In an almost extraordinary turn of events legal representation has been made on behalf of Arjuna Mahendran by the Singaporean branch of INTERPOL. The fugitive former Governor of Sri Lanka’s Central Bank is wanted by the Colombo Ford Magistrates Court subsequent to a complaint made by the Governor who succeeded Mahendran following a spectacular scandal.
Solicitors acting for Mahendran have asked Interpol in Singapore for more information. Singapore in turn have approached the Sri Lankan public prosecutor – the Attorney General – for that information.
The request askes for details of the arrest warrant issued by the Court in Colombo as well as the reasons for such detention.
A request has been made by Arjuna Mahendran, the fugitive former governor, for copies of the arrest, warrant and evidence against him on the so-called Bond Gate matter.
At the Fort Magistrates Court, Magistrate Lanka Jayaratne ordered the Attorney General to report at the next hearing on what legal measures have been taken in connection with the extradition to Sri Lanka of Arjuna Mahendran. Mahendran is believed to hold Singaporean nationality.
Perhaps uncomfortably too close to point, was the information that this resulted in the knowledge that Arjuna Mahendran is in fact resident in Singapore.
Sri Lanka’s Prime Minister Wickremesinghe has for long been the principal protector in effect of Mahendran – announcing several times in the past that there was a lack of evidence of wrong doing. So much so that he was a virtual consultant even after Sri Lankas executive President refused to appoint Mahendran for a fresh term of office – after the scandal broke.
It is unacceptable that the Attorney General Department appears to have difficulty in providing INTERPOL Singapore with details of their case against the fugitive former governor, who is wanted by the Fort Magistrate’s Court.
A simple examination of the case history will reveal that :
- There exists the Presidential Commission of Inquiry report into the Bond Scam. All 10,000 plus pages.
- Is there no B report filed in Court?
- There exist several hours of media reports and hundreds of columns of newspaper print that explains in great detail the actions of Arjuna Mahendran.
Let us remember that the Commission of Inquiry report described Arjuna Mahendran’s actions in sharing sensitive and confidential information as “Mala Fide in the interest and to the benefit of Perpetual Treasuries Limited.”
The question now arises as to why the Attorney General is on an apparent go-slow to supply the information wanted by Singapore. Compliance of this request must easily be elementary.
It has been evident that the Attorney General did indeed extend kid glove treatment to the Prime Minister when he appeared as a witness at the Commission of Inquiry. The same almost flippant treatment was afforded to senior UNP officials and cabinet ministers Kabir Hashim and Malik Samarawickrama. No such kid glove treatment was extended to the 60 plus other witnesses or notably to then Minister Ravi Karunanayake.
The Attorney General Jayantha Jayasuriya pointedly did not permit messers Dappula De Livera and Yasatha Kodagoda from questioning either the Prime Minister or Minister Hashim and Samarawickrama.Instead, the PM was sent a written questionnaire.
A fundamental aspect of Cross-Examination to elicit facts from the known to the unknown was thus conveniently evaded. Why would the Attorney General act in effect protect the Prime Minister?
The Prime Minister confirmed in a statement in Parliament that it was he who insisted on the change in the system of awarding bonds. Arjuna Mahendran confirmed that he had only acted upon the instructions of the Prime Minister. Arjuna Mahendran also took responsibility for not informing the primary dealers that an advertised one billion would become a take-up of 10 billion.
Attorney at Law Maithri Gunaratne pointed out that the Attorney General is due for retirement soon but that as a member of the Supreme Court his retirement age would then be 65 as opposed to 60 as in the case of the Attorney General.
Amidst growing calls for an expeditious closure of Sri Lanka’s largest financial scandal since independence (the Attorney General department observation at the Commission) the public are mindful that polls could be called in about a years’ time.
Currently the public conscience is aroused because it appears that for all the undertakings assurances and electoral promises, it appears that one more investigation will not see a logical legal conclusion. Those with political patronage as their armour, appear to be well on the way to keeping monies that could be described, subject to magisterial enquiry and decision, as ‘proceeds of crime’.
