The following article is based on a piece written by K. W. Janaranjana, editor of the Anidda, a weekly Sinhala newspaper published in Colombo.
Last week, Udaya Gammanpila released a report prepared by a committee led by former High Court Judge Jayaki de Alwis regarding the Easter Sunday attacks. This report implicated Ravi Seneviratne, the Secretary to the Ministry of Public Security, and Shani Abeysekara, who was recently reinstated in the police service.
In response, the government questioned the credibility of the report and subsequently rejected it. To justify its stance, the government targeted the credibility of former Judge Jayaki de Alwis, the sole member of the committee.
During a press conference on October 22, Cabinet Media Spokesperson Minister Vijith Herath stated that the government would not accept the Jayaki de Alwis report. He also mentioned that a report from the Judicial Service Commission indicated that former High Court Judge Jayaki de Alwis had previously been suspended over an allegation of “misconduct.” However, Mr. Herath did not elaborate on the nature of this alleged misconduct, nor did any reporters press him for details.
This allegation of “misconduct,” referenced by Minister Vijitha Herath, was later used to discredit Ms. Jayaki de Alwis. However, Minister Herath omitted a significant part of the story.
Just recently, new details emerged clarifying this “misconduct” narrative. When Ms. Jayaki de Alwis Kasthuriarachchi served as Magistrate of Anuradhapura, then Chief Justice Sarath N. de Silva forced her to resign without any formal charges. At the time, Sarath Nanda Silva was known for wielding considerable authority over lower court judges, often intimidating those who did not act in accordance with his wishes.
In 2000, while Ms. de Alwis was Magistrate of Anuradhapura, an incident occurred during an inquest near the Anuradhapura General Hospital morgue. A vehicle attempted to pass through the area, despite police instructions to stop. Upon investigation, Ms. de Alwis directed the police to take legal action against the driver, J. Sam, a technical officer at the North Central Provincial Health Office. As a result, the Anuradhapura District Judge, C. P. Keerthisinghe, found Sam guilty, ordering him to pay a Rs. 1,000 fine for ignoring police signals.
Following this incident, posters appeared around Anuradhapura and the courthouse, with slogans criticizing the court’s decision, including, “The fine is Rs. 1,500 when you approach the magistrate; shall we bring the morgue to the court premises?” Residents suspected the source of these posters.
Ms. Jayaki de Alwis reported this protest to Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva, who initially dismissed it. Later, a colleague warned her that the Chief Justice was displeased and advised her to meet with him. When they met, the Chief Justice instructed her to “write a resignation letter on personal grounds.” Although she had not received any formal charges, she complied, fearing professional repercussions. Thus, she submitted her resignation.
In 2006, Ms. de Alwis was reappointed as a magistrate upon her request, though without her previous seniority. If her prior actions had constituted “serious misconduct,” it is unlikely she would have been invited back to judicial service. Eventually, she retired as a judge of the Kegalle High Court.
To discredit the Easter Committee report, Minister Vijith Herath and the government focused on allegations against Ms. Jayaki de Alwis. They cited a report from the Judicial Service Commission mentioning her “misconduct.” However, it’s unclear if Mr. Herath disclosed the full context of this “misconduct,” or if the Judicial Service Commission report omitted details of her resignation, possibly listing it simply as “personal reasons.”
What, then, is the real story?
