By Ruwan Weerakoon
(Lanka-e-News -07 Nov 2026, 11.00 P.M.) A magistrate who tells the Inspector General of Police how to run his force is either defending the public or overstepping his office. Sri Lanka's Judicial Service Commission (JSC) has now moved Gampaha Magistrate Bandula Gunaratne to the Judges' Training Institute with immediate effect. It has not said which of the two it believes.
The dispute goes back to May 2026 and two narcotics cases, GM/MC1/DD/01743/26 and 01744/26. Mr. Gunaratne questioned what he saw as flawed or target-driven police prosecutions. He then ordered IGP Priyantha Weerasooriya to issue an island-wide circular telling officers to stop filing baseless cases against citizens. He also ordered compensation for those affected.
Police legal officers argued that a court cannot dictate administrative circulars to the whole force. They said this blurred the line between judicial oversight and executive command. When the directives were not carried out, Mr. Gunaratne moved to refer the files to the President of the Court of Appeal. He sought contempt proceedings against the IGP.
On October 26, the IGP lodged a detailed complaint with the JSC asking for an inquiry into the magistrate's conduct. According to the contents reported to this newspaper, it makes four allegations:
Compensation was ordered from the Police Reward Fund in a way that allegedly contravenes Section 73 of the Police Ordinance.
Remarks in open court damaged the reputation and morale of the police.
Complaints from his earlier posting in Kurunegala show a pattern of hostility toward officers.
Media and parliamentary attention turned a local dispute into a national controversy.
These are the IGP's allegations. None has been tested or upheld, and the magistrate's answers to the JSC have not been made public.
The JSC sought written observations and then issued its directive through Secretary Prasanna Alwis. The directive does not mention the contempt matter or the IGP's complaint, and the JSC has not described the move as disciplinary. A transfer to the Training Institute can be routine. It can also be a way to remove a judge without a finding against him.
Supporters of the move say the courtroom was becoming a battleground and that the commission acted to restore order. They add that the Reward Fund point raises a real legal question about where compensation can come from.
Critics say the sequence is the problem. A judge ordered reforms, was complained about by the officer he had directed, and was then moved before any contempt proceedings were heard. They argue this tells every magistrate what happens when a court presses the police.
No public finding has established the charge in the headline, unethical judicial practice. The Court of Appeal, or a formal JSC inquiry, must decide the compensation order and the courtroom remarks.
---------------------------
by (2026-11-07 17:54:32)
Read 3612 Times
Leave a Reply
0 discussion on this news