Tribunal: Senadhipathy trapped SG Wickramasinghe with the help of UNP Minister

By Shamindra Ferdinando

Despite being cleared by the Administrative Appeals Division (AAD), the interdicted Solicitor General Dilrukshi Dias Wickramasinghe hadn’t been allowed to return to the Attorney General’s Department regardless of specific instructions issued in that regard.

The AAD gave the ruling in respect of a case filed by Wickramasinghe against the Public Service Commission (PSC).

The then Attorney General Dappula de Livera, PC, interdicted SG Wickramasinghe on 25 Sept. 2019 following a leaked telephone conversation she had with Avant Garde proprietor Nissanka Senadhipathi, formerly of the Army Commando Regiment. The conversation was leaked to the media on 20 Sept., immediately after the recording of the discussion.

Wickramasinghe retired on July 30th after reaching the compulsory retirement age. The unprecedented ruling was given by a three-member AAD comprising Justice N.E. Dissanayake, A Gnanathasan, PC and G.P. Abeykeerthi. Justice Dissanayake functions as the Chairman of the highest tribunal empowered to inquire into such appeals.

Wickramasinghe appealed to teh AAD on Oct 5, 2020. The issue at hand before the AAD had been the disciplinary authority exercised by the Public Service Commission (PSC) in respect of the Solicitor General.

The original ruling given on July 14 was amended on July 22 subsequent to the PSC seeking clarification of some matters which the AAD considered important. The AAD acknowledged that the issues raised by the PSC hadn’t been taken into consideration at the time of the issuance of the July 14 ruling.

Attorney-at-law Riad Ameen and Assistant Secretary PSC Srinath Rubasinghe, appeared for Wickramasinghe and the PSC respectively.

The leaked telephone conversation in question was over the controversial case of the Avant Garde floating armoury that divided the previous government with Law and Order Minister Tilak Marapana, PC and Justice Minister Dr. Wijayadasa Rajapakse, PC, striking discordant notes.

Dappula de Livera’s successor, Sanjay Rajaratnam, PC, hadn’t, however, allowed SG Wickramasinghe to resume work in spite of the original order nor the amendment ruling given on July 14 and July 22, respectively. A copy of the original order was delivered to the AG’s Office on the evening of July 14.

Rajaratnam succeeded de Livera on May 26 this year.

The AAD ordered (1) Immediate cancellation of PSC directive dated April 06, 2021 that placed SG on compulsory leave pending the completion of a formal inquiry (2) Rescinding of the PSC directive dated October 19, 2020 that sent the SG on compulsory leave to pave the way for her to resume duties (3) Retiring her on July 30, 2021 on her reaching the compulsory retirement age and (4) finalising the much-delayed formal inquiry into the SG’s conduct in terms of Public Administration Circular 30/2019 dated September 30, 2019, expeditiously.

However, the above-mentioned directives were not carried out and SG Wickramasinghe had to retire on reaching the retirement age.

Acknowledging that Wickramasinghe had found fault with the present PSC for the undue delay in finalising the preliminary inquiry and reinstate her, the AAD declared that the PSC failed to ‘exercise its discretion in a justifiable, reasonable and an objective manner.

One-time Director General of the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption (CIABOC) Wickramasinghe declined to comment on the AAD ruling.

The AAD in its observations in the order pointed out that Senadhipathy had trapped SG Wickramasinghe with the help of the then UNP Minister Vajira Abeywardena, who gave his phone to SG Wickramasinghe, stating that Senadhipathy was on line. According to the proceedings, Abeywardena had received the call at a Colombo hotel while he was having dinner with SG Wickramasinghe and her husband.

Abeywadena is the current Chairman of the UNP. He was not immediately available for comment.

The AAD expressed astonishment at the failure on the part of those who conducted the preliminary inquiry to record Abeywardena’s statement or examine his phone. The AAD noted that Senadhipathy had got to SG Wickramasinghe through the Abeywardena’s phone after Wickramasinghe strongly opposed the minister inviting Avant Garde Chairman to have dinner with them at the Abeywardena’s residence.

The AAD stated that it had the power to take remedial measures in respect of decisions ‘tainted with error in law and fact’ taken by the PSC.

The AAD noted that SG Wickramasinghe hadn’t initiated the call and from the outset she insisted that the recording was ‘doctored, edited and distorted.’ Proceedings have revealed that AG de Livera had first listened to a tape recording that was edited at ten places and Senadhipathy himself admitted having edited the recording but he never submitted the original to the Preliminary Investigation Committee. The AAD pointed out that the AG de Livera at the time he made a statement at the preliminary investigations based his assessment on what the AAD called an edited, distorted and unauthentic version of the recording. In spite of this, the AG subsequently acknowledged that the audio tape he had listened to was distorted. However, a second statement hadn’t been recorded from him. But the PSC deciding to issue a charge sheet dated March 23, 2021 although the Preliminary Investigation team said the audio tape had been tampered with.

PIX SAVED AS DILRUKSHI, NISSANKA and WAJIRA