Several key witnesses who reportedly knew the inside details of controversial crimes, corruption, and fraud allegedly carried out under political influence have died mysteriously in recent years. Their deaths have also been controversial, as each occurred under unusual circumstances.
Among those who died in such circumstances were Rajiva Prakash Jayaweera, a former senior executive of SriLankan Airlines; Dinesh Schaffter, a director of the Janashakthi Group; Nishantha Rajapaksa, a former official of the Department of External Resources of the Treasury; Kapila Chandrasena, a former executive of SriLankan Airlines; and former Inspector General of Police C. D. Wickramaratne. All these deaths were officially categorised as suicides.
A Record-Setting Acting Appointment
Among them, C. D. Wickramaratne was an officer who passed several significant milestones in the history of the Sri Lanka Police. Many people referred to him simply as “C. D.” He became the 35th Inspector General of Police of Sri Lanka.
Even before his permanent appointment, he had already established a record in Sri Lankan police history as the longest-serving Acting Inspector General of Police.
On 29 April 2019, President Maithripala Sirisena of the then “good governance” administration sent the 34th Inspector General of Police, Pujith Jayasundara, on compulsory leave amid serious accusations that he had failed to prevent the Easter Sunday terrorist attacks despite receiving prior intelligence.
As a result, C. D. was appointed Acting Inspector General of Police.
No one was able to dismiss or remove Pujith Jayasundara from the post of Inspector General of Police or from the police service until he retired after reaching the age of 60. This was reportedly because of certain constitutional protections he enjoyed.
Consequently, C. D. continued to serve as Acting Inspector General of Police until Jayasundara retired on 14 March 2020. At the time, C. D. was the head of the Police Administration Division.
C. D.’s Position Under the Gotabaya Government
C. D. did not receive the permanent post of Inspector General of Police immediately after Pujith Jayasundara retired.
The government of Gotabaya Rajapaksa, which was then in power, was reportedly not particularly willing to appoint C. D. as Inspector General of Police. His perceived political loyalties were said not to have appealed to the Rajapaksas.
He was therefore retained as Acting Inspector General of Police for several more months while the Rajapaksa government searched for someone considered more suitable.
In the end, although reluctant, Gotabaya Rajapaksa reportedly had to appoint C. D. because there appeared to be no viable alternative. Accordingly, C. D. was appointed the 35th Inspector General of Police on 27 September 2020.
The Little-Known Journey to a Forest Shrine in Mahiyanganaya and Murugan’s Representative
C. D. reportedly spent his time reflecting on the past and participating in various religious and charitable activities.
He had a circle of billionaire philanthropist friends who were deeply involved in religious work. They had reportedly undertaken projects such as changing the pinnacle of the Ruwanwelisaya stupa, carrying out major work at the Temple of the Tooth, and supporting restoration activities in Bodh Gaya, India.
While associating with these philanthropists, who quietly engaged in charitable religious work, C. D. reportedly became increasingly devoted to the gods he worshipped.
He was a devout follower of the Hindu deity Murugan. Before becoming Inspector General of Police, he had even built a Murugan shrine at a well-known Buddhist temple in Kotte. It was said that this was part of a vow he had made in the hope of becoming Inspector General of Police.
Whenever possible, C. D. visited Kataragama. While serving as Inspector General of Police, he also reportedly made a secret monthly visit to a shrine located in a forested area of Mahiyanganaya.
Such was the extent of his devotion that he reportedly believed himself to be a representative of Murugan.
Although C. D. did not have a clear understanding of how the mysterious deaths of Kapila Chandrasena and Ranga Rajapaksa had occurred, he had reportedly told his friends on many occasions that, if they had taken their own lives, it had been a foolish and senseless act.
He viewed suicide as something that should never be done.
Against that background, the fact that his own mysterious death was also categorised as a suicide has continued to generate intense discussion both within the Police Department and among the public.
A Religious Ceremony at His Home on the Day of His Death
A religious ceremony had reportedly been organised at C. D.’s home on the day he died. It was intended for the gods he worshipped.
Even after his death, the ceremony was reportedly conducted as planned while his body remained at the Mulleriyawa Hospital. Two ritual priests had arrived at the house to conduct it.
