AAG De Livera has ‘some other questions’ to ask from PM

<< ASG Kodagoda says PTL is a criminal organization

By Shehan Chamika Silva

Acting Attorney General Dappula De Livera at the conclusion of PCoI proceedings said yesterday he would also have some other questions to ask from the Prime Minister apart from the questions put forward by the Commission.

Responding to the statement made by the Presidential Commission of Inquiry, Acting Attorney General Dappula De Livera also expressed his observations.

AAG De Livera was of the view that his team of Counsel of the Attorney General’s Department assisted the Commission under Section 23 of the Commission of Inquiry Act and spearheaded the investigation pertaining to the bond inquiry with the concurrence of the Commission, as they always kept the Commission informed about the investigation.

Moving the fact that the Attorney General’s Department had to investigate the matter with limited manpower as there were only three regular CID officers supporting the investigation, AAG De Livera said that the lack of manpower was a significant matter as they had to face numerous difficulties in the investigation process.

“I must place this on record that I have had the fullest cooperation of the entire team of the Attorney General’s Department and this effort would not have been possible if not for the team. So we played as a real team, irrespective of the seniority, all the officers fully cooperated in this endeavor”, AAG De Livera said.

He said despite all odds that they had to face, the Attorney General’s Department officials and the team were able to unearth and present cogent evidence.

AAG De Livera also said that they did not have the cooperation of the all the witness whom they had interviewed during the investigation.

“I think for the team the job is not over, the task is still outstanding and as far as this Commission is concerned our job is still not over. In terms of the evidence that transpired during the proceedings, we have submitted a 20 witnesses list to the Commission dated October 10, 2017 and out of that 20, only some  of the witnesses have now testified before the Commission. 

But still having considered the material we had gathered so far from the interviews with witnesses, these listed witnesses are necessary. The Prime Minister is also listed as a material witness”, AAG De Livera said.

AAG De Livera also said that he would also have some other questions to ask from the Prime Minister apart from the questions put forward to the Prime Minister by the Commission.

He said that the investigation and the interviewing of the individuals will continue in expectation of eliciting new material to the inquiry despite the conclusion of the hearings.

The AAG emphasized the dedication of the officials of the Attorney General’s Department and the officials of the CBSL.

“There were officer who spent 16 hours of 24 hours to this inquiry”, he said.

Additional Solicitor General Yasantha Kodagoda also concluding the proceedings made a statement thereafter.

ASG Kodagoda said that it was the first time in the history that the Attorney General’s Department able to present data extracted from phone devices to a Commission.

He also stated that the order made by the Commission with regard to the extraction of data would also go down as a good precedent in legal history.

ASG Kodagoda said that the extraction was only possible due to the several experts obtained by the CID, who were not attached to the Commission.

“I must say this. We are continuing this process to unearth some more material, which we hope to present to the Commission if that opportunity will be given by the Commission”, ASG Kodagoda said.

He also said “If we don’t get that opportunity, this would then be a half baked cake. Therefore we would like the President and the General public to receive a fully baked cake in the form of a report. So, please do give us that opportunity of presenting that additional telephone details”

“Several months ago, I said the main corporate entity of Perpetual Treasuries Ltd was a criminal organization. But I was shouted out by some learned counsel when I said it three months ago. As at today, based on the cogent evidence placed before the Commission it is evident that PTL is a criminal organization”, ASG Kodagoda said.

 

Anika flees country due to threats

<< ASG Yasantha Kodagoda informs Commission Anika’s brother received threats from Shanil Neththikumara

<< He owns casinos and Ravi Karunanayake is his uncle, says ASG Kodagoda 

By Shehan Chamika Silva

Additional Solicitor General Yasantha Kodagoda yesterday informed the PCoI that Anika Wijesuriya, who previously testified before the Commission with regard to leasing out of a Penthouse by Arjun Aloysius in which former Finance Minister Ravi Karunanayake’s family resided, had fled the country due to numerous threats levelled against her.

ASG Kodagoda said that he earlier, informed the Commission that the Attorney General’s team had predicted the threat to her life and named her as a witness under the Witness Protection Act.

Additional Solicitor General Yasantha Kodagoda revealed this while he was informing the Commission about a complaint received by them from the elder brother of Anika Wijesooriya as he was threatened by one Shanil Neththikumara recently.

"He owns casinos and Ravi Karunanayake is his uncle. He had threatened Wijith Wijesuriya the brother of Anika. Anika has now fled the country and an investigation into this must be carried out as it is an offence under the Penal Code and the Witness Protection Act" he said.

“Neththikumara is a person who seems to be acting on behalf of the person whose name was implicated during Anika’s evidence”, ASG Kodagoda said.

PCoI concludes recording of evidence

<< List of questions forwarded to the Prime Minister

By Shehan Chamika Silva 

The Presidential Commission of Inquiry (PCoI) concluded its recording of Evidence yesterday stating that it had forwarded a list of questions to the Prime Minister and if necessary would request him to attend a hearing to seek further clarifications.

