September 12, 2015
The Legal Officers’ Association of the Attorney General’s Department in a statement issued yesterday strongly defended recent decisions taken by Attorney General Yuwanjana Wanasundara Wijethilake regarding several cases, including the Avant Garde floating armoury and ‘KP’ investigations.
L. Girihagama, in a statement sent to us strongly condemned the recent media reportage of the decisions taken by the AG.
Democratic Party Leader Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka as well as civil society organizations which campaigned for Maithripala Sirisena at the January presodetial polls have publicly challenged the AG.
The following is the full text of the statement: "The Officers of the Attorney General’s Department have observed with grave concern the recent and increasing trend in media reports in which the decisions of the Attorney General and officers representing the AG have been subjected to unfair criticism. It is extremely regrettable that, despite the statement issued by the Hon. Attorney General on 08th September 2015, irresponsible sources of media and uninformed elements of the public continue to question the lawful exercise of powers by officers of the Attorney General’s Department. Therefore, pursuant to a unanimous resolution passed by the Legal Officers’ Association of the Attorney General’s Department, this press release is issued to clarify matters further.
Reiterating the contents of the previous statement, the Association wishes to first place on record that the Department has, throughout its history of 130 years, continuously followed a procedural system which has well stood the test of time and ensured that the final decision taken with regard to any case or legal opinion is based on a thorough examination of all available material and, where necessary, after calling for additional material and after consultation with more than one officer. Therefore, the recommendations contained in a preliminary report of an officer to whom a matter has been Initially assigned may not always accord with the ultimate decision. However, the decision will always be a carefully considered one.
In the Avant Garde Floating Armoury case, the officer who was originally allocated the file prepared an initial report which was based on statements and investigation notes made available by the CID. Based on that report, the Attorney General consulted other senior officers and also called for observations from the Ministry of Defence, Sri Lanka Navy, Director, Merchant Shipping, etc. it is only after considering the views expressed by all officers who were consulted, as well as the observations received from the said authorities, that a final decision was made as to whether there was sufficient evidence to adduce charges. It Is in the interest of justice and in the highest traditions of the Department, therefore, that its internal procedures were followed and will continue to be followed.
In response to media reports on Kumaran Padmanathan (KP), the Association observes that the criticisms are based on assumptions reached upon misreported facts pertaining to proceedings before the Court of Appeal on the last date in CA Writ Application No.08/2015. It is stressed that the case is not one before a criminal court with specific allegations/charges against KP. instead, the case has been filed under public law seeking the remedy of a writ of Mandamus on the Attorney General to prosecute KP in relation to several specified incidents and unspecified incidents. As already clarified, the Senior Deputy Solicitor General who represented the Attorney General on 31st August 2015 communicated to court the preliminary information received from the police at that point in respect of some of the incidents referred to in the Petition and requested further time to submit a comprehensive report after obtaining more information. This was pursuant to the Court of Appeal having directed the Attorney General to assist court. The very fact that court granted further time until 28th October 2015 to submit a report after receiving all the Information demonstrates that the Attorney General did not make any submission exonerating KP. This is manifest from the journal entry in the court record. Regrettably, misreporting of what transpired in court on the last date has led to a complete distortion of the facts, causing misconceptions among the general public. The erroneous media reports have also been misused by individuals with malicious motives who have descended to such depths as to level vicious personal attacks on the Hon. Attorney General. In fact, the most significant development in the KP matter is the strong action taken by the Attorney General in terms of the powers vested in him under the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code, whereby he has directed the IGP to conduct a comprehensive Investigation into all criminal incidents where KP may have been Involved and report whether there Is evidence implicating him, so that KP may be charged in accordance with the law. However, this progressive step has not received the media attention it deserves.
In these circumstances, the Legal Officers’ Association of the Attorney General’s Department strongly condemns the recent media reportage and unequivocally stands by the decisions of the Hon. Attorney General, which are in full compliance with the law and procedure. It is hoped that this statement will clarify the facts and put to a halt the unfair criticisms levelled against the Attorney General’s Department, allowing its officers to discharge their duties with independence, within the four comers of the law."
