Gotabaya on imminent arrest: SC re-fixes argument for October 24
The Supreme Court yesterday re-fixed the argument for October 24 the fundamental rights petition filed by former Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa seeking an order preventing arrest.
The case is over several purported investigations and a declaration that the Gazette notification on the Fraud Crimes Investigations Division is ultra vires.
The Bench comprised Chief Justice Priyasath Dep, Justices Upaly Abeyrathne and Anil Gooneratne.
When the petition came up on March 13, the Additional Solicitor General informed that the investigation against him is continuing and that if there is cognizable offence (means a police officer has the authority to make an arrest without a warrant and to start an investigation with or without the permission of a court) against him, the integral part of such offence is a mandatory requirement to arrest.
He, appearing for the Respondents and the Attorney General also told Court that the Interim Order preventing the Financial Crime Investigation Division from arresting him granted on May 13, 2015 was still in operation.
When the petition was, in the first instance, taken up on May 13, 2015, for support for granting leave to proceed, Justice Buwaneka Aluvihara had declined to be a member of the Bench and a two-judge Bench comprising Justices Eva Wanasundera and Sarath de Abrew granted an Interim Order preventing the FCID and others from arresting the former Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa for the alleged financial crime.
They had also granted leave to proceed with his petition for the alleged imminent infringement of his fundamental rights to equality and equal protection of the law, to freedom from arbitrary arrest and detention as well as his right to the freedom of movement.
Petitioner Gotabaya cited Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and members of the Cabinet, Secretary to the Cabinet, Secretary to the President, IGP N.k.ilangakoon, CID Director B.r.s.r.nagahamulla, DIG of the Financial Crime Investigation Division Ravi Waidyalankara and the Attorney General as Respondents.
Romesh de Silva PC with Ali Sabry PC, Sugath Caldera and Sanath Wijewardane appears for the Petitioner. K.kanag Iswaran PC appeared for the Prime Minister,additional Solicitor General Yasantha Kothagoda appeared for the Respondents.
Mr. Rajapaksa filed the petition seeking an Interim Order preventing police from arresting him over several purported investigations and a declaration that the gazette notification on the Fraud Crimes Investigations Division is ultra vires.
He states his petition that consequent to the Presidential Elections held on November 17, 2005, his brother Mahinda Rajapaksa was elected the President.
He adds he accepted the office of Secretary of Defence in December 2005 - an area which he possessed large wealth of knowledge and experience having served the Sri Lanka Army.
He states the National Executive Council (NEC), its members on several newspapers and media channels continued their malicious and vicious campaign against him and the members of his family alleging that they had staged a coup on the night of the elections to hold on to the power contrary to the mandate of the people.
The members of NEC who were instrumental in articulating the allegations continued with their efforts to make false and baseless allegations against him over the floating armoury which was found to have been docked at the Galle harbor with a large consignment of weapons and ammunitions, allegations of corruptions and irregularity in the purchase of MIG 27 in year 2006, purported share manipulation at Lanka Hospitals Limited and the leasing of aircrafts at the time of tenure in the office of Chairman at Mihin Lanka. he laments.
The investigative unit FCID was admittedly established to look in to complaints forwarded by the cabinet subcommittee under the patronage of the Prime Minister who was also a member of the said purported “National Executive Council”, he complains.
In the light of the complaints being forwarded by the Sub-committee, there was a likelihood that the FCID is being biased and coerced and could make a finding adverse to him, he bewails.