The man who could have been the President!

• An interview with Naganada Kodituwakku 

Sri Lanka is currently on a path to establishing a government free of injustice, nepotism, fraud, bribery, and all forms of corruption. For this ambitious goal to be achieved, individuals of impeccable character must hold government positions, and citizens must likewise adopt a mindset that supports integrity and accountability in all capacities. Achieving a truly corruption-free state requires that the ruling party remain open to constructive criticism, and that its supporters welcome such feedback without becoming sycophants—rejecting good advice or silencing critics.

Lawyer Nagananda, a respected attorney in both Sri Lanka and England, is widely known for his unwavering commitment to fighting injustice and corruption in all its forms. His constructive criticism is imparted without bias toward any individual or party. Consequently, he has often been regarded as an enemy by many, finding support only among a few rational-minded individuals.

In 2019, Nagananda’s bid for the presidency was derailed, he was barred from practicing law in Sri Lanka, and his honesty and integrity were questioned. Despite these obstacles, he has consistently advocated for the rights of the Sri Lankan people. Misinformation, mischaracterization, and malicious lies have clouded his message. This interview aims to clarify the doubts surrounding him and highlight his enduring commitment to justice, which long predates his entry into politics. A man’s character is not built overnight; Nagananda’s past actions speak volumes about his steadfastness to justice. All statements he makes here are backed by hard evidence and provided with references.

Q. You are a British-qualified practicing solicitor and a Sri Lankan-qualified Attorney at Law. Many youths today may not know your background prior to leaving for the United Kingdom. Could you elaborate on your past profession in Sri Lanka and what compelled you to move to the UK? 

A: By the time I left for the UK in September 2001, I was the head of the customs serious frauds investigation unit then known as RTF (Revenue Task Force) of Sri Lanka Customs. It was the then Director General of Customs WDL Perera who was compelled to ask the UK government to provide me protection in the UK explaining life-threats faced by me for being uncompromising in my over 2 decades long anti-corruption campaign (Ref: 1). Just two weeks after my departure, the then President Chandrika Kumaratunga and her Cabinet was condemned in the parliament by the opposition MPs for their failure to provide adequate protection and to retain my service for the country. Throughout my career I had to face a sustained persecution under each and every regime beginning from President J R Jayawardena and culminating with President Chandrika Kumaratunga. I was interdicted 3 times and dismissed twice on the orders of the Executive Presidents but reinstated each time on Court Orders (Ref: 2) 

In 1986, I was framed in a bribery case and taken into Custody. Whilst in remand custody in the Welikada Remand Prison I was kept in the death-row cells for my own safety. The politico-business-mafia kept me out of service for 6 years and my studies at the Law college had been stopped for 10 years. In the UK I had to start my career from the beginning and ended up qualified as a Solicitor in England and Wales.

It is pertinent to mention that I had to resort to legal action against the Home Secretary UK for turning down my application for protection in the UK. And it was the judiciary that decided in my favour after the 18-page judgment by the Court is a testimony of dedicated service under trying circumstances in the Customs Administration of Sri Lanka.

In 2004 I was served with a vacation of post notice when I asked time to keep away from Service as one Mr Sarath Jayathilake who had contributed to my exit had been made the Director General of Customs. 

Q.  What made you come back to Sri Lanka and give up your UK residency? 

I became a British citizen in 2007 and after 2009 I received a written request from the then President Rajapakse’s Secretary, Lalith Weeratunga through an email to return to Sri Lanka and to join the ‘Nation building effort’. I returned to Sri Lanka and had a one-to-one talk with President Rajapakse and agreed to return to service subject to the condition that there would be no interference whatsoever. Yet, PB Jayasundara, the then Secretary to the Ministry of Finance, vehemently objected to my return to Customs administration and with that my career in the public service came to an end. Since then, I started working in both England and Sri Lanka as a lawyer and finally decided to engage in the legal profession in Sri Lanka, particularly in the public interest litigations which I did absolutely on pro bono basis for public good (Ref: 3). 

I was the only lawyer to do so and I brought up over 40 public interest litigations, each one of which was on matters affecting the helpless citizens of Sri Lanka. In short, I had to fight against all three organs of the government (Legislative, Executive and the Judiciary) for the first time in the legal history of Sri Lanka.

Q.  Most Sri Lankan voters do not know the history of the people to whom they cast their votes or do not care to learn it. This situation is further exacerbated by their readiness to believe rumors and unfounded accusations of politicians they do not support and stay completely blind to their own party members. Therefore, I want to ask you directly about your first presidential contest. Why were you unable to participate, and what did you do after realizing that you could not run? How did you address the concerns of those who relied on you and raised funds on your behalf? 

