|
"My
wife was at home"
What
C. D. S.'s husband had to say.
Q:
What time did you get home from work on Tuesday, July 6th?
A:
At 5 p.m.
Q:
Were you thereafter at home the entire evening?
A:
No, I had a cup of tea and left for my classes. My wife was
at home when I arrived and when I left. In fact C. D. S. was
home that entire evening. I know because I kept calling her
and speaking with her.
Q:
What time did you get back home from your classes?
A:
At around 8.30 p.m or 8.45 p.m.
Q:
Was C at home at the time?
A:
Yes, she was.
Q:
Did you leave the house thereafter or did C leave the house?
A:
No we did not. Both of us were at home throughout that
night.
Q:
Was she with you at 10 p.m. 11 p.m. and 12 midnight on the
6th?
A:
Yes, she was.
Q:
How well do you know the Chief Justice?
A:
He is a second cousin to my father. In fact my family and
his have built a temple together at Katana.
Q:
So you have known him since childhood?
A:
Yes, but we got close only recently. He has been a very
close friend of both me and my wife.
Q:
Have you ever met the CJ's partner Damayanthi Jayasekera?
A:
No, never.
Q:
If you are family friends with the Chief Justice did you not
meet her even at a social occasion?
A:
No, never.
*
* *
"I
don't know C. D. S."
This
is what Damayanthi Jayasekera - Chief Justice's partner had
to say.
Q:
What time did the Chief Justice get home on Tuesday the 6th?
A:
Must be at the time he says he did.
Q:
In his letter to the IGP the CJ has said he left his office
at 8 p.m. What time did he reach home?
A:
I cannot remember exactly. He came home in time for dinner.
Q:
What time is dinner?
A:
Maybe a little before or after 9 p.m.
Q:
Are you familiar with or have you ever met C.D.S... and her
husband?
A:
No, I have never met them. I don't know them at all.
*
* *
The
tell-tale phone calls.
New
evidence in the possession of The Sunday Leader indicates
that C. D. S.. nee S. has repeatedly telephoned the Chief
Justice Sarath Nanda Silva repeatedly on his personal mobile
number, at his chambers and even at his home at Katana -
Negombo, which he retires to on a Sunday.
For
instance C.D..S. spoke to the Chief Justice at his house in
Katana on telephone no. 031 224 0537 on Sunday morning July
4, 2004 at around 8 a.m. Again that evening she spoke to the
Chief Justice on his personal mobile telephone no. 071 221
9245 at around 8.30 p.m. that night.
When
we dialed this mobile phone number and asked to speak with
the Chief Justice, a male person replied saying, "he is
not available right now," before abruptly switching off
the phone.
We
subsequently spoke to the Chief Justice at his residence
phone number early Friday morning. He claimed he does not
use a mobile phone.
However
three hours later, also on Friday morning we contacted the
CJ's chambers at Hulftsdorp and spoke with a person who
identified himself to be the CJ's Secretary. He confirmed
that the CJ's personal mobile phone number is indeed 071 221
9245.
On
Monday July 5th, also, this lady, C.D.S.. spoke to the CJ on
this mobile number at around 5.20 p.m.
On
July 6th, the day of the incident, we have proof that the
lady in question spoke with the Chief Justice again on this
mobile telephone number - twice. The first call was made
from the lady's Dialog mobile phone to the CJ's Mobitel
phone no. at around 7.40 p.m. The second call was made again
from the lady's mobile phone number to the CJ's mobile phone
number at around 9.50 p.m.
According
to the Talangama police entry, the couple discovered parked
at Diyawanna Gardens, the male person who the cops say was
identified to be the CJ after he produced an official ID
which stated as much, were first seen at around 8.45 p.m.
The couple, according to the police was allowed to leave the
scene a little after 9 p.m. that night.
According
to Damayanthi Jayasekera the CJ's partner, she said the
Chief Justice returned home "just in time for
dinner" on the 6th. She said, "maybe a little
before or after 9 p.m."
Our
investigation found that on the 7, a day after this incident
C.S.nee S. telephoned the CJ's mobile number six times
between 1.40 p.m. and 2.10 p.m.
Our
investigation further reveals that the lady in question had
been repeatedly calling the Chief Justice at his chambers on
telephone no. 2437526. This hotline is enlisted. For example
she called him on this number at his chambers on Monday,
July 5, close upon 5 p.m. She spoke to the CJ on this number
on the 7th, too, a day after the incident at around 2.40
p.m.
We
also have proof that C.S.nee S. and her husband spoke to
each other on their mobile phones at around 10 p.m. on July
6th. This is indeed strange since both she and her husband
insist they were both at home at this time. Why they would
each need to speak to each other on their mobile phones if
this was so is curious. Our investigation found that even
C..S..nee S..husband's mobile phone indicates he spoke to
his wife that night July 6th, at around 10 p.m. on her
mobile phone number.