C. D.’s death occurred after he came outside his home in preparation for his morning exercise. He had been shot in the chest.
People attempting suicide with a firearm usually shoot themselves in the head, or place the weapon beneath the chin so that the bullet passes through the head. However, C. D. had been shot in the chest.
The weapon was reportedly the firearm belonging to his security officer.
According to the security officer, C. D. came out of the house to leave for exercise and asked for the firearm. After the officer handed it to him, C. D. reportedly asked him to bring a glass of water.
The officer said that he went inside the house to bring the water and heard a gunshot. When he returned outside, he saw C. D. lying on the ground with a gunshot wound.
Neither the security officer nor anyone else in the house reportedly saw C. D. shoot himself. The firearm involved was the security officer’s weapon.
The question therefore arises as to whether a man who had invited ritual priests to conduct a ceremony in the shrine room of his house would have taken his own life in this manner. It remains a perplexing issue, and the article states that only time may provide an answer.
Rajiva Prakash Jayaweera
The death of Rajiva Prakash Jayaweera was no less mysterious than that of C. D.
Jayaweera was a former senior executive of SriLankan Airlines, a political and economic analyst who contributed articles to several leading newspapers in Sri Lanka, and an independent writer. His death remains a mystery to this day.
He was the son of Stanley Jayaweera, a former Sri Lankan ambassador to Germany, and the nephew of well-known civil servant Neville Jayaweera.
Educated initially at Nalanda College, Colombo, he served for many years as SriLankan Airlines’ country manager in several countries, including France, Austria, and Oman.
He also wrote critical articles for websites and weekend newspapers about major corruption and fraud allegations involving SriLankan Airlines, including the Airbus transaction that is now the subject of a lengthy investigation by the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption.
He had also disclosed information to the country about alleged fraud and corruption at Mihin Lanka.
Rajiva Prakash Jayaweera, who had repeatedly exposed alleged corruption and irregularities in transactions carried out during the Rajapaksa administration, died mysteriously on the morning of 12 June 2020.
His body was found near Independence Square in Colombo.
According to the post-mortem reports, he died from a gunshot wound to the head. Police also found a Micro-brand pistol near his body.
The death, which occurred during Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s administration, attracted considerable public attention because Jayaweera had exposed alleged corruption involving the Rajapaksas.
In the period immediately before his death, he had also been strongly critical of the conduct of the Gotabaya Rajapaksa government and the behaviour of senior officials in handling the COVID-19 pandemic.
As a result, intense discussion arose in political circles, with suspicions that his death may have been an organised killing.
Suspicion increased further because the police allegedly attempted to close the case by categorising it as a suicide. They claimed to have found a two-page letter that Jayaweera had written to his brother before his death.
Police repeatedly said the letter suggested that he had taken his own life because of a spinal condition, deteriorating eyesight, and personal reasons.
Police said the letter had been found at his home on Lauris Road in Bambalapitiya.
However, members of the public questioned whether the letter had genuinely been written by him.
Questions were also raised about why, if Jayaweera had intended to take his own life, he had chosen Independence Square, a prominent public location in Colombo with a high level of security, rather than doing so at home.
It was considered unusual for a person intending suicide to choose such a public place.
Jayaweera was also not known to be someone who used firearms. Nevertheless, police maintained that he had shot himself, citing the Micro-brand pistol found near his body.
The article argues that, had he intended to take his own life, many other methods would have been available to him. It questions why he would have obtained a firearm and travelled to a high-security zone that was also used by the President for exercise.
Jayaweera had reportedly given evidence before a presidential commission concerning alleged corruption and fraud committed during the Rajapaksa administration.
Although the police attempted at the time to close the case as a suicide, doubts remain because many people believe there may be a larger story behind the death.
Dinesh Schaffter
Another suspicious death following that of Jayaweera was the death of Dinesh Schaffter, a director of the Janashakthi Group and a prominent businessman. His death also remains a mystery.
The incident occurred at the Borella General Cemetery on 15 December 2022, with Schaffter dying the following day.
Investigators from the Criminal Investigation Department initially made significant efforts to present the death as a suicide. However, following lengthy court proceedings, the court ultimately determined that it was a homicide.
