Breaking News: Full Text Of The Interim Reply Given By The Chief Justice
“It is therefore apparent that these charges are baseless and groundless. It is a pity that the Chief Justice’s reputation has been adversely affected. We hope that with the true facts being revealed, the public will realize the evil perpetrated on her.” says Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake‘s lawyers in her interim reply.
CJ
WE publish the full text of the interim reply given by the Chief Justice.
The charges are groundless and baseless. There has not even been an iota of consideration of the facts before the resolution was signed or placed on the Order Paper. The charges are levied to damage the reputation of an independent and fearless judge. The true facts illustrate the above.
CHARGES RELATING TO FINANCIAL IMPROPRIETY
PURPORTED CHARGE 3
“Whereas, by not declaring in the annual declaration of assets and liabilities thatshould be submitted by a judicial officer, the details of approximately Rs. 34 million in foreign currency deposited at the branch of NDB Bank located at Dharmalpala Mawatha, Colombo 07 in accounts 106450013024, 101000046737, 100002001360 and 100001014772 during the period from 18 April 2011 to 27 March 2012.”
The Charge is groundless and baseless.
In summary Dr. Shirani Bandaranayake’s position is as follows:-
There was no deposit of Rs. 34 million in foreign currency as alleged in the charge.
Dr. Bandaranayake’s sister remitted from Australia the equivalent of Rs.29,688,225.38 for the purchase of a housing unit at trillium residencies.
Out of such sum, a sum of Rs.27, 987,200/- was remitted to the vendor by cheques in connection with the purchase of the housing unit at trillium residencies.
The above sum of Rs.29,688,225.38 was not an asset of Dr. Shirani Bandaranayake.
Of the balance, a sum of Rs. 1,000000 was remitted to Dr. Bandaranayake’s sisters’s account.
The balance Rs. 800,000/= was retained by Dr. Shirani Bandaranayake to be used as per her sister’s instructions to be utilized for other purposes including the annual almsgiving in memory of their parents.
Though not an asset in her declaration of assets and liabilities, Dr. Shirani Bandaranayake declared a sum of Rs.10,061,819/31 as “holding on behalf of my sister to pay for the apartment” [this was the only sum held by Dr. Bandaranayake for her sister as at 31.3.2012 and it had been declared].
In the circumstances,
(a) Dr. Shirani Bandaranayake did not receive a sum of Rs.34 million as alleged in the charge;
(a) Dr. Shirani Bandaranayake did not receive a sum of Rs.34 million as alleged in the charge;
(b) the only sums received from abroad aggregated to the equivalent of Rs.29,688,225.38 which she received from her sister for the purchase of the apartment..
(c) of this sum, a sum of Rs.27, 987,200/- was remitted to the vendor to purchase the apartment;
(d) a sum of Rs 1,000,000/= was credited to her sister’s account; the balance was retained as per her sister’s instructions for expenses.
(d) Dr. Shirani Bandaranayake had declared the full sum held by her on account of her sister as at 31.3.2012 in her declaration of assets and liabilities [that is a sum of Rs.10,061,819.31].
In the circumstances the purported charge that she did not declare Rs.34 million in her declaration is groundless, baseless, frivolous and malicious.
PURPORTED CHARGE 2
“Whereas, in making the payment for the purchase of the above property, by paying a sum of Rs 19,362,500 in cash, the manner in which such sum of money was earned had not been disclosed, to the companies of City Housing and Real Estate Company Limited and Trillium Residencies prior to the purchase of the said property.”
The Charge is groundless and baseless.
The sum of Rs.19,362,500/- was part of the purchase consideration of the housing unit referred to above.
This sum (Rs.19,362,500/-) is included in the aforesaid sum of Rs.29,688,225.38 remitted to our client by her sister for the purchase of the housing unit referred to above.
This sum of Rs.19,362,500/- is also included in the sum remitted to the vendor for the purchase of housing unit.
This sum of Rs.19,362,500/- never belonged to our client.
PURPORTED CHARGE 4. Read More
