Raviraj verdict erroneous! Re trial -two appeals; State has acted against itself ! International community shocked..!

By Wimal Dheerasekera

(Lanka-e-News -13.Jan.2017, 11.45PM)   The bizarre  verdict delivered after hearing the trial  until late in the night for the first time in Sri Lanka’s judicial history on the Raviraj murder case had been challenged on the grounds the court decision is absolutely faulty and flawed . Therefore two appeals were filed in the appeal court day before yesterday (11) challenging the earlier decision  and requesting a review on the decision  from the very beginning.
One appeal was filed by the Attorney General (AG) , and the other was by lawyer Sumenthiran on behalf of the aggrieved party .

Answering queries  in this regard , Sumenthiran said , this case being heard before a jury panel itself was wrong because one of the charges was filed under the prevention of terrorism Act (PTA) , and a jury panel is not empowered to hear such cases filed under the PTA. When this case was being heard earlier , this objection was raised at the outset , but that was ignored , Sumenthiran pinpointed. 

Sumenthiran via the appeal is requesting a re trial  - with the parties to the case in  the earlier trial .

State against State –International community  dismayed and disturbed ….

Meanwhile ,according to reports reaching Lanka e news , even internationally the verdict in this case has  sent a  wave of  great shock and perturbation. This is because , while two  members of the security division who were implicated in this murder have become crown witnesses and have come forward to give evidence , and when of one them was even an eye witness in the twin  murder of Raviraj M.P. and his security police officer , it is a most perplexing question why were all the accused acquitted and exonerated of all charges?  Obviously, the next question therefore is , who is truly behind the murder of  Raviraj and his security officer ?

International observers  while saying   , what mainly influenced the verdict of the court  was the evidence given by the Director ,State intelligence service (SIS),  also   question ,how did the court accept the false evidence of SIS Director DIG Nilantha Jayawardena who is a State officer himself ,which was against the evidence of the other  State witnesses ?  This has baffled and shocked the foreign observers too. 

Nilantha Jayawardena an officer of the State going  against the State witnesses itself is to make a joke of the modes and methods of the  government, because the state officer should be appearing against the criminals ( otherwise it implies the state  itself is acting on behalf of the criminals) and not on their behalf . While the  government  is expected to take action against the criminals , in this    instance Nilantha the State officer appeared on behalf of the accused (criminals)  instead of the state witnesses.  
Nilantha’s  mendacity  came to light when he said he does not know Abeyratne , an intelligence division officer under him  who was implicated in the crime , but  later became a state witness,  despite   the fact Nilantha was in the same intelligence division for a long time.

When Nilantha said he could not identify Abeyratne , Rohan Abeysuriya representing the A.G.’s department in his cross examination  asked from Nilantha in court , whether he does not know Abeyratne’s wife who is still working under him  in the Intelligence division ?.

When  Nilantha could not give an excuse , the crown counsel inquired in open court  , whether it is possible to accept Nilantha’s answer that he does not know Abeyratne who is the husband of  the lady  officer , and also working under him in his own division?  The foreign observers  have therefore rightly  questioned whether it   didn’t  become clear from all these  that Nilantha was lying before court ? and  cited this as an example to substantiate their view that  this case was not impartially conducted. 

Meanwhile Nilantha  related a different story among his friends…
He was summoned to give evidence in court without providing  him enough time. The court summons  was delivered by hand by the  CID one evening asking him to be present in court  the following morning , he had revealed.
Even the delivery of notice is questionable , for a court must deliver a summons through a courts officer , and not through the CID that is appearing on behalf of the complainant. Unbelievably , the judge for inscrutable reasons ordered that the  summons be handed over to the CID.

Nilantha had also disclosed because he was not given adequate time by the court , he could not seek AG’s  advice. But this statement of his is untenable since ,when a State witness appears in court to give evidence on behalf of the state , he must undoubtedly have secured AG’s advice under the law.  

Hence , Nilantha  had the opportunity to ask for another date to give evidence after citing the reason that the summons was served on him only the previous day. Nilantha did not do that.  Hence he has committed perjury  and his statement  before court based on the  ground  that he did not receive A.G.’s advice is unacceptable under any circumstances. In addition, Nilantha has told his friends that Abeyratne the state witness is an ‘Ass’. He was once interdicted over charges of a  laptop robbery . He also had an illicit affair  with the wife of Ilampari , an LTTE leader. Hence Nilantha has told his friends , such an officer should not have been made a State witness.

In fact these reasons adduced by him  are in fact going against Nilantha because his statement in court that he does not know Abeyratne  has been proved false thereby.  Besides , his  claim that Abeyratne is an Ass and should not have been made a crown witness is most ridiculous because one who becomes a crown witness in every case is such an individual who is associated with the  crime , that is  ,in anticipation of a pardon. Therefore , a crown witness cannot ever be somebody otherwise than an “Ass’ to borrow Nilantha’s word.  It is  because of this ,  to commit such crimes , ‘gentlemen’ in the Intelligence division are not deployed. Such gentlemen irrespective of who instructs what do not  indulge in unlawful and murderous  activities. 

If anybody is committing murders on illegal orders or for money or for perks , he /she must be an ass of the intelligence division naturally .  The reasons cited by Nilantha in his defense only go to prove all the more that he has a soft spot for criminals who are in the intelligence division. 

The international community is  most perturbed and agitated pertaining to the Raviraj murder  owing to the fear they now harbor  that even  in connection with all the high profile murders of Lasantha Wickremetunge; Thajudeen ; Prageeth Ekneliyagoda ;  Pararajasingham M.P.;  and killing of five children in the East after committing  extortion  , during the Rajapkse regime , this same illegal procedures may be followed during the trials in these cases which are pending  ,and the same villainies may be resorted to . 

It is the apprehension  of the international community that even in the future cases to be heard , Nilantha Jayawardena can be a pernicious influence. He could be giving evidence against the state witnesses , and can be used as a tool towards that end to make a mockery of justice.  One more reason for this belief is , the intelligence service under Nilantha Jayawardena had not lifted a finger to assist the CID in its investigations so far .
In the circumstances , it is the duty of  the present  government to take a decision in regard to government officers appearing on behalf of the State because , in case the international community forms the opinion that this government is unable to sustain and maintain the sovereignty of the law , this government could lose its international image and  stature much  faster than even the corrupt , crooked and finally despised and   discarded Rajapakse regime , with the result the present rulers can possibly  be shunted and marginalized by the international community beyond  measure.
Connected report …

By Wimal Dheerasekera 

Translated by Jeff

by     (2017-01-14 00:06:54)

We are unable to continue LeN without your kind donation.

Leave a Reply

  2 discussion on this news

This type of duplicity and mal- practices by the judiciary only justifies the necessity of "International Judges".
-- by surasena on 2017-01-14

Fully agree with Surasena - Its surprising all the people who support are silent. Totally biased justice system and the Justice Minister. Damn Shame - Sri Lanka . Please publish the name of the jury - we like know who these clowns are ..
-- by Anton on 2017-01-15

News Categories


    Defence News


    Ethnic Issue in Sri Lanka


    Fine Art

    General News

    Media Suppression