| |
SRI LANKA: THE UNTOLD
STORY
Chapter 58: Premadasa
indicted
By K T Rajasingham
When President Chandrika Kumaratunga came to
power, after putting an end to the UNP's 17 years of
rule in 1994, she launched a Special Commission of
Inquiry into the assassination of Lalith Athulathmudali,
which had been an election promise.
On December
7, 1994, Kumaratunga, in a warrant of appointment issued
to the commissioners, stated: Whereas Lalith William
Athulathmudali, the late leader of the Democratic United
National Front was assassinated on April 23, 1993. And
whereas numerous allegations have been made that the
investigation into the above-mentioned assassination was
not conducted in a proper and impartial manner. And
whereas it appears to me to be necessary to establish a
Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry into the
matters hereinafter mentioned, being matters in respect
of which an inquiry will, in my opinion, be in the
public interest.
Now, therefore, I Chandrika
Banadranaike Kumaratunga, President reposing great trust
and confidence in your prudence, ability and fidelity,
do, in pursuance of the provisions of Section 2 of the
Presidential Commission of Inquiry Law No. 7 of 1978 (as
mentioned by the Special Presidential Commission of
Inquiry (Special Provisions) Act No. 4 of 1978) by these
presents appoint you, the said
1. Justice George
Randloph Tissa Bandaranayake
2. Justice Dassanayake
Padmasiri Swarnajith Gunasekera and
3. Rajasuriya
Appuhamilage Nimal Gamini Amaratunge (Judge of the High
Court.)
To be my commissioners to inquire into an
obtain information in respect of the following matters:
(a) The circumstances relating to the assassination
of the late Lalith William Athulathmudali at a meeting
held at Kirulapone, on April 23, 1993 and the person or
persons directly or indirectly responsible for such
assassination and whether any persons conspired to
assassinate, or aided and abetted in assassinating the
said Lalith William Athulathmudali at Kirulapone on
April 23, 1993. (b) The circumstances relating to the
physical attack on Late Lalith William Athulathmudali
(i) At Pannala on November 2, 1991;
(ii) At
Madapatha, Piliyandala on April 23, 1992;
(iii) At
the Fort Railway Station on August 7, 1992, and
(iv)
At Dehiwala on August 29, 1992.
And whether the
persons involved in, or connected with, any or all of
these attacks were directly or indirectly connected with
or involved in the aforesaid assassination.
(c)
Whether there was a failure or omission on the part of
any public officer to perform any duty required of him
by law, in relation to investigations into the incidents
referred to in paragraphs (a) and (b).
(d)
Whether there was a failure to provide, or intentional
withdrawal of security by the authorities at the meeting
held at Kirulapone on April 23, 1993, at which the late
Lalith William Athulathmudali was assassinated and if
so, the person or persons responsible for such failure
or intentional withdrawal;
(e) Whether there was
failure by the authorities concerned to provide adequate
personal security to late Lalith William Athulathmudali
despite repeated requests by him, for such security;
And to make such recommendations with reference to
any of the matters that have been inquired into under
the terms of this Warrant. And I do hereby appoint you,
the said Hon Justice George Randloph Tissa Dias
Bandaranayake to be the Chairman of the said Commission.
And I do hereby authorize and empower you, the said
Commissioners, to hold all such inquiries and make all
other investigations, into the aforesaid matters as may
appear to you to be necessary, and require you to
transmit to me within three months from the date hereof,
a report or interim reports thereon under your hands,
setting out the findings of your inquiries, and your
recommendations.
And I do hereby direct that
such part of any inquiry relating to the aforesaid
matters, as you may in your discretion determine, shall
not be held in public; And I do hereby require and
direct all State Officers, and other persons to whom you
may apply for assistance or information for the purpose
of your inquiries and investigations to render all such
assistance and furnish all such information as may be
properly rendered and furnished in that behalf. And I do
hereby declare that the provisions of section 14 of the
aforesaid Law No: 7 of 1978 shall apply to this
Commission.
These three were the same
Commissioners appointed to probe into the assassination
of Lieutenant General Denzil Kobbekaduwa and nine others
and causing serious injury to another, at Araly, Kayts,
on August 8, 1992.
We have already covered the
commonality in the inquiry, such as the transfer of
weapons to the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE)
by President Ranatunga Premadsa, the motion for the vote
of no confidence on the President by Athulathmudali and
others, and also of the dismissal of Lalith
Athulathmudali and others from the ruling party by the
President, Ranatuna Premadasa.
