Alleged Misappropriation Of TRC Funds

by Nirmala Kannangara

Former Chairman Telecommunication Regulatory Commission (TRC), Lalith Weeratunge, and its former Director General, Anusha Pelpita, were granted bail by the High Court Judge Colombo last Wednesday.

Lalith Weeratunga, who was also the Secretary to the former President, Mahinda Rajapaksa, and the Director General, Anusha Pelpita, are accused of misusing public money to distribute ‘gift’ to the devotees as part of Mahinda Rajapaksa promotional election campaign in run up to the presidential election held on January 8, 2015.

Meanwhile, the High Court Judge, Kusala Weerawardena, has warned the two suspects not to violate the bail conditions and has impounded their passports. Weeratunga and Pelpita are charged with criminal misappropriation of Rs. 620 million of TRC funds from October 30, 2014 till January 5, 2015, to distribute sil redi.

The Investigation Division of Sri Lanka Police – the Financial Crime Investigation Division (FCID), which was established on February 26, to investigate major financial crimes against public property and frauds, has meanwhile come under severe criticism for their attempt to prevent Lalith Weeratunga and Anusha Pelpita, from being arrested for allegedly misusing public funds to the tune of staggering Rs.620 million.

Based on a complaint lodged by the Chairman/ Managing Director of Telshan Network Pvt Ltd, Shan Wickremesinghe on March 15, 2015 against Lalith Weeratunga and Anusha Pelpita at the FCID (file no: FCID/ 11B/ 15) for the alleged misappropriation of TRC funds to the value of Rs.620 million to distribute ‘sil redi’ during the last presidential election campaign a ‘B’ report was filed in Colombo Chief Magistrate’s Court by Assistant Superintendent of Police Asanka Gunathilake and Inspector Saajith.

In the complaint, Wickremesinghe has not only cited Lalith Weeratunga, Anusha Pelpita but former President’s Coordinating Secretary for Religious Affairs Ven. Vatinapaha Somananda Thero as well.

According to the reports, all supporting extracts to prove how the TRC funds have been misused for election work with the knowledge of the then Chairman and Director General had been submitted to the Senior State Counsel Thusitha Mudalige on April 27, 2015 for further action.

Doubles standards

Meanwhile, Attorney –at-law Gunaratne Wanninayake, told The Sunday Leader, that the FCID’s double standards should be investigated immediately as the Police Investigation Division has purposely violated the Constitution.
According to Gunaratne, at a time the general public is accusing the new government for not taking any action against those who have misappropriated public funds during the previous regime; it is because of these government officers, the necessary action cannot be taken against the wrongdoers.

“Had the FCID produced the suspects under the Public Property Act in Magistrate Court, they would have certainly remanded for fourteen days. But because of the FCID deliberately prevented these two from being imprisoned they were produced in High Court,” Wanninayake alleged.
“The police officers attached to the FCID are not school leavers, but have vast experience in the police field, who know the country’s law better than a layman. When the Constitution clearly states that the suspects, who have violated the Public Property Act, should be produced before a Magistrate, and if the involvement of the fraud is over Rs.25, 000, the suspects should be remanded, unless there is a special reason for not doing so.

What made the FCID to produce these two suspects who are accused for violating the Public Property Act, in High Court?
Having filed the ‘B’ report in the Magistrate Court, what made the FCID to produce the same suspects in High Court. No one can say that this was done due to ignorance. This was done due to political influence.

Having known that these two suspects would have certainly taken into remand custody had they produced in magistrate court, the FCID was prompt to produce them in High Court in order to get bail to them,” Wanninayake said.

According to Wanninayake, if the FCID is not in a position to carry out their duties according to the law and order of the country, it is questionable as to why they were given a responsible task to investigate major financial crimes and frauds that had taken place in the country during the previous regime. “We did not know that the FCID was so incompetent. We have a doubt whether the FCID, the Attorney General’s Department, and the Judicial system in the country are working hand in glove and are attempting to safeguard the corrupt in the former regime,” Wanninayake alleged.

Wanninayake further accused the Attorney General’s Department for not filing the charge sheets in Magistrate Court.
“What made the Attorney General’s (AG) Department to do this? Are they still learning law? If not, what made them file indictment in the High Court, by-passing the Magistrate Court, knowing well that this was a case against two suspects who are accused of violating the Public Property Act. Was this done because the two suspects were holding high posts in the previous regime?

Wanninayake said that he was surprised as to why the High Court Judge, Justice Kusala Weerawardena failed to inform the FCID to produce the suspects in the Magistrate Court instead of the High Court. “Justice Weerawardena would have asked the FCID to take up this case before a Magistrate as such cases have to be taken up in a Magistrate Court but not in High Court,” Wanninayake claimed.
Meanwhile, Wanninayake paid his respect to the Colombo Additional Magistrate, Nishantha Peiris, for reprimanding the FCID for their failure to produce the suspects who are accused of violating the Public Property Act.

“It was a landmark decision given by the Colombo Additional Magistrate, Nishantha Pieris, on Thursday by asking the FCID to ‘show cause’ as to why they produced Lalith Weeratunge and Anusha Pelpita in the High Court, without producing them before a Magistrate.
Having produced the suspects in High Court, what made the FCID to make a request to the Magistrate Court to lift the restraining order given against Palpita from travelling abroad?” Wanninayake queried.

 

FCID acted on AG’s directives

However, Police Spokesman ASP, Ruwan Gunasekera, said that the FCID acted on the directives of the Attorney General as indictments were served by the AG.
“The AG has more powers than the Magistrate. Once the investigation file is sent to the AG’s Department, the AG serves the indictments against the accused in High Court. In this case too, there was no necessity to produce the accused in the Magistrate’s Court. If the AG decides that the suspects should not be arrested then orders are given to grant bail,” Gunasekera claimed.
When asked whether it was wrong for the Additional Magistrate to ask the FCID to show cause as to why they produced Lalith Weeratunga and Anusha Palpita in High Court, without producing them before a Magistrate, ASP Gunasekera said that there is no such law that those who are accused of Public Property Act has to produce in a Magistrate Court. “I do not want to say anything against the Additional Magistrate’s decision, but, what I am saying is that the AG has the power to refer such a case to the High Court,” the Police Spokesman said.