SC terminates contempt proceedings against Namal

By S.S. Selvanayagam

The Supreme Court on Tuesday terminated the contempt proceedings against Hambantota District Parliamentarian Namal Rajapaksa.

The bench comprising Chief Justice K. Sripavan, Justices Priyasath Dep and B.P. Aluvihara observed that despite Rajapaksa jeopardising law and order earlier he was now acting in the terms of applied law.

The Court terminated the contempt proceedings said he was willing to cooperate with the Bribery Commission investigation.

When the matter was taken up before Court, Additional Solicitor General Sanjay Rajaratnam told Court that the Rajapaksa was at the Bribery Commission on 15 February as per the undertakings given to courts and submitted an affidavit. He added that Rajapaksa was summoned on 20 February and was present before the commission.

He told Court that Rajapaksa was required to be present at the Bribery Commission for further investigations on 27 March 2017.

He brought to the court’s notice that he got no instructions from the Bribery Commission but learned what transpired there and left the matter in the hands of the Court.

In view of the submissions made by the Additional Solicitor General, the Court was of the view that Rajapaksa failed to appear before the Commission on 26 May 2016 and jeopardised law and order.

Court directed Rajapaksa to comply with the orders of the Bribery Commission in the future.

Additional Solicitor General Sanjay Rajaratnam on 1 January informed Court that the Bribery Commission was prepared to accede to Rajapaksa’s request to go to the Bribery Commission in order to give an affidavit and make a statement without prejudice to the contempt proceedings.

He submitted that the Director General of the Bribery Commission had intimated its observation that the conduct of Rajapaksa had undermined the integrity of the commission in the eye of the public and hampered the investigation.

However, the commission is prepared to accept his affidavit and record his statement without prejudice to the contempt proceedings, he told Court.

Gamini Marapana PC, appearing for Rajapaksa, said his client was prepared to go the commission and hand in an affidavit and make statements and pleaded to terminate the contempt proceedings.

Both Rajapaksa and the Attorney General had agreed that Rajapaksa go to the commission on 15 February. The matter was fixed to be mentioned yesterday at 3.00 p.m.

Rajapaksa on 16 January pleaded not guilty to the charge against him for contempt against the Bribery Commission and its authority.

He had also told the Supreme Court that he was willing to go to the Bribery Commission and make a statement if required and was also willing to submit an affidavit.

Rajapaksa’s counsel had said his client had not committed any act of contempt against the commission and asked the Court to terminate the proceedings.

 The Supreme Court on 15 September 2016 directed the Bribery Commission to file a charge sheet against Rajapaksa for the alleged offence of contempt of the Bribery Commission on or before 3 October. Court rejected the preliminary objections raised by Rajapaksa on the maintainability of the commencement of contempt proceedings.

The Bribery Commission complained to the Supreme Court that Rajapaksa committed an offence of Contempt of the Bribery Commission by allegedly disrespecting the authority by failing to appear before the commission on 26 May last year.

Then Director General Dilrukshi Dias Wickremasinghe PC had sought to initiate the contempt proceedings against Rajapaksa that without reasonable cause he failed to appear before the commission and failed to produce an affidavit in connection with the investigation into his assets.

Signed by the Chairman Justice T.B. Weerasuriya, the determination of the commission requested the Supreme Court to initiate proceedings against the Parliamentarian under the Article 105(3) of the Constitution.

The commission stated that it commenced an investigation on the assets of the Parliamentarian which would be an indictable offence under the Bribery Act and that the investigations revealed evidence to substantiate an offence of bribery.

Apart from the routine investigative steps taken for the purpose of ascertaining the truth of the matters being investigated, the Parliamentarian was requested by a notice dated 14 December 2015 to produce an affidavit on 20 January 2016, it stated.

Rajapaksa through a letter dated 19 January 2016 had requested further time to send the affidavit and the commission granted him further time until 15 March, it further stated. However, on 15 March he had requested a copy of the complaint from the commission.

The commission wrote to him that it could not provide a copy as he was not entitled to it and further requested him to submit an affidavit before 17 April which he did not comply with. But the content of the letter was disputed by Jayantha Weerasinghe PC on behalf of Rajapaksa and through a letter dated 25 May he had replied to the summons and objected to its legality.

Gamini Marapana PC with Shavindra Fernando PC, Ali Sabry and Navin Marapana appeared for Rajapaksa. Additional Solicitor General Sanjay Rajaratnam with Deputy Solicitor General Nerin Pulle appeared for the Attorney General as amicus curie (literally, friend of the court to assist).