Can Gota Be Arrested? AG Pushes for SC Review

COLOMBO (News 1st); With regard to investigations into the Easter Sunday terrorist attacks, the Attorney General today requested the Court of Appeal to refer to the Supreme Court the writ petition filed by former President Gotabaya Rajapaksa seeking an order preventing his arrest.

The petition was taken up for consideration for a third day today before a Court of Appeal bench comprising President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Rohantha Abeysuriya, and Justice Sarath Dissanayake.

During the proceedings, Deputy Solicitor General Suharshi Herath, appearing on behalf of the respondents, informed court that although the petitioner had stated in his application that he did not know a person named Azad Maulana, evidence suggested that the two had in fact met.

Quote
Deputy Solicitor General Suharshi Herath

"Your Lordship, the petitioner has stated in this petition that he does not know a person named Azad Maulana. He has further stated that he does not know who such a person is. However, a person currently in custody named ‘Iniyabharathi’ has provided a statement to the Criminal Investigation Department. In that statement, he says that in 2019, Hendavitharana contacted him and informed him that he should meet Gotabaya Rajapaksa. Accordingly, Iniyabharathi visited Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s residence in Mirihana. He has stated that he saw Azad Maulana, the Secretary and Treasurer of Pillayan’s party, and several others at that residence. The respondents have also submitted photographs to court that support this account. In those photographs, Azad Maulana can be seen together with the petitioner."

At that point, the President of the Court of Appeal raised a question and asked where the photographs had been taken.

Responding to the query, the Deputy Solicitor General stated that the photographs had been taken at Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s residence.

The Deputy Solicitor General further argued that the relief sought by the petitioner through the writ application was in fact connected to matters involving fundamental rights.

Quote
Deputy Solicitor General Suharshi Herath

"Your Lordship, the petitioner states in this application that his right to move freely has been violated. He also claims interference with his personal liberty. These are matters entirely connected to fundamental rights. Under Article 126 of the Constitution, only the Supreme Court has the authority to hear and determine such matters."

Before the Deputy Solicitor General commenced her submissions, President’s Counsel Romesh de Silva, appearing on behalf of petitioner Gotabaya Rajapaksa, told court that the application had been filed with the objective of preventing his client from being arrested in a manner that would interfere with his liberty.

Quote
President’s Counsel Romesh de Silva

"Your Lordship, before a person can be arrested and deprived of personal liberty, there must be strong evidence against that individual. There must be reasonable suspicion. The Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasized through decided cases that this principle applies whether an arrest is carried out under the Prevention of Terrorism Act or under ordinary law. Following the Easter Sunday terrorist attacks, several commissions were appointed to investigate the incident. Not a single one of those commission reports contained any reference whatsoever to the petitioner. After Azad Maulana made statements to the UK's Channel 4, a commission headed by Mr. Imam was appointed to investigate the matter. Even that commission report made no reference to the petitioner. Despite this, the respondents are now preparing to arrest the petitioner unlawfully. Articles 13(1) and 13(2) of the Constitution make it clear that a person cannot be arbitrarily arrested on baseless allegations. A person may only be arrested in accordance with procedures established by law. The existence of reasonable suspicion is an essential requirement. Section 6 of the Prevention of Terrorism Act clearly addresses the issue of reasonable suspicion. This has also been correctly highlighted in a recent judgment delivered by the current Chief Justice Surasena. In these circumstances, I am surprised that the Attorney General is supporting this course of action."

The President’s Counsel also commented on the photographs submitted to court by the respondents.

Quote
President’s Counsel Romesh de Silva

"Your Lordship, one of these photographs shows the petitioner with His Eminence the Cardinal. Another photograph shows him with Douglas Devananda. In other photographs, he can be seen with MP Sampanthan and Praba Ganeshan. These are photographs taken while he was engaged in political activities. Merely because Azad Maulana appears in one photograph alongside him does not mean that he was involved in any criminal activity."

After considering the submissions, the Court of Appeal bench fixed the matter for further arguments by the Deputy Solicitor General and ordered that the petition be called again on July 9.