The Supreme Court yesterday (July 22) issued an interim order suspending the implementation of a previous ruling by the Court of Appeal, which had invalidated a letter sent by the Attorney General to the Criminal Investigation Department (CID), naming current Inspector General of Police (IGP) Deshabandu Tennakoon—who was serving as Deputy Inspector General (DIG) in charge of the Western Province at the time—as a suspect in connection with the attack on the ‘GotaGoGama’ protest site at Galle Face on May 9, 2022.
A three-member Supreme Court bench consisting of Justices Janak de Silva, Sobhitha Rajakaruna, and Sampath Abeykoon issued this order, allowing for an appeal filed by the Attorney General to proceed.
When this petition was called for consideration today, the Supreme Court rejected the preliminary objections raised by President’s Counsel Romesh de Silva, who appeared on behalf of Deshabandu Tennakoon. De Silva had argued that the list of respondents in the petition had not been appropriately amended.
Submissions by the Attorney General’s Department
Deputy Solicitor General Suharshi Herath, appearing on behalf of the Attorney General, argued before the court that the Attorney General has no authority to issue instructions directly to the police on naming individuals as suspects. She emphasized that decisions about naming suspects should be made by the Police or the Criminal Investigation Department based on evidence uncovered during investigations.
Herath further pointed out to the Supreme Court that during the earlier hearing at the Court of Appeal regarding this matter, several important confidential documents submitted by the Attorney General were not properly considered by the presiding Judge before issuing the verdict.
She also noted that the Attorney General does have authority to provide advice to police when they request guidance on any investigation, and emphasized that Deshabandu Tennakoon was previously named as a suspect based on an order issued by the Colombo Fort Magistrate’s Court.
Herath argued that the Court of Appeal, before delivering its decision, had completely disregarded the points raised by the Attorney General, and moreover, granted reliefs that were not even requested by the petitioner. She claimed that the Court of Appeal judgment was therefore completely contrary to the law.
Submissions on behalf of Deshabandu Tennakoon
President’s Counsel Romesh de Silva, appearing on behalf of respondent Deshabandu Tennakoon, submitted to the court that the Attorney General had no legal power to instruct police to name individuals as suspects. He reiterated that the decision to name a suspect should be based solely on investigative findings made by the Police or the Criminal Investigation Department.
He further emphasized that the Attorney General’s letter instructing the CID to name Tennakoon as a suspect in this incident was completely contrary to the law.
After considering submissions from both parties, the three-member Supreme Court bench granted permission to proceed with the petition filed by the Attorney General.
Additionally, the Supreme Court issued an interim order preventing the implementation of the contested Court of Appeal judgment until the Supreme Court delivers its final ruling on the petition.
Previously, Deshabandu Tennakoon had filed a writ petition in the Court of Appeal seeking to invalidate the Attorney General’s letter, dated April 19, 2023, instructing the CID to name him as a suspect. The Court of Appeal bench presided by Justice Nissanka Bandula Karunaratne had recently delivered a decision invalidating the Attorney General’s letter.
In response, the Attorney General had filed the present appeal before the Supreme Court, arguing that the Court of Appeal’s decision was unlawful and requesting that it be set aside.
