products, including energy, rare earths and certain ⁠other metals, beef, coffee, certain fruits and vegetables, pharmaceuticals, organic chemicals and aircraft parts.

The USTR said it would accept public comments on the proposed tariffs and other remedies through July 6, with a public hearing scheduled for July 7.