2015 Special Interim Committee report not based on findings of investigation but observations of mine: DEW Gunasekara
By Shehan Chamika Silva
When former MP, D.E.W. Gunasekara was delivering evidence at the Commission today, Counsel Chanaka de Silva who appeared on behalf of the former Central Bank Governor, questioned the relevancy of obtaining an opinion over the incident from ex- chairman of the Special Interim COPE committee, which was appointed in March 2015 to investigate the controversial Bond auction held on February 27, 2015.
The Counsel moved this preliminary objection when Mr. Gunasekara was asked to speak to the commission if there were other findings by him pertaining to the subject matter.
Mr. De Silva was on the view that even though the witness had delivered his evidence in relation with the 42 evidence recorded during the investigation of the special interim committee, allowing an opinion would be utterly irrelevant to the Commission which is on facts finding, since Mr. Gunasekara was not an expert into the subject matter, and that would be unfair to other parties.
However, allowing Mr. Gunasekara to speak to the commission, the Commissioners held that they would check up such opinion from the witness and if so would not be recorded as a fair move towards all parties.
Nevertheless, Mr. Gunasekara ascertained that despite if the Commission in consideration of the interim report prepared by him earlier, it was irrelevant his personal opinion into the matter.
With thirteen members of parliament, the Special Interim COPE committee had been appointed including Mr. Gunasekara as the chairman of it to inquire into the alleged irregularities occurred at the thirty year bond auction held on February 27, 2015 and whether it had actually incurred financial loss to the state.
During the leading evidence from the witness, Gunasekara conducted by Additional Solicitor General Dappulada Livera PC, it was revealed that statements were recorded under oath from 42 witnesses in relation with bond issue between May 26 – June 23 by the interim committee.
Later, based on the arguments happened during the parliament sessions by both government and opposition members, the Hon. Speaker had informed him to prepare a final report on the findings of the interim committee.
However, the interim committee was still investigating on the matter at that time and I replied to the Hon. Speaker over the inability to submit such a report, then the Hon. Speaker asked me to submit at least an interim report in parliament on the interim committee’s investigation, Mr. Gunasekara said.
Subsequently, chairman, Gunasekara had prepared an interim report on the investigation and had sent it to the members of the Committee for their observation. When the interim committee gathered on June 26 to decide on the interim report, three members out of seven who were presented at the gathering had objected to submit an interim report to the speaker at that particular time.
However, during these discussions, on June 26, the members had come to know the dissolve of the parliament and the proceeding were discontinued.
“It was not an interim report, which was consented by other members of the interim Committee nor based on the findings of the investigation conducted till June 23, 2015 by the Committee. It was purely an observation of mine over the investigation, but nothing else”, he revealed to the Commission.
For the further legal proceedings of the Commission, ASG also verified the listed 42 witnesses who had delivered evidence at the Special Interim Committee from the witness.
Subsequently, the Commission comprised with Supreme Court Judges Kankanithanthri T. Chitrasiri, Prasanna Sujeewa Jayawardena and former Deputy Auditor General Kandasamy Velupillai to inquire into the Treasury Bond issue, decided to resume the inquiry tomorrow with two CB officials, Deputy General Manager of Human Resources, Ms. Kalyani Gunathilake and a former Additional Governor Mr. Karunathilake.
No comments:
Post a Comment