President Anura Kumara Dissanayake (AKD) and his Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP)-led National People’s Power (NPP) Government are facing a conundrum in one of their key pledges to the people prior to election to office. It is the promise to ensure justice to victims in many cases, including several emblematic cases as well as the Easter Sunday attacks probe.
The Government, or rather President AKD, is now facing quite a crisis with two key State institutions – the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) and the Attorney General’s (AG) Department – on a collision course with many forces within the Government as well as pro-JVP/NPP loyalists who are demanding the removal of the Attorney General.
There’s no doubt that President AKD is aware of the crisis at hand – the breakdown in law enforcement and legal processes as well as the failure to honour pledges – if the clash between the CID and Attorney General’s Department continues.
The Anura Meter manifesto tracker meanwhile has stated in its latest report that President AKD has fulfilled 10 of his key election promises by November 2025, while a further 10 are currently in progress.
The assessment shows that nine promises have made no progress, while one promise has failed. The review has monitored 30 major pledges outlined in President AKD’s 2024 election manifesto and incorporates measures announced in the 2026 Budget. However, the evaluation was completed prior to the impact of Cyclone Ditwah.
The promises tracked under the Anura Meter have been selected based on their national importance and high level of public interest, covering critical policy areas such as economic reform, governance, anti-corruption, law and order, and social protection.
Meanwhile, a delegation of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) is currently in Sri Lanka assessing the damage caused by Cyclone Ditwah and to hold discussions with relevant authorities regarding the situation.
The IMF noted that the purpose of the visit was to examine how Sri Lanka had addressed the economic and humanitarian challenges caused by the cyclone and to understand the impact on infrastructure, livelihoods, and economic stability as well as to focus on the Extended Fund Facility (EFF). The IMF’s Executive Board last month postponed the fifth review report after approving a Rapid Financing Instrument (RFI) following Cyclone Ditwah.
The IMF has also reaffirmed its continued support for Sri Lanka’s economic recovery, underscoring international confidence in the country’s post-crisis stabilisation and reform efforts.
The assurance was conveyed by IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva during a meeting with Prime Minister Dr. Harini Amarasuriya held on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum (WEF) 2026 in Davos last week.
AKD meets Mahinda
Meanwhile, President AKD met former Secretary to the Treasury and current Asian Development Bank (ADB) Alternate Executive Director Mahinda Siriwardana, focusing on Sri Lanka’s economic outlook. The meeting had taken place on Thursday (22) at the Presidential Secretariat.
In a post on X, Siriwardana, who served as Sri Lanka’s Treasury Secretary until June 2025, said the talks focused on economic challenges, opportunities, and possible pathways forward, including ADB support to strengthen resilience and promote sustainable growth.
Challenging the Opposition
Meanwhile, the Government made a play at turning tables on the Opposition over the No-Confidence Motion (NCM) being prepared by the Opposition against Prime Minister and Education Minister Amarasuriya. The NCM resulted in a verbal clash between the Government and the Opposition.
Chief Government Whip, Minister Nalinda Jayatissa on Tuesday (20) told Parliament that the Government had learnt of Opposition moves to present an NCM against the Prime Minister. He added that the Government was prepared to debate the motion on Thursday (22) and Friday (23) and urged the Opposition to present the NCM.
Jayatissa went on to say that in the event the Opposition was not prepared to present that NCM and debate it on Thursday and Friday, the Government was prepared to use the two days to debate the country’s education policy and issues in the higher education sector.
Leader of the House, Minister Bimal Rathnayake also told the House that the Government was ready to debate the NCM and questioned the Opposition if it would be presented. “News that an NCM is being prepared against the Prime Minister and the premiership is a very serious matter. We feel it is an issue if an NCM has been prepared, with signatures having been obtained, but not submitted. We would like to know if the Opposition is going to submit the NCM or not,” he said.
Counter-challenge and conspiracy
However, the Opposition responded to the Government’s challenge with a counter-challenge by calling on the Government to agree to a three-day debate on the country’s education sector without limiting it to two days. The Opposition also noted that there was a conspiracy against the Prime Minister given that the push to debate the NCM was being made when the Premier was overseas.
Chief Opposition Whip Gayantha Karunatilleka noted that the NCM was a matter related to the Opposition, and that a decision would be made after holding the necessary discussions.
Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa meanwhile questioned why the Government was trying to rush the debate on the NCM when the Education Minister was out of the country, noting that there seemed to be a conspiracy against her. Prime Minister Amarasuriya left the country on Monday (19) on an official visit to Switzerland.
“The Constitution specifies the process that must be followed for a No-Confidence Motion. The timing and place are not decided by the Government but by the proper procedure. We are not ready to debate whenever the Government dictates,” he said, adding that the Opposition would present the motion properly with the required signatures and challenge the Government.
Split in Opposition
Nevertheless, it seemed the ruling party had decided to throw the gauntlet at the Opposition over the NCM against the Prime Minister due to a split among Opposition ranks over the NCM.
After the decision to move an NCM against Amarasuriya was announced, the Ilankai Tamil Arasu Katchi (ITAK) – an Opposition party – said it would not support the motion. It is learnt that several other members of the Opposition had also expressed concerns over moving the NCM, stating that the issue of education reforms should have a broader approach.
It is in such a backdrop that Opposition Member of Parliament (MP) Harsha de Silva noted in Parliament that the Opposition was completely in favour of education reforms, raising concerns over the postponement of the proposed education reforms for Grade 6. Following issues over some contents in the Grade 6 English module and textbooks, the Government announced that the proposed education reforms for Grade 6 would be postponed till 2027.
De Silva, commenting on the issue, stated that the Government should not cite an inappropriate website as the cause, as such excuses were irrelevant. “A website is irrelevant to us. If anyone has misused or improperly handled the matter, suspend them. We must go beyond this. We must implement these reforms. Instead of postponing it, you should have owned up to the mistake, said you are going to correct the mistake, and urged us to agree to the implementation of the reforms,” he told the House.
De Silva made this comment as some members of the Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) continued the push for the NCM.
Harini responds
However, after returning to the country, Prime Minister Amarasuriya spoke in Parliament and asked the Opposition when the NCM against her would be moved, saying that she was waiting for it.
Amarasuriya told Parliament that the Opposition was not required to bring in an NCM against her since she was ready to quit and go home when the people of this country decided that the prime minister must change, since she and the Government were accountable to the people and their conscience.
The Prime Minister also urged the Opposition to engage in an in-depth discussion on the education reforms after a proper study without debating on surface matters.
CC nominees finalised
Meanwhile, the issue over the appointment of three civil society representatives to the Constitutional Council (CC) came to an end last week with the Prime Minister and Opposition Leader finalising three new nominees.
Prime Minister Amarasuriya moved a motion in Parliament with the names of the three nominees and parliamentary approval was granted for Austin Fernando, Professor Wasantha Seneviratne, and Ranjith Ariyaratne to be appointed as non-Members of Parliament to the CC.
The CC meanwhile has refused to disclose certain information sought under the Right to Information (RTI) Act No.12 of 2016 regarding its decision on the President’s nominee for the post of auditor general.
The RTI application had been submitted on 1 January by Attorney-at-Law Aazath Atham Lebbe, following a news report that the Constitutional Council had rejected several of the President’s nominations for the auditor general post. The request had reportedly sought details on the total number of members of the CC, as well as the names of members who voted in favour of or against, or abstained from voting on the nomination of Army officer O.R. Rajasinghe.
The Information Officer of the CC had responded stating that information relating to the total number of members and their designations was already available on the official website of the Parliament of Sri Lanka and had declined to disclose the names of members who had voted in favour of or against the nominee, citing Section 5(1)(g) of the RTI Act No.12 of 2016 on the grounds that the information was required to be kept confidential by reason of the existence of a fiduciary relationship.
Parliamentary oversight issues
While the Constitutional Council appointments were completed last week, the issue over the delay in appointing a permanent auditor general continued, with the Auditor General’s Department functioning without a chief for many months.
Opposition MP Dayasiri Jayasekara has warned that the continued absence of an auditor general had become a serious issue as it further complicated parliamentary oversight. He noted that key parliamentary oversight bodies such as the Committee on Public Enterprises (COPE) and the Committee on Public Accounts (COPA) were effectively unable to function without the auditor general’s oversight since parliamentary committees could not be convened without an auditor general in terms of Articles 148 and 152 of the Constitution.