Investigations indicated that on 15 December, Schaffter left his home on Flower Road, Kollupitiya, saying he was going to meet a person in connection with a financial transaction involving tens of millions of rupees.
He was later found inside his vehicle, which had been parked in a secluded corner of the Borella General Cemetery.
Schaffter was found by his assistant after the assistant went to the cemetery in search of him. His hands had been bound, his neck had been constricted, and he was in critical condition.
He was taken from the cemetery to the National Hospital in Colombo and died the following day after a severe struggle for his life.
The death has left many unanswered questions.
The investigation was assigned to the Criminal Investigation Department by C. D., who was then the Inspector General of Police and who, according to the article, later died in a mysterious shooting.
The CID’s Homicide and Organised Crime Investigation Division claimed that Schaffter had taken his own life by hanging himself inside the vehicle.
A television antenna cable had been wrapped around his neck.
CID investigators claimed that the cable had been cut from an antenna cable at his home. They also said that he had taken with him the cables used to bind his hands when he left the house.
The CID further claimed that security-camera footage showed the cables lying on the dashboard of the vehicle in which Schaffter travelled.
According to the article, the CID presented evidence to court only for the purpose of supporting the theory that Schaffter had taken his own life.
Investigators attempted to argue that Schaffter had bound his own hands, placed a noose around his neck, constricted his neck, and hanged himself inside the vehicle.
The article describes this as a “fairy tale” and says the public ridiculed the CID because of doubts over whether such an event was physically possible.
While the CID continued trying to establish the suicide theory, Schaffter’s family challenged it in court.
The court consequently appointed a five-member panel of specialist judicial medical officers to reinvestigate the death.
Based on the expert medico-legal report submitted by the panel, which comprised several respected and experienced doctors in Sri Lanka, the Colombo Magistrate’s Court ruled in November 2023 that the death was a planned killing.
The decision was delivered by Colombo Additional Magistrate Rajindra Jayasuriya.
Medical reports confirmed that the cause of death was external pressure applied to Schaffter’s neck and face.
There was also considerable discussion at the time over the alleged presence of cyanide in his body.
Information also emerged about two bread rolls he had obtained from a restaurant in Colombo 7. Schaffter had reportedly eaten only one of them.
The article questions who ate the second bread roll and claims that the CID did not properly investigate that issue.
It was also said that only someone familiar with the cemetery could have driven a vehicle to the location where Schaffter’s car was parked.
There was no evidence that Schaffter had previously visited the Borella General Cemetery.
The article therefore argues that he must have driven to the location either under the instructions of someone who knew the area or in the company of such a person.
Although the CID allegedly focused heavily on proving that Schaffter’s death was a suicide, it showed little interest in identifying a mysterious person who was reportedly seen walking away from the vicinity of the vehicle.
A cemetery employee said that he had seen a person leaving the area near the vehicle.
During arguments before the court, the CID eventually acknowledged that a suspicious person had been seen leaving the location. This conclusion was reportedly based on footage obtained from a security camera at an institution outside the cemetery.
Nearly three years have passed since the court concluded that Schaffter’s death was not a suicide but a planned killing and ordered the arrest of those responsible.
Nevertheless, the death remains unresolved.
Ranga Rajapaksa
The death of Ranga Nishantha Rajapaksa also generated intense public discussion.
He had served as an Assistant Director of the Department of External Resources at the Ministry of Finance and had been suspended in connection with a cyber-related financial fraud.
The fraud involved a payment of US$2.5 million that was intended for an Australian company as part of a foreign-debt instalment but was instead transferred to an account in the United States.
One or two weeks after the fraud came to light, Rajapaksa died mysteriously at his home in Kuliyapitiya on 30 April.
His death occurred while the Criminal Investigation Department had been repeatedly questioning him.
Although many matters connected to the fraud were obscured following his death, the CID reportedly uncovered a substantial amount of information about the cybercrime through scientific and forensic evidence.
However, many of those allegedly responsible were not identified after the death of Ranga Nishantha Rajapaksa.
His death occurred in unusual circumstances.
Using medical and forensic evidence, the police sought to demonstrate before the court that it was a suicide.
They also relied on the conclusions and recommendations of a four-member medical panel appointed to conduct the post-mortem examination.