 I did my best to contest the Presidential Election 2019 and there was a huge public interest both in Sri Lanka and abroad to my election campaign purely based on rule of law and peoples’ Constitution designed to be adopted by the people. As required by law, I had to contest through a political party and the Chairman of the Election Commission Mahinda Deshapriya strongly recommended to me a party named Okkoma Vasio belonged to one Dr Taminimulle from Kandy. However, this person at the 11th hour let me and all my followers down and refused nomination through his party which was a heavy blow. This was the culmination of a well-laid out plan guided by Mahinda Deshapriya, Rajapakse brothers, a person named Oshala Herath and Malimawa, who considered my campaign based on rule of law as a real threat to their progression.

As the campaign was abruptly stopped, I had to bear outstanding payments for social media channels and printers from my own funds. The total collection of funds for the Presidential Election from 2017 to 2019 October was approximately 13 million rupees and a fully audited report of accounts by a chartered auditors was submitted to the Election Commission (Ref: 4) and published in the Vinivida Foundation website as well.

On the nomination day I made a complaint against Taminimulle for the criminal breach of trust to the Election Commission (Ref:5) and a criminal case was initiated against him in the Magistrate’s Court which is due to resume on 2nd December 2024 after dismissal of all his appeals to the Court of Appeal (Ref: 6) and Provincial High Court, Western Province (Ref. 7) against the interim order made against him by the Magistrate (Ref. 8).

The conspirators knew that had I tendered my nomination I would have definitely stopped Ghotabhaya Rajapakse’s nomination as he was a dual citizen by then not renouncing his US citizenship. None of the 36 candidates had a backbone to bring this out on the nomination day which was a crime committed against the citizenry. 

Oshala Herath who engaged in a character assassination campaign after the denial of my nomination was charged for defamation along with Anura Kumara Dissanayake and the matter is still pending in the civil appellate high Court Colombo. The reading of the complaint will enlighten you on this charge (Ref: 9)  

Q.  Why did you not run for the presidency this time? What prevented you, and why did you not foresee these barriers? 

The Election Commission refused registration of our party Vinivida Foundation twice and now it has been charged before the Supreme Court (Ref: 10) and the matter is still pending. Even this time (2024) I tried hard to get hold of a registered political party, which included the Communist Party and the Samasamaja Party but no one was willing to give without a big fee. I know of a person who has paid 60 million to a leftist party to contest the 2024 Presidential Election through that party.  

Q. What have you been doing since that presidential election? 

 As cited above, I was the only public interest litigation activist who fearlessly dealt with people occupying public office in the Legislature, the Executive and the Judiciary for the commission of the criminal offence of corruption. The enclosure (Ref: 3) attached here vividly displays this higher to unparallel record.    

Q.  Anura Kumara has provided the people of Sri Lanka with an alternative path, filled with hope, success, and prosperity. His main political theme was "a country free of corruption." Under what theme would you have run if you had decided to enter the race? 

 Anura Kumara Dissanayake (AKD) is yet to prove that he was different from the other corrupt politicians in Sri Lanka. However, in the past he had committed serious violations and financial frauds which were unpardonable. He could have easily stopped Gotabhaya Rajapakse from contesting Presidential Election in 2019 and he should not have got involved with Ranil Wickremasinghe’s attempt to usurp the powers of the Executive President by unlawful means. 

Of the same bunch of politicians accused of looting the country, whereas Nagananda is an activist lawyer whose campaign from day one was to establish a nation that respects the sovereignty of the people and the rule of law. The sole objective of the People’s Constitution designed by the Vinivida Foundation was to make it the supreme law of the land with a clear people’s mandate at the Presidential Election. Even at this (2024) Presidential Election it was offered to Malimawa but it declined the offer. And then one Prof Lalith de Silva was willing to put it to the people seeking their approval but he lacked the necessary characteristics to persuade the citizenry to accept it and make the Supreme Law of the Land.  

Q.  You are now running as a candidate from your new party. What are you offering that is different from other candidates? 

 The Election Commission twice refused to register Vinivida Foundation, despite fulfilling all the requirements for registration. It has registered 7 new parties that, compared to Vinivida Foundation, have done nothing for public good. In this backdrop Vinivida Foundation was compelled to contest from one of the other registered political parties namely United National Freedom Front at the 2024 parliamentary election. 

Our objective is to motivate the people to demand for a system change that respects the norm of representative democracy with due regard and respect to the sovereignty of the people, the rule of law and public trust doctrine, the foundation on which the people’s Constitution is formulated. 

Q.  Should the NPP party secure a 2/3 majority or just a simple majority? Shouldn't the Sri Lankan people give the NPP an opportunity to govern, to eradicate corruption and bring prosperity?  

It is apparent that the NPP administration has missed the greatest opportunity it had to turn the tables in the endangered political system of Sri Lanka. Had they presented the People’s Constitution to the people seeking a clear mandate at the Presidential Election – 2024 by now it would have been the Supreme Law of the Land. In such a scenario the NPP’s governance would have been much easier since all the traps set out by JR Jayawardena would have been thrown to the dustbin of history by the sovereign people themselves.  