However, the Commission informed the Attorney Generals team that in the event new evidence surfaces they would commence proceedings with a one-day notice.

Chairman of the Commission Justice K.T. Chitrasiri made a statement bring the proceedings of the Commission to a conclusion.

The full statement follows: 

The recording of evidence before this Commission of Inquiry commenced on 21st February 2017. All hearings have been held in public. There have been 120 days on which hearings were held. 63 witnesses have given evidence.

The evidence of some witnesses spanned several days. Over 450 documents have been produced in evidence, with several of these documents consisting of a large number of pages.

In the event that, after today, any new material is identified and the Commissioners are of the view that, such new material must be placed before this Commission of Inquiry as formal evidence, a further hearing will be held.

Subject to that, the Commission of Inquiry has now completed the hearing of evidence, except for recording the evidence of the Prime Minister, if it is required.

In that regard, we consider it relevant to state that, the Commission of Inquiry has previously forwarded a list of questions, in the nature of interrogatories, to the Prime Minister and has requested the Prime Minister to provide his answers, by way of an affidavit.

If required, a list of further questions will be forwarded to the Prime Minister. Upon receipt of the affidavit, the Commission of Inquiry will peruse its contents and, if necessary, request the Prime Minister to attend a hearing of the Commission of Inquiry to give evidence or request the Prime Minister to provide further clarification, as this Commission of Inquiry considers necessary.

If any further hearing is to be held, a notice to such effect will be displayed at the Office of the Commission of Inquiry before the day of any such hearing.

The Commissioners now have, before us, the task of carefully studying and analyzing all the oral and documentary evidence that has been presented and preparing our Report to be submitted to the President.

This will be a complex, arduous and time consuming exercise. Therefore, we will be compelled to request His Excellency to extend the warrant issued to the Commission of Inquiry which, at present, is due to end on 27th October 2017.

In the meantime, counsel who have appeared before the Commission of Inquiry are given the opportunity to tender their written submissions, if any, on or before 25th October 2017. In the event the warrant issued to the Commission of Inquiry is extended before that date, any written submissions may be tendered within a further week from 25th October 2017.

The Commissioners wish to thank the team of officers of the Attorney Generals Department, who assisted the Commission of Inquiry.

They have worked long hours and have demonstrated sustained dedication to their task of presenting evidence, which had to be gathered from a very large amount of documents and after consultations with many persons. The Commissioners deeply appreciate their efforts and thank these officers.

The Commissioners wish to thank learned counsel who appeared before the Commission of Inquiry on behalf of persons who wished to be represented under and in terms of section 16 of the Commissions of Inquiry Act.

The Commissioners appreciate the cooperation given by these counsel to the Commission of Inquiry in completing the time consuming and often difficult task of conducting these proceedings.

The Commissioners wish to thank the officers of the Criminal Investigation Department who carried out investigations and recorded the statements of witnesses and other persons. They have made a significant and valuable contribution to the efforts of the Commission of Inquiry.

Finally, the Commissioners wish to place on record our gratitude to Mr. S.Udugamasuriya, Attorney-at-Law, who has functioned as the Secretary of this Commission of Inquiry and to all the members of the Staff of this Commission of Inquiry for their cooperation and hard work, which has enabled this Commission of Inquiry to function.

PTL net inflows happened mainly through transactions with Govt. entities

By Shehan Chamika Silva

Out of the total net inflow (Rs. 11 billion) of Perpetual Treasuries Ltd during 2015 -2016 in bond disposals, Rs. 8.5 billion came through from the transactions with Government institutions.

During yesterday’s Proceedings, Deputy Solicitor General Milinda Gunatilleke led another witness, Suresh Sedara, who is an Assistant Director of CBSL, through a document prepared by the witness, which is relating to the calculation made by him regarding PTL’s net inflow during the time period of February 2015 to March 2016.

This computation was based on the documents provided by PTL itself to the Commission.

There were seven ISINs (International Securities Identification Number) that had been investigated relating to PTL’s disposal of bonds.

DSG Gunatilleke submitting relevant documents moved that out of the PTL’s total inflows from the counter parties in relation to these bonds, PTL gained net inflows largely through Government institutions.

Total net inflow of PTL- Rs. 11,148,221,479.99 (Rs. 11 billion)

< Through Government institution (EPF, ETF SLIC, NSB, Mahapola and UGC Provident Fund)- Rs. 8.5 billion

< Through other counter parties- Rs. 2.6 billion

Aloysius` Assistant says `I dont know who RK, AM, Hon PM are´

<< Justice Prasanna Jayawardena cautions Aloysius PA Steve Samuel that action would be taken against him if it was proved that he lied under oath

<< SSC Dr. Avanti Perera continuously questions Samuel as to who were referred to as RK, AM, Arjun M, Ravi K, Hon PM, A Mahendran and Ravi Karunanayake

<< ASG Yasantha Kodagoda says Steve Samuel is lying under oath

<< Samuel breaks into sobs and says his mother had a stroke in the morning and his brother is handicapped


By Shehan Chamika Silva


The Bond Commission today observed that the personal Assistant of Arjun Aloysius, Steve Samuel was lying before the Commission and said that in the event they found him to be doing so appropriate action would be taken against him.