Senior Deputy Inspector General of Police and attorney-at-law Ajith Rohana, described in the article as the most senior currently serving police officer by length of service and the officer in charge of the North Western Province, personally appeared before the court and led evidence to show that Rajapaksa’s death was a suicide.
Rajapaksa’s wife is a schoolteacher. On the day of the incident, she had gone to school as usual.
Because the family had planned to travel to Kandy to worship at the Temple of the Tooth, she returned home at approximately 10.50 a.m.
Rajapaksa was the father of two daughters. His elder daughter was studying at university, and only his 15-year-old younger daughter was at home that day.
She told police that at approximately 10.00 a.m., her father had taken a knife and gone towards the lower section of the garden, saying he was going to clear the property.
When he failed to return for a considerable period, his wife, daughter, and a worker who had been tending the family’s betel plot searched for him.
They found Rajapaksa lying in a pool of blood near a banana plant in the garden.
Major blood vessels in both legs and his left arm had reportedly been cut, causing severe blood loss.
The case attracted considerable public discussion over whether a person could cut major blood vessels in three different parts of the body in order to take his own life.
It was argued that the intense pain and blood loss caused by the first wound would make it unusual for the person to inflict a second and third wound.
The public also questioned whether Rajapaksa had genuinely taken his own life using such a painful method, particularly because the knife allegedly used was not extremely sharp.
Senior Deputy Inspector General Ajith Rohana told the court that blood and fingerprints found on the recovered knife matched those of Ranga Rajapaksa.
Police argued before the court that the death had not resulted from external intervention and had been caused by suicide.
Although the death was officially declared a suicide after considering the medico-legal reports, public suspicion has not disappeared.
According to the article, this is because certain matters connected to the US$2.5 million fraud were buried following his death.
Kapila Chandrasena
Another death that attracted intense public discussion, like that of C. D., was the death of Kapila Chandrasena, a former Chief Executive Officer of SriLankan Airlines.
The article states that his death occurred on 8 May 2026 inside the Kollupitiya home of internationally renowned former cricketer Aravinda de Silva.
The death attracted public attention because Chandrasena had been facing legal action over allegations of large-scale corruption involving the purchase of Airbus aircraft during his period at SriLankan Airlines.
It was also notable that he died only a few days after being released on bail following his arrest by the Bribery Commission and remand in custody.
At the time of his death, a court order had reportedly been issued for his rearrest because of questions concerning those who had stood as sureties for his bail.
Both the Criminal Investigation Department and the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption were investigating an alleged US$2 million bribe connected to the purchase of a wide-bodied aircraft fleet for SriLankan Airlines.
The Bribery Commission arrested Chandrasena on 12 March.
An affidavit that he was said to have given to the Bribery Commission generated political controversy.
It allegedly described how part of the bribe money had been distributed among several individuals, including Mahinda Rajapaksa, who was President at the time.
Chandrasena’s lawyers argued that the Bribery Commission had intimidated their client and forced him to write the statement.
They reportedly said the intimidation included references to the suicide of a suspect in a bribery investigation involving the name of Keheliya Rambukwella.
Chandrasena was produced before court and remained in remand custody until 5 May.
After being granted bail and released that day, he died mysteriously on 8 May in a room at Aravinda de Silva’s home.
This occurred after the court had reportedly cancelled his bail order on 7 May and ordered his rearrest because of an issue concerning his sureties.
Although the death was described as a suicide, it was said to have occurred in unusual circumstances.
Chandrasena had allegedly used an exercise resistance band to take his own life.
Police reported to court that the exercise band had been placed over the upper part of a wooden door in the room, with the other end around his neck.
Considering the height of the door, Chandrasena’s own height, and the item allegedly used for hanging, the death was regarded as an unusual suicide.
For that reason, it attracted considerable public discussion.
Although suicide was suspected, the Colombo Crimes Division launched a broad investigation to determine whether there had been a conspiracy or mystery behind the death.
It remains unclear whether the death was a homicide. Body samples were reportedly sent to the Government Analyst to establish the precise cause of death.
Although some of these deaths have been officially described as suicides, they continue to be surrounded by genuine mystery and unanswered questions.
By Ruwan Wediwardhana
