Sri Lanka’s high legal investigator insists he has carried out nothing incorrect after he was launched on bail earlier this week after greater than 10 months in jail remand in a homicide case by which a senior police officer has been implicated.
Shani Abeysekara, 59, the previous senior superintendent of police who headed the Legal Investigation Division, is accused of fabricating and concealing proof within the case in opposition to former Deputy Inspector Common of Police Vaas Gunawardena, his son and 4 different law enforcement officials.
The group was convicted and sentenced to loss of life for the kidnapping and homicide of Colombo-based businessman Mohamed Shiyam as a contract killing for $50,000 in Might 2013.
“The reality will prevail,” Abeysekara advised Al Jazeera. “I’m an trustworthy and hardworking officer. In my entire profession, I didn’t do any wrongdoing, that’s all I can say.”
Abeysekara’s modest two-bedroom flat in Colombo is just a few hundred metres away from the jail the place he was held.
He appeared calm and assured, regardless of struggling a coronary heart assault throughout his imprisonment, coupled with different well being points.
“Individuals who reside in keeping with their conscience discover that it’s not onerous to face something. They know that in the event that they do one thing incorrect, they need to face the punishment,” he says.
“I gained’t need to face punishment as a result of I’ve not carried out any incorrect.”
Court docket of Attraction rejects allegations
Abeysekara was investigated regardless of Gunawardena, thought of near President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, admitting to being in possession of the weapons that have been used to kill the businessman.
A police constable posted on the DIG’s residence additionally testified that he had loaded the weapons into the officer’s car on the day of the businessman’s homicide.
The Court docket of Attraction in its June 16 bail order mentioned “the allegations in opposition to the suspect Shani Abeysekara are a results of falsification and embellishment and a creature of afterthought”.
“Upon the statements of obvious backers and supporters or collaborators of the convicted murderers, purported information have been reported …. in opposition to the suspect in a blatant try to border allegations by way of fabrication of false proof,” Justices Bandula Karunarathna and Ratnapriya Gurusinghe mentioned in a scathing critique of the police and authorized equipment.
“Nonetheless, no credible proof had been dropped at the eye of the courtroom” within the case in opposition to Abeysekara, they added.
In response, Justice Minister Ali Sabry advised Al Jazeera mentioned the Court docket of Attraction order reveals “precisely how robust our democracy and the rule of regulation is and the way unbiased our judiciary is”.
“So I could be pleased with the judiciary the way in which they’ve acted,” he mentioned.
When requested in regards to the courtroom’s view that allegations in opposition to Abeysekara have been false, Sabry mentioned, “The commentary must be considered by the police … Because the justice minister, I don’t run the police.”
Sabry mentioned the police ought to now “discover out what’s there and if there’s ample proof of allegations, an inquiry must be launched”.
Police spokesman, DIG Ajith Rohana, advised Al Jazeera the division “respects the order of the Court docket of Attraction and can take motion accordingly if there are tips or suggestions (to be adopted)”.
Highly effective enemies
In his 34-year profession, Abeysekara had led investigations into dozens of high-profile instances, a lot of them involving human rights violations and extrajudicial killings.
Typically, the instances additionally concerned senior members within the authorities and high-ranking navy and law enforcement officials. Many say Gunawardena was shielded by Gotabaya Rajapaksa when the incumbent president served because the defence secretary from 2005-2015.
The senior policeman threatened Abeysekara with loss of life throughout interrogation, an offence that earned him 5 years of rigorous imprisonment.
Touted as probably the most “diligent” and “trustworthy” officers, these qualities additionally made Abeysekara a goal to be silenced.
Two days after Rajapaksa took workplace as president in November 2019, Abeysekara was demoted to the function of a private assistant to a superior officer.
In January 2020, leaked recordings of a phone dialog between Abeysekara and actor-politician Ranjan Ramanayake went viral.
In the course of the dialog, the voice alleged to be of Abeysekara criticises senior officers within the police and judiciary in response to questions requested by Ramanayake.
Because the recording went viral, police accused Abeysekara of “bringing disrepute to the police service”. He was suspended from service.
“Abeysekara was not somebody who took bribes or cheated. He confronted political interference from this authorities and the final,” a human rights lawyer advised Al Jazeera, requesting anonymity.
“Makes an attempt to point out he was biased and assassinating his character appears to be a part of a much bigger plan.”
EU strain
The bail order favouring Abeysekara additionally got here days after Sri Lanka was censured in a June 10 decision adopted by the European Parliament, by which the bloc “famous with concern the detention of former CID Director Shani Abeysekara and urged the federal government to right away give these detained a good trial on legitimate prices or launch them unconditionally”.
The decision adopted by 628 of the 705 members of the meeting known as for the EU Fee to think about the “momentary withdrawal” of Sri Lanka’s preferential entry to European markets. Europe is Sri Lanka’s second-largest export market.
Abeysekara, in the meantime, is decided to clear his identify. Two petitions in opposition to his arrest and detention have been filed within the Supreme Court docket, however any progress within the case has been slowed down by the coronavirus pandemic.
“As a Buddhist, I don’t hate anybody. I’m not indignant,” he advised Al Jazeera.
“I labored true to my conscience. I handled my duties to implement the regulation as sacred. However in consequence, I used to be pressured to steer clear of residence, away from my household, my youngsters for no purpose. That’s one thing I remorse.”