Letter of concern to Defence Secretary over arrest of former Navy Chief

Former Navy Commander Nishantha Ulugetenne

Civilian intelligence architect and legal-State strategist Jihan Hameed has written to the Defence Secretary expressing concern over the manner in which the former Navy Commander Nishantha Ulugetenne was arrested and remanded on Tuesday. In her letter Hameed alleges grave institutional failure in the civilian remanding of the former Navy Chief and urges clarification from the Defence Secretary. Following are excerpts.

This letter is issued to formally raise alarm over the recent remanding through civilian custody of the former Commander of the Sri Lanka Navy — a constitutional-level military authority who once held direct command over one-third of Sri Lanka’s defence apparatus.

The treatment of such a figure through standard criminal remand procedures, absent any assertion of military custody or command-level procedural safeguards, amounts to a direct institutional breakdown and violates the national doctrine of civil–military coordination.

While the judiciary may act independently, the Ministry of Defence bears the non-transferable responsibility to advise, intervene, and preserve the command dignity of the armed forces, especially in cases involving former service commanders.

The Sri Lanka Navy Act (Cap. 358) and the broader defence legal framework provide clear avenues for lawful detention and inquiry of serving and former officers, including:

• Military custody under naval or tri-force supervision
• Board of Inquiry (BOI) or service-based fact-finding prior to criminal process
• Defence Ministry oversight in civil–military interface during legal action
• Special status considerations for former Commanders under protocol

In this instance, the complete failure to invoke or recommend such protections has resulted in:

1.A breach of military law and standard procedure, particularly Sections 109–120 of the Navy Act

2.A collapse in civil-military administrative coordination, led by your Ministry

3.A violation of Article 12(1) of the Constitution, where equal protection of the law is denied through selective targeting

4.A national-level humiliation of the highest wartime naval authority, sending an irreparable message to current and future commanders of all tri-services

There is no precedent in Sri Lanka’s modern history for a former Commander of a military branch to be remanded in this manner without conviction. There is, however, precedent for internal military investigation, dignified inquiry, and state oversight — all of which have been abandoned in this case.

I therefore demand that your Ministry provide immediate answers to the following:

1.Was the Ministry of Defence consulted or notified prior to the arrest and remand of the former Navy Commander?

2.Did the Ministry propose, request, or evaluate military custody under the Sri Lanka Navy or Joint Operations Command?

3.Did the Navy initiate a Board of Inquiry or recommend alternative protocol-based actions in line with its command statutes?

4.What established procedures exist for the handling of legal action against former Commanders of the tri-forces, and were they followed?

5.Does the Ministry accept that it has failed in its statutory and institutional duty to prevent this breach of military dignity?

The absence of public explanation is unacceptable. This is not a civilian matter. This is a direct assault on the symbolic and constitutional standing of the Sri Lankan armed forces. The remanding of a former Navy Commander without military oversight constitutes a state-level institutional failure for which the Ministry must now be held accountable.

If your office does not respond with clarity, I reserve the right to escalate this matter through legal action, parliamentary exposure, and international security law advisory channels. This is no longer a personal or political issue — it is a national breakdown in state protocol.