National Freedom Front leader and Member of Parliament Mr Wimal Weerawansa filed a case before the Colombo District Court today (12) demanding compensation of 1000 million rupees from the immigration officials who illegally arrested and prosecuted him on false and malicious allegations of using an illegal passport. Sri Lanka Latest News
When Mr Wimal Weerawansa, who was an opposition member of parliament, arrived at the Katunayake airport to go abroad in 2015, the immigration department officers arrested the member and brought him to court and filed a case. Last April, Mr Wimal Weerawansa was ordered to be acquitted in this case, which was heard at the Negombo Magistrate’s Court for 8 years.
In that case, Mr. Sarath Jayamanna, the President’s lawyer who represented Mr Wimal Weerawansa, managed to prove in his statements and cross-examination that the questionable passport presented by the MP was not false or forged. The Negombo Magistrate, who considered the facts, acquitted MP Wimal Weerawansa and stated in the order that presenting an inactive passport is not a criminal offence and it has been proved that the passport presented by the MP is not forged or fabricated.
Accordingly, Mr Wimal Weerawansa demanded a compensation of 1000 million rupees from the officers who made the false and malicious complaint, stating that by maliciously assigning and maintaining the said case, he had to face severe mental and physical pain and his reputation and social respect had been lowered. The case was filed today in Colombo District Court.
Accordingly, the former officials of the Immigration Department have filed this case against the defendants and it is stated in the complaint filed today that they were arrested and prosecuted maliciously without conducting a fair investigation and knowing that it was not a criminal offense. This case has been filed by a group of lawyers including lawyer Dinesh de Silva, lawyer Sineth Bandara and lawyer Thilini Perera.
Member of Parliament Wimal Weerawansa states that he believes that the officials may have acted in this way at the request or on the advice of the politicians of the good governance government that was in power at that time.