The delay in appointing an auditor general has resulted in a delay in finalising around 60 audit reports of State institutions and 70 audit reports to be presented to Parliament. It is also believed that there could be a delay in releasing the national audit report for 2025, which is scheduled to be released on 31 May.
The lack of these reports would have a direct impact on the probes carried out by COPE and COPA in Parliament.
Cabinet put on notice
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka has issued notice to the Cabinet of Ministers to present explanations on 15 July in a Fundamental Rights (FR) petition filed over the Government’s failure to minimise the devastation caused by Cyclone Ditwah last year.
An FR petition was filed by an attorney-at-law from Kandy citing the President, Prime Minister, and Cabinet of ministers as respondents. The Supreme Court has asked the Cabinet of Ministers and the National Disaster Management Committee to present their responses to court on 15 July.
CID clashes with AG
Be that as it may, the JVP/NPP Government is faced with a conundrum that could have a severe impact on the administration’s future. It is learnt that the clash between the CID and the Attorney General’s Department has now further intensified, with the former expressing displeasure at the way the latter has been attending to several key investigations.
Among the key concerns raised by the CID is the acquittal of some suspects in key cases without heeding justifications to hold the witnesses presented by the CID. The Attorney General’s Department, however, has responded, saying that the decisions to withdraw certain cases and to acquit some suspects have been made according to evidence in the case files.
The ongoing clash between the CID and the Attorney General’s Department and the delay in ensuring justice to victims of key cases have resulted in members of civil society demanding that the Government proceed faster with the setting up of an independent prosecutor’s office. The Justice Ministry has also conducted several consultations on the independent prosecutor’s office.
Nevertheless, the clash between two key State institutions that play a prominent role in the Government honouring some of its key pledges ranging from ensuring justice to victims of murder to action against bribery and corruption as well as other crimes is a key concern for President AKD.
With some members of the Government as well as forces who have supported the ascension of the JVP/NPP Government agitating against the Attorney General while President AKD has to ensure he balances between the Executive and Judiciary, it will not be an easy path to resolve the current crisis.
Protests for and against
The ongoing controversy surrounding the Attorney General further intensified on Wednesday (21) with a group of civil society members launching a silent protest outside the Attorney General’s Department calling for his removal while a group of lawyers expressed support for the Attorney General.
The group of lawyers calling themselves Free Lawyers held a solidarity campaign for the Attorney General and handed over a letter to the Attorney General expressing their support for him.
The campaign against the Attorney General, predominantly over the withdrawal of some cases, acquittal of suspects in several key cases, and the delay in filing cases before court on case files handed by the CID, started last year when the Attorney General’s Department acquitted several suspects in the case on The Sunday Leader Founder Editor Lasantha Wickrematunge’s murder. A protest was held outside the Attorney General’s Department at the time.
These civil society groups have been agitating for justice for years, believe that justice delayed is justice denied, and claim that the Attorney General’s Department is not moving ahead with the cases.
The Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) meanwhile has expressed serious concern over growing public pressure on the office of the Attorney General. The BASL has warned that recent social media campaigns and public actions targeting the Attorney General risk undermining the independence of the office, which it described as a key pillar of the rule of law.
The BASL has noted that the Attorney General performs a quasi-judicial role in criminal matters and is required to decide whether to indict suspects based solely on the evidence presented by investigative authorities and the likelihood of securing a conviction under the law.
The association stressed that decisions of the Attorney General were subject to judicial review through writ jurisdiction in the Court of Appeal or FR jurisdiction in the Supreme Court and should not be influenced by public opinion or political pressure.
AG speaks to lawyers
Meanwhile, speaking to the representatives of the Free Lawyers group that met him, Attorney General Parinda Ranasinghe Jnr had noted that he was not above the law.
“If I make a mistake, then the Court of Appeal is there. The Supreme Court is there. Please go there and challenge me. If the court tells me to do something, I will be more than happy to do it,” he had said.
“We firmly believe that the Attorney General’s Department has always acted independently and honourably, without yielding to any influence, and that it must follow evidence and legal procedures rather than popular sentiment,” the letter handed over by the lawyers to the Attorney General had noted.
“Our organisation expresses its full cooperation and support for you to carry out your duties freely and without interference, and we wish you strength, courage, and blessings to continue acting impartially in the process of delivering justice,” the letter had added.