*
* *
"I
was not the lady with the CJ"
We
place below C.D.S.'s on the record version of events.
Q:
How well do you know the Chief Justice?
A:
He is a very close family friend. He is a close friend of my
husband's as well.
Q:
For how long have you known him in this capacity?
A:
Over the last couple of years.
Q:
Do you own a car bearing registration number WPJA 8762?
A:
Yes, I do. But that is not the number given by the police.
Q:
How do you know that?
A:
I read your article last week and the number is not
my car number.
Q:
As we have correctly stated in our article.
Are you familiar with the address 250/7 High Level
Road, Kirulapone, Colombo 6?
A:
Yes, my mother lives at this address. My parents are
separated, only she lives there now.
Q:
Did you ever live at this address?
A:
Yes, before my marriage.
Q:
Where do you live now?
A:
At ... Pepiliyana Road, Dehiwela.
Q:
Were you the lady that was allegedly found by police on the
night of July 6, inside a parked car together with a male
person who was allegedly not your husband?
A:
I was definitely not the person. Since I got home that day
at 4.30 p.m. I never left the house. My husband will vouch
for this.
Q:
What time did you leave your office in parliament on Tuesday
the 6th?
A:
I left at 4 p.m. It took me a half hour to get home and
since then I never went out. These allegations are
completely false and baseless and I don't know why I am
being targeted in this manner?
Q:
Did you ever apply for a post in the judiciary?
A:
No, I never did.
Q:
Did the Chief Justice recommend you for your present posting
or did he exert any form of influence to ensure you got the
job?
A:
The CJ had nothing to do with me securing my present
job. I was previously employed as a legal and research
assistant to the select committee on electoral reforms.
Later when parliament was dissolved I responded to a
newspaper advertisement and was selected to serve as a legal
assistant to the parliament modernisation programme for
democracy and development. I was interviewed for this post
by the deputy secretary general of parliament Dhammika
Dassanayake and some others representing the UNDP.
Q:
Are you aware that there is a police entry which has given
your car number and former home address alleging it was you
who was found by police inside the driving seat of a parked
car, allegedly in a compromising position, bearing the
registration number of your own car?
A:
That entry does not have my car number.
Q:
But an entry made by four police officers of the Talangama
police does have your car number.
Are you aware of this?
A:
No. Anyway please call my husband and he will vouch that I
was home that entire evening and never left the house.
*
* *
CJ's
time of departure
The
Chief Justice left his chambers on July 6th a little before
7.40 p.m and not at 8 p.m.
Our
investigation found that Chief Justice Sarath Nanda Silva
left his chambers at Hulftsdorp before 7.40 p.m. on July 6th
and not at 8 p.m. as he has stated in his letter to the IGP.
A
log entry made by the engineering division of the Superior
Courts complex states as much. Mace bearer of the Chief
Justice, Rufus as usual on July 6th accompanied the CJ to
the lifts when he left his chambers and thereafter together
with engineering staff locked up the CJ's chambers, which is
the regular routine Rufus follows on a daily basis when the
CJ is in office and a log entry was thereafter made that the
chambers were locked at 7.40 p.m.
*
* *
Complaint
against conduct of IGP in CJ inquiry
Hon.
W. J. M. Lokubandara
Speaker/Chairman Constitutional Council
Dear
Sir,
Hon.
Chief Justice's complaint against allegations made by police
officers
Allegations
made by certain police officers regarding the conduct of the
Hon. Chief Justice at about 9.00 p.m. on Tuesday, 6th July
2004 and the counter complaint made by the Hon. Chief
Justice to the IGP that the allegations are baseless and
have been fabricated to discredit him in view of certain
cases being heard by him, have received wide publicity both
in the print and electronic media.
The
fact that such serious allegations could in fact have been
levelled against the head of the judiciary by officers of
the Sri Lanka Police Force is an indication of the
prevailing depravity of Sri Lankan society. The very
survival of Sri Lanka as a nation state with a semblance of
respectability, hinges on the truth of this matter being
ascertained, beyond any doubt.
This
can only be achieved by strictly impartial, unbiased and
thorough investigation.
The
validity of the appointment of the IGP from 19.2.2004 to
18.8.2004 without approval of the Constitutional Council,
has been challenged in the Court of Appeal by CIMOGG in CA
564/04 (Writ). The application is still pending and it would
be inappropriate that the necessary investigations are
directed by the IGP whose term of office expires on
18.8.2004 who has already been reported to have arrived at a
significant conclusion without any proper inquiry.
