Magistrate reprimands President’s Counsel for disorder in Diana Gamage’s forged document case

Friday, 3 March 2023 00:05 -     - {{hitsCtrl.values.hits}}

  • Directs CID to file comprehensive report in Court, further inquiry fixed for 25 March

By T. Farook Thajudeen


State Minister Diana Gamage

Colombo Chief Magistrate Prasanna Alwis yesterday critically commented over the behaviour of the lawyers in the courtroom during the inquiry into a forged Birth Certificate case of State Minister Diana Gamage and remarked that whatever category a lawyer may be, he should behave decently before the Court.

Colombo Chief Magistrate Prasanna Alwis made this remark when Saavedra Fernando PC pointlessly tried to obstruct Counsel Rienzie Arsekularatne PC by thwarting his submissions.

The incident took place when PC Arsekularatne objected to the submissions of the CID by asserting that the CID's double standard was making submissions in court without arresting Diana Gamage.

The Counsel said the CID had not arrested her while there is ample proof that Diana Gamage had committed an offence punishable.

Counsel Arsekularatne further told the Magistrate that a “B’ report filed in court by the CID in 9 May 2011 had clearly stated that Diana Gamage had obtained a passport by tendering a forged certificate

to the Immigration and Emigrations and now without arresting the suspect the CID tried to let her scot-free by saying that they are further investigating the matter and had sought the assistance of the Foreign Department of Great Britain to ascertain her British Citizenship.

At this point Counsel Saavedra Fernando attempted to interrupt Counsel Arsekularatne and Senior Counsel Gunaratna Wanninayake intervened into the incident and asked Counsel Fernando to allow Counsel Arsekularatne to make submissions as Arsakularatne is very much senior to Fernando and it was Arsekularatne’s turn to make submissions.

As a result there was confusion and mayhem within the Courtroom and the Magistrate kept down the case and commented on the behaviour of the lawyer’s in court.

Later when the case was taken up in the court and the CID told the Magistrate that they had contacted the British High Commissioner in Sri Lanka to assert whether Diana Gamage is a British citizen and the High Commission had told to the CID that they do not have any proof to say whether Diana Gamage is a British Citizen or not.

The CID further said that they have sought the assistance of the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office of UK to assert that fact and the case is pending.

However Magistrate Prasanna Alwis pointed out that the CID had earlier reported Court that the details in the Computers of the Immigration and Emigration Department  does not tally with the document in the brief of Diana Damage’s and further the statement made by officer Mallawarachcige Geewan Karunaratne of  the Immigration and Emigration Department had asserted that there is a disagreement in the documents tended to the Immigration and Emigration Department by the suspect and also there are complaints of attempt of pilfering with documents tendered to the Immigration and Emigration Department by Diana Gamage.

The Magistrate underscoring these facts said itself is enough for the arrest of Diana Gamage for the fraud.

The Magistrate ordered the CID to file a comprehensive report in Court on the next date of hearing and fixed further inquiry for 25 March.

The Magistrate told the parties that he intends to take the assistance of the Attorney General on the next case date.

This case relating to the State Minister Diana Gamage’s citizenship was filed by civil activist Oshala Herath challenging the citizenship of the State Minister of Tourism Diana Gamage.

The petitioner has sought a ruling that Gamage is not qualified to serve as a Member of the Sri Lankan Parliament due to her British citizenship.

The CID is carrying out investigations under section 175 of Penal Code for furnishing false information and under sections 45(1(a) and 45(1)(c) of the Immigrants and Emigrants Act (IEA) for remaining in Sri Lanka in contravention of the provision of the IEA and making a false representation.

 

COMMENTS