The short memories
It is, however, interesting to see the statements being made by some Opposition politicians in this clash between the Attorney General and the CID as well as civil society.
One of the most interesting statements was made by Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) National Organiser Namal Rajapaksa. He has accused the Government of attempting to intimidate the Attorney General’s Department and the Judiciary to achieve its political objectives.
Namal told journalists outside the SLPP Headquarters on Nelum Mawatha that he was confident that the Attorney General’s Department and the country’s judicial system would not succumb to pressure from the Government. He further claimed that the present administration had “passed five classes but has failed in Grade 6”.
Namal’s statements and those of senior members of his party criticising the protests against the Attorney General, which they claim are being pushed by the Government, and standing for a free Judiciary, resulted in many on social media reminding how former Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake was removed from office during the then Mahinda Rajapaksa (MR) Government.
As claimed by a senior political analyst, when the MR Government ousted Chief Justice Bandaranayake and undermined the independence of the Judiciary, most of the nationalist groups raising objections had supported the action. “The irony is that the civil society members protesting against the Attorney General demanding justice for victims now were the ones who protested on streets and were assaulted for opposing the threat to the Judiciary and removal of the then Chief Justice,” the senior analyst noted.
Harshana’s assurance
Meanwhile, Justice Minister Harshana Nanayakkara has also been pushed into a difficult spot in the clash between the CID and some elements of the Government with the Attorney General. Nanayakkara had earlier served in the Attorney General’s Department and is a friend of the incumbent Attorney General.
The Minister stated last week that there was no discussion in the Cabinet about removing the Attorney General and moving an impeachment motion against him.
Nanayakkara also distanced himself and the Government from the ongoing social media campaign against the Attorney General, stating that it had nothing to do with the Government.
Retired MPs’ plight
Meanwhile, the plight of retired MPs who are currently living off the pension received by them as former MPs has resurfaced as the Government moves to abolish the MPs’ pension. The proposed legislation to abolish the MPs’ pension has already been tabled in Parliament and is to be taken up for debate and passage in the coming weeks.
Some of the key former MPs who will be affected by the abolition of the MPs’ pension will be former JVP MPs.
The recent hospitalisation of former JVP senior and presidential candidate Nandana Gunathilake, who later defected from the party, and the difficulties faced by him in paying his medical bills reignited the conversation about the abolition of MPs’ pension. Gunathilake, who was admitted to the Sri Jayewardenepura Hospital recently, was later transferred to the ICU of the Ragama Hospital where he passed away last Sunday (18).
Many former JVP MPs, who have since defected from the party, have publicly objected to the move to abolish the MPs’ pension, claiming that it is their only income. They have also claimed that if the MPs’ pension is abolished, they will file legal action urging their former party, the JVP, to return their MPs’ salaries that were deposited into the party account from the time they served as JVP MPs as well as the pensions that were deposited to the party account after they were no longer in Parliament.
It was also revealed recently that there are currently 182 spouses of former MPs who receive the pensions of their spouses.
It has also been reported that there are 50-odd former MPs who have resigned from the public administrative system to work as public representatives and they too will lose the MPs’ pension as well as the pension that they would have received if they had remained in public service.
Challenging before court
Meanwhile, several petitions were filed before the Supreme Court challenging the proposed legislation and seeking determination that several provisions of the bill presented to Parliament to abolish the pension scheme for MPs were inconsistent with the Constitution.
Among the petitioners are former MPs M.M. Premasiri, Navaratna Banda, B.M. Deepal Gunasekara, Samansiri Herath, Piyasoma Upali, and Upali Amarasiri.
The petitions have reportedly stated that certain clauses of the proposed bill violate Fundamental Rights guaranteed by the Constitution. Accordingly, the petitioners have requested the Supreme Court to rule that if the bill is to be enacted, it should be passed with a special majority in Parliament and approved at a referendum.
Sajith’s assistance
The financial difficulties of Gunathilake, the former senior JVPer who later joined the United National Party (UNP), had also come to light during his time in hospitals receiving treatment prior to his death. Gunathilake and his family, it is learnt, had faced difficulties in paying the hospital bills for the medical treatment.