We
would strongly urge you as Speaker of Parliament and
Chairman, Constitutional Council to direct the National
Police Commission to speedily conduct a thorough and
unbiased inquiry and submit its findings to you for swift
remedial action.
In
view of the possibility of evidence in this regard being,
accidentally or otherwise destroyed we would urge that the
relevant evidence including original log entries and
statements of the police officers involved, be taken into
your custody and certified photocopies of same be utilised
for all investigations.
Thanking
you,
Yours faithfully,
CIMOGG
*
* *
CJ
says he is the victim
Chief
Justice Sarath Nanda Silva lashed out at the police and
media accusing them of unfairly targeting him in a kind of
concerted effort to slander and character assassinate him.
When
told that four police officers from the Talangama police
station have made an entry saying that the male person in
vehicle WPJA 8762 produced an official identity card which
allegedly stated him to be the Chief Justice Sarath Nanda
Silva, the CJ, responded saying, "I don't know anything
about this incident. No sooner I learnt of the allegations I
promptly wrote to the IGP and it is I who initiated this
inquiry."
The
Chief Justice thereafter bitterly criticised the police and
media asserting, "I have been in public service for 36
years in this country and never before have I been subjected
to an investigation by mere police officers. Never before
have such diabolical charges been made against my character
and conduct. Apart from the fact that I am the chief justice
also as a private citizen of this country I don't think you
have the right to cross-examine me in this manner."
When
told we were acting impartially and in the national interest
since the allegations are directed at the Chief Justice of
this country he replied, "The media should be on my
side in this case. After all, I am the victim."
Asked
if he was familiar with a Chamindri S.... and her husband,
the CJ said, "I don't know.
If she is a lawyer yes, then I would know her."
When
told that both Chamindri S.... and her husband have told The
Sunday Leader that they are both close family friends with
the CJ, he replied, "I know Mrs. S.... she being a
lawyer I would know her.
But I am not going to tell you if she is a close
family friend or not. I
am under no obligation to reveal publicly who my friends
are. I don't have to explain myself or list my friends and
colleagues. If I do, that too will be published and what
does that say for my privacy?"
The
Chief Justice added "Today (Friday) I learnt that a
newspaper has slandered Mrs. S... This is outrageous.
She is an extremely nice and good person with a very
promising career ahead of her and to slander her in this
manner and destroy her as a woman I think is simply
outrageous. I
have been courteous enough to answer your questions.
I am here, and I answer my phone.
But I really should not be subject to this kind of
interrogation."
*
* *
Fernando's
letter to Abeysuriya
Mr.
Ranjit Abeysuriya,
Chairman, National Police Commission,
69-1, Ward Place,
Colombo 7.
Dear
Chairman,
Fact
finding inquiry by police into statement by Hon. Sarath
Silva that the police conspired against him with regard to
an incident on 6th July, 2004
I
wish to complain in terms of Article 155 G (2) of the
constitution with regard to the so called Fact Finding
Inquiry by the S.I.U. with regard to the above matter.
I
represented Chief Inspector C.V. Weerasena on 14th July,
2004 at this inquiry, to which Mr. Weerasena had been
summoned to appear at 9.30 a.m. at the SIU Unit before SSP
E.L.L. Amerasekera. SP Roshan Fernando was also present.
Before the inquiry commenced, the Head of the S.I.U. (Mr.
E.L.L.Amerasekera SSP) and Mr. Roshan Fernando SP showed
Chief Inspector Mr. Weerasena the front page of the Ravaya
newspaper of 11th July, 2004 which carried a photograph of
Hon. Sarath Silva. Chief Inspector Weerasena was told that
the police constables who had been involved in the incident
had stated that this photograph was not the photograph of
the person they found in the car on the night of 6th July at
the Nagahamulla area in Diyawannawa. They further added that
the male in the car had been described by the constables as
a person who was very dark in complexion, had a pot belly
and a big mustache. Mr. Weerasena was told that if he could
also say the same thing they will not put Mr. Weerasena in
trouble and that they would close the file. I then told Mr.
Weerasena not to take any notice of these remarks but to
tell the truth.
If
this was a bona fide fact finding exercise, clearly there
was no need for Mr. Weerasena to be told that unless he
complied with the alleged version of the police constables,
his file would be closed. There is no question of closing a
file in fact finding exercise. Clearly, such an expression
would indicate that Mr. Weerasena's conduct was being
inquired into. In view of the manner in which this
"fact finding exercise" was conducted, I have no
confidence in impartiality of the police and I respectfully
request you to direct that the inquiry be held by a person
without any bias and under the direction of the Police
Commission and not by police officers who are in service
under the Inspector General of Police.
Your
sincerely,
Desmond Fernando,
President's Counsel |
