• Namal alleges Govt. witch-hunt of family amidst 3 money laundering cases against his brother

Yoshitha Rajapaksa, the second son of former President Mahinda Rajapaksa, who had been remanded in custody, has been granted bail after being produced before the Colombo Magistrate’s Court yesterday (27).

Colombo Additional Magistrate Manjula Rathnayake, while declaring his decision following an extended hearing of the facts, ordered that the suspect be released on bail in accordance with the provisions of the Bail Act, as the prosecution had failed to present sufficient and satisfactory evidence to warrant further remand. Accordingly, Yoshitha Rajapaksa was ordered to be released on two surety bails of Rs. 50 million each. The Additional Magistrate, who also imposed an overseas travel ban on Rajapaksa, ordered the Immigration and Emigration Controller General to be informed in this regard. Meanwhile, Rajapaksa was ordered to appear at the Police Financial Crimes Investigation Division (FCID) on the last Sunday of every month, and also ordered against the influencing of any witnesses in the case.

On 25 January, Rajapaksa was arrested by Criminal Investigations Department (CID) officers in the Beliatta area under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, and produced before the Aluthkade Number Five Additional Magistrate Pavithra Sanjeevani. Accordingly, he was remanded under the said Act until yesterday after being produced before the Colombo Additional Magistrate. This followed the recording of a statement before the CID. The arrest came after the Attorney General (AG), President’s Counsel (PC) Parinda Ranasinghe Junior notified the CID on 23 January, stating that there was sufficient evidence for Rajapaksa to be named as a respondent in a land-related case valued at Rs. 34 million. The case involves Rajapaksa’s grandmother, Daisy Forrest Wickremasinghe, at Sirimal Pedesa in Ratmalana. The primary suspect in the case, which is still pending, is Wickremasinghe. A group of Counsels including Additional Solicitor General Dileepa Peeris PC, representing the State, is appearing on behalf of the plaintiff in this case, the FCID. During the trial, the Court was told that the charges against Rajapaksa stem from multiple investigations related to alleged money laundering activities. Peeris PC presented evidence linking the suspect to suspicious property transactions, including the purchase of a Rs. 350 million house in Sirimal Mawatha, Ratmalana, in 2012.

 Investigations revealed that the property was acquired in the name of Wickremasinghe who had worked in modest positions such as a hospital employee, a teacher, and a hostel warden, Peeris PC stated, noting that her declared income was insufficient to support such a purchase, and that her statements to the Police were inconsistent, suggesting involvement of undisclosed funds. Peeris PC mentioned that further inquiries uncovered the deed to the property in the possession of an individual named Palitha Gamage, who claimed that it was given to him by Mahinda Rajapaksa. Peeris PC argued that this demonstrated an attempt to obscure the true ownership of the property and highlighted concerns over undisclosed income and the circulation of laundered money. He also detailed Yoshitha Rajapaksa’s income as a Navy Lieutenant from 2006 to 2016, where his monthly salary of Rs. 73,000 was directly credited to his account without withdrawals. The prosecution questioned how such a limited income could justify the purchase of a high value property.

Sampath Mendis PC, representing the defendant, countered that the investigation into the property transaction began over eight years ago and has not reached a conclusion. He noted that the primary suspect, Wickremasinghe, was released on bail without being remanded, and argued that it was unfair to hold Rajapaksa in custody when the main suspect had been granted leniency. Mendis also emphasised the delayed progress of the investigation, highlighting that the case files were forwarded to the AG’s Department in 2018 but remain unresolved. He urged the Court to release the suspect on bail under appropriate conditions.

In his ruling, Additional Magistrate Rathnayake emphasised the importance of freezing assets involved in money laundering cases. However, he noted that the property in question had not been frozen. While acknowledging the seriousness of the case, the Additional Magistrate stated that the prosecution failed to provide sufficient evidence to justify further remanding the suspect. The Additional Magistrate dismissed the prosecution’s argument that public unrest and the gravity of the charges warranted continued detention, stating that remanding a suspect requires substantive evidence rather than generalised claims.

Based on the facts presented, the Court ruled in favour of releasing Rajapaksa on bail, while reiterating the need for continued investigation into the allegations.

However, Peeris PC told the Court that this case is part of a broader investigation involving three separate money laundering-related allegations against Rajapaksa. These include: the purchase of a Rs. 50 million worth house in Dehiwala, investments in the Carlton Sports Network Channel, and the purchase of the Rs. 350 million Ratmalana property.

Meanwhile, Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna Opposition Parliamentarian Namal Rajapaksa, the eldest son of Mahinda Rajapaksa, challenged the Government to prove in court if either he or his brother Yoshitha Rajapaksa has committed any wrongdoing, instead of resorting to various ‘spectacles for the media.’ Namal Rajapaksa accused the Government of targeting his family members rather than addressing the country’s pressing issues. Speaking to the media following the Court hearing involving Yoshitha Rajapaksa, he alleged that members of the current administration have also been involved in illegally acquiring land and have ongoing court cases against them. “The law must be enacted equally on everyone, including them,” Namal Rajapaksa asserted, urging the Government not to ‘politicise’ legal proceedings. He further alleged that the Government is seeking revenge against his family, particularly his brother Yoshitha Rajapaksa, while he (Namal Rajapaksa) himself is the one voicing criticism of the Government in the Parliament. Namal Rajapaksa claimed that Yoshitha Rajapaksa’s recent arrest was nothing more than a ‘media spectacle’ orchestrated at the expense of public funds. Responding to a question as to whether he is attempting to bring down the Government, Namal Rajapaksa remarked: “We are not the ones who turned ‘pol (coconut) sambol’ into a national crime, nor did we claim that the rice shortage was due to dogs and cats eating rice. The failure of the Government should be questioned by those who made such statements.”

PHOTO  Ishan Sanjeewa