The medical bill at the Sri Jayewardenepura Hospital had been settled by the family with the help of several friends.
It is also learnt that when Gunathilake had been admitted to the Ragama Hospital for further treatment, leaders of the political party he was serving towards the end had failed to inquire into his well-being or provide any assistance to the family for his medical treatment.
The irony however is that it was a political leader whom Gunathilake had been critical of as a member of the UNP who had assisted the family after hearing of Gunathilake’s situation – Opposition Leader Premadasa.
Premadasa had been informed of Gunathilake’s deteriorating health by a friend in London. After hearing about the matter, Premadasa had said that he did not know Gunathilake and had not interacted with him politically, but that he had heard that the former JVPer was an honest politician. Premadasa had said he would assist if there was a need.
Gunathilake’s family members had telephoned Premadasa on 16 January evening, just as Premadasa had returned home. Soon after speaking to the family members, Premadasa had said he would come to the Ragama Hospital to see Gunathilake and provide any assistance required.
A short while later, Premadasa had arrived at the hospital and, after seeing an unconscious Gunathilake being treated in a normal ward, had immediately intervened to get him admitted to the hospital’s ICU. Afterwards, Premadasa had assisted with the medical treatment, had spent time with Gunathilake’s family till around midnight, and had left after asking the family to reach out to him if they required any other assistance.
AKD not welcome at funeral
Meanwhile, the funeral of the late Gunathilake became quite controversial, with one of his sisters stating that the family had decided not to cremate the remains, but to bury them in order to enable further inquiries into the death given a suspicion of foul play.
Several senior JVPers, including Minister K.D. Lalkantha, have made critical comments about Gunathilake for joining the party that is being blamed for the killing of around 60,000 comrades during the second insurgency in 1988–’89.
It is learnt that President AKD had decided that he should pay his respects to the former senior JVPer who had played a key role in reconstituting the party after the 1988–’89 insurrection. The President, it is also learnt, had informed his staff to make the necessary arrangements for him to attend the funeral.
However, AKD has had to change his plans after being informed that Gunathilake’s sister had objected to the President visiting to pay his respects.
The slow move
Meanwhile, the alliance plans between the main Opposition SJB and UNP are continuing, albeit at a slower pace.
Opposition and SJB Leader Premadasa, who is leading the initiative, seems to have slowed down the pace while continuing talks with the UNP side.
It is learnt that Premadasa is also looking at addressing the issue within his party, where some seniors together with some members of the UNP are trying to block the two parties from uniting.
Meanwhile, Premadasa held another round of discussions with UNP seniors yesterday (24) at the Colombo Club at the Taj Samudra in Colombo.
Premadasa was accompanied by SJB General Secretary Ranjith Madduma Bandara and Premadasa’s adviser, Lakshman Fonseka.
The UNP was represented by Deputy Leader Ruwan Wijewardene, General Secretary Thalatha Athukorala, National Organiser Sagala Ratnayaka, and seniors Akila Viraj Kariyawasam and Navin Dissanayake.
UNPers’ suspicion
Meanwhile, suspicion over the SJB leadership’s move to unite the UNP and SJB continues to increase among some UNPers, especially after learning about an incident related to the religious observances that were held to mark Premadasa’s birthday recently. The event held at the Hunupitiya Gangaramaya Temple was attended by several senior UNPers and organisers, resulting in SJBers and UNPers eager to see the two parties join forces feeling more positive about the alliance.
However, it is learnt that the SJB leadership has objected to efforts by the organiser of the religious observances, Lakshman Fonseka, to invite UNP Leader Ranil Wickremesinghe to the event as well.
Informed sources stated that Fonseka had asked a young SJB MP, who maintains close ties with Wickremesinghe, to invite the UNP Leader to Premadasa’s religious event on his birthday. This MP had, however, refrained from extending the invitation to Wickremesinghe. Fonseka, after learning that the young MP had not conveyed the invitation to Wickremesinghe, had requested another young SJB MP, who is a Premadasa loyalist, to invite the UNP Leader to the event.
However, Fonseka’s effort to invite Wickremesinghe to the event was learnt by a former SJB MP from the Matara District, who in turn had asked Premadasa if he was aware that Wickremesinghe was going to be invited to the religious observances at the Gangaramaya Temple. Premadasa, it is learnt, had said that he was not aware of such a move.