At the
commencement of the inquiry, the Commission advertised
in local newspapers in all three languages, calling for
information regarding the matters set out in the
warrant. It should be remembered that, Lalith
Athulathmudali was shot dead on April 23, 1993. Since
then, President Premadasa had died on May 1, 1993 in a
bomb blast. Prime Minister Wijetunga assumed the
presidency of the country.
Premadasa and
Wijetunga's governments informed the public through the
media that, Lalith Athulathmudali was the victim of
assassination by the LTTE. It was reported that,
Athulathmudali had taken action against the LTTE while
he was the Minister of National Security, since March
1984, and as Deputy Minister of Defense thereafter,
until 1989. According to the government's version,
therefore, the LTTE sent its suicide cadres to shoot and
kill Athulathmudali. Accordingly, a gunman killed
Athulathmudali and then committed suicide by biting into
a cyanide capsule.
This position was supported
by seeking to connect the death of a Tamil youth found
dead in Mugalan Road, Kirulapone on April 24, 1993, a
few hundred meters from the scene of the shooting of
Athulathmudali. The police determined that, the youth
known as Ragunathan, was a LTTE activist. The findings
of the Judicial Magistrate Officer in Colombo that the
youth had died of cyanide poisoning were presented, as
confirming the government version of the killing. It was
therefore suggested that the two deaths were connected,
that having shot Athulathmudali the youth found that he
could not escape as he had himself received a gunshot.
His cause of death as given by the Magistrate in
Colombo, was sought to be supported by a visiting team
of foreign detectives (including from Britain's New
Scotland Yard) and pathologists, who arrived in Sri
Lanka on April 26, 1993. They reported to Wijetunga's
government that they had found a minute trace of cyanide
in a blood sample they had taken at a second post-mortem
of the youth.
This was done by Dr R T Shepherd,
but Magistrate M A de Silva told the investigative
Commission that no application had been made to the
court for permission, and neither had he given any.
According to the Commission Report, the fact that Dr
Shepherd was permitted to do a second post-mortem
without informing or obtaining permission from the
magistrate, who had already commenced inquest
proceedings, shows the high handed manner in which the
local police conducted themselves.
In the
meantime, Detective Superintendent Alec Edwards of the
Investigation and Crime Branch of New Scotland Yard
forwarded an undated report. According to his
conclusion:
(i) That the person now known to be
Ragunathan alias Appaiah Balakrishnan shot and killed
Mr. Athulathmudali and was later found dead at scene
2.
(ii) Seriously injured and fearing imminent
capture, he undoubtedly took his life by way of cyanide
poisoning;
(iii) There is no evidence, direct or
circumstantial, to support the allegation that this
tragedy was orchestrated by or in any way linked to the
Sri Lankan Government, UNP members or other official
agencies including the police;
(iv) An analytical
study of LTTE modus operandi showed that this act was in
total concert with their current subversive activities.
The Presidential Commission concluded in its
investigation as follows:
The Commission has come to
a finding that the firearm wound on Ragunathan was
caused by a shot fired at a very close range with a
doctored and tampered 9 mm cartridge. To do this,
Ragunathan had to be in someone's captivity and it is
nobody's case, and there is not an iota of evidence that
the wound was caused at very close range, maybe from two
feet away at the playground. No one says the assassin
was shot in his back from two feet away. No bodyguard
would want to shoot at an assassin with a reduced-charge
cartridge.
As it manifest from all of the
evidence considered collectively, that Ragunathan was in
captivity at the time he was shot, then it must follow
that the poison, which caused his death, was
administered to him. This alone absolves the LTTE from
any involvement in these crimes. We accordingly reject
totally and unreservedly all four conclusions stated by
Detective Superintendent Alec Edwards of Scotland Yard.
According to the Presidential Commission Report,
Ragunathan was a Tamil. He had come to Colombo to go
abroad. He was really alone. His few associates were
Tamils. Thus there were people who could confirm that he
was a Tamil, but who would not be searching for him.
This is an important connection as being classified as
an LTTEer.
The deaths of Lalith Athulathmudali
and of Ragunathan are closely linked. The police
investigation of 1993 into these deaths suggested the
assassination of Athulathmudali by the LTTE and a
suicide by its agent when confronted with arrest.
The evidence now available proves beyond any
doubt that Ragunathan was murdered by those who killed
Athulathmudali, by an administration of poison, to wit;
potassium cyanide. In conclusion, the Presidential
Commission served notices under section 16 of the Law
No: 7 of 1978: Cap 9: LEC who in the opinion of the
Commission were implicated or concerned in the matters
under inquiry and subsequently implicated were:
1.