No political party that has tasted the fruits of corruption will back the total independence of the judiciary, breaking away from the clutches of the other two organs, which they perceive as a threat to their survival. 

The NPP has to prove itself as and when it gets its proposed Constitution ready for approval of the people. It is observed that despite NPP being in active mainstream politics for decades it did nothing when Gotabhaya Rajapakse removed the Constitutional Council through his 20th Amendment denying judiciary and other so-called independent Commissions their liberty and freedom to perform office independently it did not challenge the same for its constitutionality. I must state that even before I left for England in September 2001 my uncompromising attitude and steadfastness with due respect to the rule of law was the same without which fighting against corruption cannot be accomplished.

The naked truth is that without going for a true system no one would be able to guarantee the judiciary with total freedom from the other two organs with due respect and regard to the doctrine of separation of power which has includes the judicial review i.e., to review any law enacted by the legislature for the constitutionality. In my view, even if NPP wants to fight corruption it will not succeed as the system itself under the existing Constitution encourages corruption with no accountability, transparency backed by sanctions are in place.   

Q.  The Sri Lankan people have not yet learned to discuss or debate politics in a civil manner without resorting to personal insults against the opposition. They also exhibit a sycophantic mentality toward their leaders. Supporters often do not appreciate it when the governing party is questioned, viewing such inquiries as threats or as support for opposing parties. Many questions about misconduct are met with responses asking why the previous government was not questioned over similar issues or how such actions were tolerated then but not now. How can we change this trend, especially when it comes to the youth, who often lack any knowledge of history, civic rights, and the ability to conduct proper research and argue logically? 

 Absolutely correct. Apparently the print and electronic media have failed their role and not encouraging the people to be assertive and to demand the government to be accountable to the people, the supreme body of representative democracy. The people have not been taught that in a system of governance based on the norm of democracy people are expected to respect the views of opposing parties. Whereas in this country the print and electronic media which include the social media is being abused to the maximum and it has become the accepted norm of the day, compelling the new law, namely the Online Safety Act came into being with penal sanctions provided against abuse of freedom of speech and expression. 

The Constitution requires every citizen to respect, honour and defend the rights of other citizens to fight for their rights (Article 28) and requires every citizen to engage in his or her chosen occupation with due respect and regard to the rights of the others in practice it is not seen anywhere. Although the said Article requires citizens to commit themselves to fight corruption and protect nature, 9 out of 10 people are unaware of this constitutional mandate. Therefore, there is a great deal the media is expected to play in this regard in educating the people about their duties and responsibilities. Unfortunately, the media is equally corrupt and turns a blind eye simply playing a passive role. 

Q.  Finally, if you are elected to parliament, you may find yourself a lone voice in the wilderness. Can you play an effective role alone? Will you be a one-man army, or will you seek support from the opposition?

 Sadly, but faithful to the nation I must say this to my people.  In the past this beautiful nation had people stupendously honest, and faithful to their motherland but not anymore and it is almost impossible to find people who perform faithfully in whatever their chosen occupations whether it is in party politics and even outside of politics. Because the noble dhamma based on the law of nature is no more in actual practice.   

Vinivida Foundation and Nagananda, strong advocators of the rule of law, doctrine of public trust, doctrine and accountability, transparency and separation of powers, will do its utmost best to reestablish a system of governance treat every citizen, including those in politics, equally and support any political party or organization that respects these views which a must to establish a true representative democracy that respect the will of the people. Unfortunately, in this country people seem to believe that the politicians are from different classes and they deserve special treatment with a right to abuse the wealth of the nation for their private benefit. 

References

1.https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Ips10xN0syNFJ-lOuXMj_KRqLXUFvf-v/edit

2. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Gf5zr4auqi-Z09N6uMN70_VfMl0azOZg/view

3.https://drive.google.com/file/d/1b3-gxPSf2SErIXNfECt4d9hoItpDBJg3/view

4.      https://drive.google.com/file/d/1TxzMki1IkNcwT9IeFUhOMnOhdXi5B6mY/view

5.https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dAL0mxFqLhTNYhC-ywVkN-FGQCu6yn2_/view

6. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yQljrAiAh9f_eDg4VVahTl7FSwIHfyix/view

7.https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vknPpT8YW15-_xwUty2_3Zhz8eViSRDC/edit

8.https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xm3s1l9PyH_MZR-z_ncM1jaGYM_WnHI1/view

9. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1tLPHQHduZrOu3l3JcgsTqslQxJ29PjPR/view

10.https://drive.google.com/file/d/1cdooVXY_-9yT3B6JjkR2d_F7WnZ2n1FY/view

The writer is the President- Virginia Research Institute, USA, President – Tennessee Association of Science Department Chairs and a Fulbright Specialist – USA