The Trial-at-Bar against former Health Minister Keheliya Rambukwella and other accused over the procurement of substandard human immunoglobulin concluded on Wednesday, with the court fixing written submissions for 25 November and oral submissions for 30 November.
The permanent three-judge High Court at Bar in Colombo closed the hearing on 4 November, Hiru News reported. A date for the verdict is expected to be fixed after submissions are heard, NewsFirst reported.
The charges
The Attorney General filed the case against 12 accused under 13 indictments. The central allegation is a conspiracy to fraudulently misappropriate Rs. 144.4 million of state funds by supplying 6,195 vials of substances that were not human immunoglobulin or rituximab to the Medical Supplies Division of the Health Ministry, together with criminal misappropriation of those funds.
Rambukwella is the eighth accused. The prosecution placed some 350 witnesses and close to 300 productions before the court.
How the defence stage ran
The defence case opened on 29 October. All accused gave their statements from the dock except the ninth accused, who is evading court. Oral testimony of the accused concluded on Tuesday, 3 November.
Keheliya’s claim about the Cabinet paper
During a lengthy statement from the dock on Monday, Rambukwella told the court that the Cabinet paper linked to the emergency drug procurement process was submitted not by him but by Ranil Wickremesinghe, then Finance Minister and Prime Minister, NewsFirst reported.
This is an assertion made by an accused in his own defence, not a finding of the court. No response from Wickremesinghe is reported in either filing.
Context
The immunoglobulin case is one of several concurrent proceedings involving the former minister, and they should not be conflated. A separate case over payments to private staff at the Health Ministry is before the Colombo High Court and was listed for 7 November. Allegations concerning expired rabies vaccine and the NMRA have been pursued separately.
Not reported
Neither filing names the judges on the current bench, identifies the other 11 accused, says who the ninth accused is or when they absconded, or gives an expected verdict date. Neither reports a response from the Attorney General to the claim about the Cabinet paper, nor explains why the court set written and oral submissions five days apart. No other verified newsroom had carried the conclusion of the hearing at the time of writing.
