High Court dismisses Greek Bonds case; Cabraal and others discharged

Thursday, 11 December 2025 06:19 - - {{hitsCtrl.values.hits}}

Ex-CBSL Governor Ajith Nivard Cabraal

The High Court yesterday threw out the long-running corruption case filed against former Central Bank of Sri Lanka (CBSL) Governor Ajith Nivard Cabraal and three other senior officials over the CBSL’s 2011 investment in Greek Government Bonds.

When the matter was taken up before High Court No. 6, counsel for the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption (CIABOC) informed the Court that the Commission would withdraw all indictments pursuant to a submission made under Section 67 of the new Anti-Corruption Act by President’s Counsel Dilan Ratnayake, appearing for Cabraal.

While withdrawing the charges, the Commission sought Rs. 1.8 billion in damages from Cabraal alone, adding that the case would be refiled if the damages were not settled in three months.

However, High Court Judge Mohomed Mihal, after hearing submissions from Ratnayake and counsel for the other accused, ruled that all charges be dismissed forthwith. The accused were discharged unconditionally.

In his legal submission to the Commission, Ratnayake argued that the corruption charges could not stand in law or on evidence. He said the investment decision was made collectively by officers empowered under the Monetary Law Act and that there was no material to show an intention or knowledge to cause wrongful loss to the State.

He cited statements from then-Deputy Governor (now Governor) Dr. Nandalal Weerasinghe describing the Monetary Board’s collective investment process, and a 2018 confirmation from former Governor Dr. Indrajit Coomaraswamy that the Greek Bond purchase had adhered to applicable reserve-management guidelines.

Ratnayake also pointed to the CBSL’s substantial profits from reserves management in 2010 and 2011 of $ 341 million and $ 430 million, respectively, noting that these returns were achieved by the same officers involved in the disputed transaction, undermining any suggestion of intent to cause loss. He argued that, at most, the allegation amounted to an error of judgment and not a criminal act.

He further submitted that the Monetary Law Act provides statutory protection for actions taken in good faith, and that no evidence of misconduct or wilful default had been presented to remove that protection.

The defence also relied on a 2014 Supreme Court determination dismissing a fundamental rights challenge over the same investment, in which the Court held it could not conclude that the Monetary Board acted arbitrarily or in a fraudulent manner.

Ratnayake told the Court that allowing the indictment to proceed would result in a futile and protracted trial unsupported by evidence, and urged that it be withdrawn under Section 67 of the Anti-Corruption Act.

The High Court’s order yesterday brings the proceedings to an end.