According to the informed source who recounted the details to ‘The Black Box,’ Premadasa had asked Fonseka not to move ahead with the invitation for Wickremesinghe to attend the event at the Gangaramaya Temple on his birthday.
Several senior SJBers, however, noted that Premadasa may be holding off on meeting with Wickremesinghe to first have a one-on-one before meeting out in public.
Premadasa’s move to stop Wickremesinghe from attending the religious observances has resulted in increasing suspicion among several senior UNPers regarding the SJB Leader’s sincerity in uniting the two parties.
Some UNP seniors also noted that Wickremesinghe had made several attempts to contact Premadasa via telephone on his birthday to wish him, but had not been able to gain access to him.
RW’s latest move
Meanwhile, Wickremesinghe continues to play his usual political games by getting some of his loyalists in the party and some members of the SJB as well as dissident SLPPers to carry out his bidding.
Wickremesinghe’s latest move is to claim that he is no longer engaged in active politics. He had made this statement when journalists had attempted to question him regarding political matters following his audiences with the Chief Prelates of the Malwathu and Asgiri Chapters.
Video clips of Wickremesinghe’s departure show him saying that he is not in the Government and that he is not in active politics.
Dissidents return to SLPP
Meanwhile, several SLPP dissidents who had extended their support to Wickremesinghe at the last Presidential Election have returned to the SLPP. ‘The Black Box’ on several occasions earlier revealed the discussions held among dissident SLPPers to discuss their political futures given their plight after Wickremesinghe’s defeat.
It was also revealed that some SLPP dissidents had held several rounds of discussion with SLPP National Organiser Namal to explore the possibility of returning to the party fold.
Following the success of these discussions, SLPP dissident, former Minister Ramesh Pathirana last week rejoined the SLPP. He was appointed as the SLPP Organiser for the Bentara-Elpitiya electorate as well as the Head of the party’s health services union.
It is learnt that several other dissident SLPPers are to follow Pathirana’s lead and rejoin the SLPP.
Chamara indicted
Meanwhile, outspoken Opposition MP Chamara Sampath Dasanayake’s ongoing court cases took a new twist with the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption (CIABOC) informing the Colombo Magistrate’s Court that indictments had been filed in the Colombo High Court against Dasanayake over a corruption allegation.
The CIABOC had notified the court when the case in this regard was taken up before Colombo Chief Magistrate Asanga S. Bodaragama last week that indictments had been presented before the Colombo High Court against the suspect.
Accordingly, concluding the proceedings before the Magistrate’s Court, the Magistrate had ordered Dasanayake to appear before the High Court once a notice was issued.
Manusha withdraws petition
Meanwhile, an FR petition filed by former Minister Manusha Nanayakkara, seeking an order to prevent his arrest by the CID in connection with the Korean visa issue, has been withdrawn before the Supreme Court.
The petition was taken up on Monday (19) before a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court headed by Justice S. Thurairaja.
Appearing on behalf of the respondents, Additional Solicitor General and President’s Counsel Lakmali Karunanayake had informed the court that limited objections relevant to the case had been filed on behalf of the respondents. Accordingly, an affidavit by CID Director Shani Abeysekara had also been submitted to court by the respondent party.
When the petition was called, President’s Counsel Saliya Pieris, appearing for the petitioner, had told the court that the CID had informed the Magistrate’s Court that no arrest would be made of his client at this stage and that there was therefore no necessity to proceed with the petition, and had requested permission from court to withdraw it.
Accepting the request, the Supreme Court bench had granted permission to withdraw the petition.
Johnston and sons re-remanded
Former Minister Johnston Fernando and four other suspects, including two of his sons, who were previously remanded have once again been ordered to remain in remand custody by the court when the case against them was taken up last week.
Accordingly, the Magistrate had ordered that the suspects, including the former Minister’s two sons, be remanded until 30 January.
Fernando was arrested on 5 January by the Financial Crimes Investigation Division (FCID) and produced before the Wattala Magistrate’s Court in connection with a case filed over the misuse of a Sathosa lorry during his tenure as Minister of Cooperatives and Internal Trade. The Wattala Magistrate’s Court at the time had ordered that Fernando and the other suspects be remanded.