Arambawalage Don Ranjith Upali de Silva alias Sothi
Upali. There is satisfactory evidence that suspect Sothi
Upali was directly concerned in the murder of deceased
victim 2 - Ragunathan earlier named Appaiah
Balakrishnan. The acceptable evidence implicates Sothi
Upali as conspiring with others to abduct Ragunathan,
receive him as a prisoner, keep him in secret wrongful
confinement, starve him of food and water and have him
killed by probably secret administration of poison, to
wit, cyanide and then make up false scene as if he
committed suicide by biting on a cyanide capsule, when
he faces imminent capture. All this was done to suggest
that Ragunathan was a member of the LTTE, who
assassinated Athulathmudali.
The Commission
recommended that Arambawalage Don Ranjith Upali de Silva
alias Sothi Upali be made subject to civic disability.
Apart from the above the Commission recommended that the
evidence was sufficient to consider indicting him with
conspiracy and abetment with others of the murder of
Ragunathan and in the same transaction, conspiring and
abetting Janaka P Jayamanna alias Sudumahattaya to
assassinate Lalith W Athulathmudali, offences punishable
under Penal Code.
2. Uswatte Liyanage
Senivaratne. A Provincial Councilor of the UNP for the
Western Province. The Commission while recommending the
subjection of the civic disability, also reported that
there was sufficient evidence to indict U L Senivaratne
with having conspired and abetted the commission of the
offences of unlawful assault, voluntarily causing hurt
while being armed with deadly weapons to wit; pistol,
iron rods, clubs etc and wrongful restraint, criminal
intimidation, offences punishable under the Penal Code
in respect of the Fort Railway Station incident on
07.08.1992 and conspiracy with Janaka Priyanka Jayamanna
and others to assassinate Athulathmudali on 23.04.93 and
conspiracy with others to abduct and murder Ragunathan
between 23 and 24 April 1993, all offences punishable
under the Penal Code.
Also with the same charges
against (3) Janaka Priyanka Jayamanna alias Wellapittye
Sudumahattaya, (4) Wanadula Bandulage Somaratne alias
Konda Some (5) K Nandasiri Karunatilake alias Nandana,
(6) Bulathsinhalage Srisena Coorey - the former minister
of Housing and Construction in the Premadasa government,
and earlier the Colombo mayor and subsequently after
becoming the minister was also inducted as the general
secretary of the United National Party by President
Premadasa The last indicted person was Bulathsinhala
Ajith Coorey, the son of Srisena Coorey.
The
Commission report said that, it had dealt at length with
the conduct of public officials, mainly police officers
with regard to the several incidents of physical attacks
on Athulathmudali at Pannala, Madapatha, Colombo Fort
and Dehiwala. It was no different at Kirulapone.
Reports further add that, before the
assassination, the conduct of the police officers in
shifting the venue of the meeting and withdrawing police
strength from the meeting is evident. It says that after
the assassination there was the recording of the false
statements submitting incomplete report to the
Magistrate's Courts and avoiding questioning witnesses
on relevant matters. Further it shows the falsification
and tampering suppression of evidence and fraudulent
conduct. Those involved were, according to the
Commission report, A S P Lugoda, I P Dharmawardene, S I
Sunil Shantha and I P Ekhanayake.
The
investigation regarding the death of Ragunathan was most
unsatisfactory. Those involved were, as pointed out in
the Commission report, Senivaratne, Gunaratne,
Dharmawardene, Basil, Jayasinghe, Devasundara, Aabdeen,
Nilaabdeen, Deepthi Wijewickrema and other CDB officers.
Galgamuwa of the Wellawatte police is seen showing
weapons to underworld gagsters at the police station.
Adhikari of the Borella police had given protection to
criminals, particularly to Sothi Upali, whom he
addressed as "Chief". Devasundara and Ilabdeen visited
Ragunathan, who was held in captivity in Gothami Road.
According to the Commissioners, the IGP should have had
their conduct investigated through the entries they made
in police books, the omissions and failures to perform
their duty as seen in those entries and statements
recorded by them, and meaningful disciplinary action
taken against them. The report was replete with
criticism of their conduct.
The Commission
report in it concluding paragraphs reported that it
remained to say something about President Premadasa in
relation to the terms of reference. It was he who had
the strongest possible motive to eliminate
Athulathmudali. He was badly insulted by the contents of
the so-called impeachment motion, his place as head of
state publicly ridiculed and undermined, a political
force headed by Athulathmudali was developing against
his continuance as president. Ministers who were
supporters of him were from the Colombo district and
were grouping in the political firmament. They all had
connections with the underworld, the world of gunmen,
smugglers, drug dealers and outlaws. He also had the
support of corrupt policemen.
