Lawyers acting for former minister Patali Champika Ranawaka have asked for a formal investigation into roughly Rs. 450,000 of public money spent to fly a prosecution witness from Germany to Sri Lanka to give evidence against him.
The complaint was drawn up by Senior Attorney-at-Law Shiral Lakthilaka and announced in a media statement on Thursday. It is directed to the National Authority for the Protection of Victims of Crime and Witnesses and the Attorney General’s Department, and is being delivered by Attorneys-at-Law Rajika Kodithuwakku and Thikshana Gammanpila, according to Newswire.
It arises from evidence given on 19 October in case HC 1824/20, being heard before the Colombo High Court.
What the witness said
The central assertion is a reversal. The witness had earlier told the court through his lawyers that he was unable to travel to Sri Lanka to testify at the original trial. About Rs. 450,000 was then spent on air travel and related costs to bring him from Germany.
Asked in court about those costs, the witness said he had not paid them himself, and named the person who did as “Mr. Indika, the Director of the CCD” — the Colombo Crimes Division.
What is being asked
The complaint seeks a formal investigation into:
- whether the legally prescribed procedure for taking evidence from an overseas witness was followed;
- whether the spending of state funds complied with the applicable financial regulations;
- whether the arrangement amounted to improper interference with a witness, or could have affected the witness’s independence or the fairness of the trial.
It also asks for an audit of the public money spent, and for legal action against anyone found to have broken the law. Newswire reports that it frames the issue around alleged misuse of provisions of the Assistance to and Protection of Victims of Crime and Witnesses Act — the statute under which the National Authority operates.
A difference between the two filings
The two accounts differ on the tense. Hiru News reports that the complaint has been handed over to the Authority and the Attorney General’s Department; Newswire says it is to be handed over by the two attorneys. Neither states whether either body has acknowledged receipt.
Hiru also does not identify the case number, does not mention the Witnesses Act, and omits the witness’s earlier statement that he could not travel — the fact that gives the complaint its force. Newswire alone carries all three. As an aggregator, Newswire does not count toward this article’s credibility rating, but it is the fuller account.
Not reported
Neither filing gives the subject matter of HC 1824/20, the witness’s identity, or what his evidence concerned. Neither carries any response from the Colombo Crimes Division, the official named as “Mr. Indika”, the Attorney General’s Department or the National Authority.
This desk’s earlier coverage of proceedings involving Ranawaka includes his summons before the coal procurement commission in July. No filing states whether HC 1824/20 is connected to that matter, and no connection is asserted here.
