The Hon. Rauff Hakeem, Attorney-at-Law

¶ 01 Hon. Deputy Chairperson of Committees, I am glad to follow our affable Prime Minister, the Hon. (Dr.) Harini Amarasuriya. She, in her inimitable style, delivered a very sensible speech regarding today’s Adjournment Motion, referring to pending issues with sensitivity and emphasizing ending the culture of impunity to usher in a new, sensible era under the new regime.

¶ 02 Be that as it may, Hon. Prime Minister, I wish to refer to the matter now gaining much publicity: the arrest of the former President when he visited the Criminal Investigation Department. With humility, Madam Prime Minister, a few days ago at a public function, a YouTuber behaved in what I consider an inappropriate way and even announced in advance that the former President would be arrested. This appears to be an inspired leak from someone in authority. How can such matters be publicly foretold by a YouTuber? Is this the new culture you seek to build? That worries us.

¶ 03 Whatever our differences— I have been in and out of his Cabinets, opposed him and supported him— he was a Head of State. If he is summoned to the CID to record a statement regarding alleged wrongdoing, the normal practice is to take statements, compare with prior witness statements, and then file a B report before a magistrate. There is a basic courtesy owed to a former Head of State. A B report could have been filed, he could have been summoned before a magistrate, his attorneys heard, and the magistrate could then decide on remand or bail. To detain a former President like a common criminal and then produce him is unbecoming. Equality before the law is paramount, but minimum courtesies should be extended. That is my humble view.

¶ 04 I also wish to address the Report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, to be debated from 8 September for a month in Geneva. The Government has pledged a new Public Prosecutor’s Office— a welcome move. The High Commissioner’s Report states:

¶ 05 “The wide prosecutorial discretion afforded to the Attorney-General, a general reluctance to act on uncorroborated evidence, limited investigative capacity of the police, lack of qualified forensic experts and shortage of Tamil-speaking officers are collectively hindering victims’ access to justice and perpetuating impunity.”

¶ 06 “A key obstacle to justice has been the need for reform within the Attorney-General’s office to ensure an independent prosecutorial authority to prosecute grave human rights violations. In its policy manifesto, the Government had pledged to introduce ‘a Directorate of Public Prosecution’, independent of the Attorney-General’s Department. An expert committee has been established to study the establishment of an Independent Prosecutor’s Office. The Government reported that a Committee has been tasked to develop initial proposals and that feedback from public, the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka and civil society would be sought on the draft concept paper.”

¶ 07 I have suggestions on the Independent Prosecutor’s Office, but time is limited. I urge the Government, especially given the Prime Minister’s sensible speech, to ensure that moving away from impunity does not devolve into exhibitionism. Today’s events appear geared to the galleries— humiliating a former President merely to draw applause. Normally, even in minimal cases, a B report is filed, a summons issued, and the person is heard before the magistrate decides. The humiliation seemed forethought— as the YouTuber announced days prior. This is unbecoming of the Government. Having said that, I conclude. Thank you.