Underworld gunmen
and thugs did these killings. Before that,
Athulathmudali was hunted, assaulted and humiliated
during his election campaign. The killings were
elaborately planned, the need for deception being of
paramount importance. Who could enlist the support of so
many policemen all over the country to interfere with,
fabricate and tamper with evidence after the numerous
physical attacks on him by assorted thugs and
politicians.
The Commission expressed that it
was of the view that President Premadasa was himself
directly involved in the conspiracy to assassinate
Athulathmudali and that others did his bidding. He has
preferred deception to debate.
The Commission,
after deliberating for two years, submitted its final
report to the Sri Lankan President on October 7, 1997.
The findings pointed the finger at former President
Ranasinghe Premadasa (1988-93) and security force
personnel who were close to him as directly responsible
for the killing of Athulathmudali.
Earlier in an
interview with the Sunday Times of May 4, 1997, the
former UNP kingmaker Sirisena Coorey, looking relaxed
and confident despite uncertainty over his position,
insisted that he had retired from the UNP and from
politics and had no intention of making a comeback.
Cooray suddenly re-appeared in Sri Lanka (he had been in
Australia) and said that he had nothing to hide or fear,
especially relating to the Athulathmudali assassination,
on which the Presidential Commission was finalizing a
report.
Excerpts from the interview:
Q.
Wasn't it bad for your image to be considered a sort of
fugitive from justice with a warrant out for you?
A. It is all nonsense, there is a Sinhala saying
rata wate vetak bandath kata wate bandinda be.
You can fence the country but you can never fence the
tongue. I was by no means a fugitive from justice for
the eight months I was away. I was never accused or
convicted to be a fugitive. Like any ordinary person I
was out of the country, and that does not mean I was in
hiding.
Q. But there were aspersions that you,
one time strongman of the UNP, was keeping away from the
country. What were you doing?
A. I traveled in
America. My sons live in Australia and there got
involved in retirement villages, not homes for the
elderly as such. Another son met with an accident and he
was in a hospital in Bangalore for two weeks, and he is
still in Madras undergoing treatment. So you see I spent
my time profitably.
Q. Why did you not appear
before the Special Presidential Commission inquiring
into the assassination of Lalith Athulathmudali?
A. As I said before, people talk a lot of
nonsense, not knowing the full story. I requested the
Commission to allow me to appear before it and believe
it or not I did not even get a letter of acknowledgment
from it for three months. Therefore, is it wrong for me
to presume that I was not required by the SPC and so I
legally left the country like any citizen and did not go
stealthily.
Q. When did you get to know the
Commission wanted you?
A. I first read about it
in the papers three months after I had left. So I took
the obvious step of asking my lawyers to get a date for
me to come in time. I never showed reluctance to appear
before the Commission. I don't think there was any
concrete evidence against me. It was largely loose talk
and hearsay. Would I have offered to go before the
Commission if I was guilty? Even when I wrote to the
Commission it never asked me to stay on in the country.
Q. It is alleged that you were associated with
men like Sothi Upali who were linked with the
Athulathmudali killing. Would you comment?
A.
You cannot just indulge in drawing room and cocktail
party gossip and assassinate people's character. There
must be acceptable evidence and it was conclusive that
the LTTE had planned the killing.
Q. Then why
all these allegations and innuendo?
A. Ask those
who talk. It may be to tarnish my political image. What
can I do about it?
Q. Will you remain in Sri
Lanka or are you planning another long trip?
A.
Why should I leave my country unless it is for a
holiday? I am too old to start a new life. I will
definitely not leave. Charges were earlier made against
President Premadasa and Minister Ranjan Wijeratne. Now
people are pointing a finger at me over various
killings. Such people either don't have anything worth
doing, or they are afraid I will get back to active
politics.
On September 8, 1988 one Devasundara,
Inspector of Police in charge of the local unit of the
newly formed Terrorism Investigation Department (TID)
was arrested in Anuradhapura in connection with the
murder of Athulathmudali.
The other accused
arrested in the case were W Bandulalage Somaratne alias
Malwatte Some, U L Seneviratne, B G Devasurendra and A
Abdeen. They were all charged with conspiracy, aiding
and abetting to commit the murder of Lalith
Athulathmudali and unlawful detention of Ragunathan.
Subsequently two of the accused were killed.
Chapter
57: Kittu, the LTTE legend
(©2002 Asia Times
Online Co, Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact content@atimes.com
for information on our sales and syndication
policies.)
|
| |
|
|
 |
|