Justice Prasanna Jayawardena made this remark after Samuel repeatedly denied any knowledge of the contents of the text messages sent by him which referred to RK, AM, Arjun M, Ravi K, Hon PM, A Mahendran and Ravi Karunanayake.

“No I dont know he said each time he was questioned on the text messages by Dr. Avanthi Perera Senior State Counsel.

At the end of the evidence Justice Jayawardena sarcastically said:  We would like to have him (Samuel ) educate us on how to forget things. You know its a remarkable skill.

At the onset of the today`s proceedings, Arjun Aloysius personal assistant, Steve Samuel testified before the Commission regarding several text messages and e-mails which were extracted from Aloysius phone by the CID.

These text messages and e-mails had been sent by Steve Samuel to his boss, Aloysius.

According to the witness, Samuel had joined Perpetual Capital Holdings in November 2016 and had served as the personal assistant of Arjun Aloysius and thereafter Geoffrey Aloysius.

Senior State Counsel Dr. Avanti Perera questioned the witness showing several text messages and emails.

Senior State Counsel Dr Avanti Perera: These text messages were sent by you, right?

Witness Steve Samuel: I cannot recall exactly.

Then the senior state counsel read the first text message.

Witness: Yes, that was a text message sent by me to Aloysius.

Text message 1 (Serial number 8309)  Samuel to Aloysius- Date : November 28, 2016

“Reminder to request Hon PM and RK to get a copy of the monetary board meeting/papers need to be submitted today 28

Senior State Counsel Dr. Avanti Perera: This message was sent by you, right?

Witness: I cannot recall exactly. But I think I got a call from the general line that day and I was asked to send this message.

Justice Prasanna Jayawardena: Who called you through the general line?

Witness: I cannot recall that exactly at this moment.

Justice Jayawardena: Was it Arjun Aloysius or anybody else?

W: I dont know. Honestly I cannot remember.

At this moment, when Counsel Chanaka de Silva asked the Commission whether the date of the text message was relevant with the proceedings, Justice Jayawardena said This was the date on which some event happened.

Additional Solicitor General Yasantha Kodagoda at this moment said the day was relating to Perpetual Treasuries Ltd. And that was the day that regulatory decisions had been taken against PTL by the CBSL.”

At this moment the witness said that he had no clue whatsoever regarding the company activities of the PTL and he just noted down things only that were asked to be done by Aloysius.

Justice Jayawardena replying said that nobody would blame him doing his job as the personal assistant of Aloysius and the Commission only requires him to answer the questions precisely.

Senior State Counsel Dr Avanti Perera: Do you understand what the abbreviation Hon PM stands for?

W: No

Senior State Counsel Dr Avanti Perera: If I suggest to you that it was the Prime Minister, would you accept that?

W: I cannot accept that because I didnt know what that meant, so, I cannot comment on that.

Senior State Counsel Dr Avanti Perera: Would you know what abbreviation RK stood for?

W: No

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: So, your position is you received instructions through the general phone line and you noted them down and sent back to Aloysius, right?

W: Yes

Text message 2 (Serial number 9039)  Samuel to Aloysius- Date : December 1, 2016

GM Chairman, hope you had a very good meeting with ‘RK’, just update when you and I can meet before you leave tonight

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Now, in this text message you have mentioned hope you had a very good meeting with RK. Is it your position still that you dont know who RK is?

W: No. I dont know

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Could you explain why you would say hope you had a good meeting?

W: That is the normal way I asked as the personal assistant

Justice Jayawardena: obviously, you would have known that Aloysius was having a meeting with Mr. RK or Mrs RK, right?

W: I dont know whether it was Mr. or Mrs.

Justice Jayawardena: As a primary dealer, Aloysius would have dealt with the Ministry of Finance regularly, right?

W: That I dont know. He doesnt tell me about his meetings. And I have never gone to his meetings.

Justice Jayawardena: So, in any event you knew that Aloysius had a meeting with some RK, right?

W: Yes

J: Who could be that significant RK?

W: That I dont know

Text message 3 (Serial number 6364) Aloysius to Samuel- Date :

Steve please remind me to talk to RK on two matters when I meet him tomorrow.

1. PPP units set up
2. Two meetings with PM tomorrow at 4 with US treasurer

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Do you know who RK is?

W: No

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Do you know who PM is?

W: No

Justice Jayawardena: PPP stands for Public Private Partnerships, was that correct?

Witness in a hesitant manner said that he doesnt know.

Justice Jayawardena: This text message says about a meeting with US treasurer. So, who would meet US Treasurer?

W: I dont know I was not in this country before I joined the job. (He said he was a cabin crew staff employee of an airline in the Middle East for 25 years)

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: In your statement given to the police at the Commissions premises you have responded to a question as to who was PM and RK. You had said that Im not sure but perhaps it could be the Hon. Prime Minister, so now would you accept that it was Prime Minister?

W: I cant accept it. That is why I had said perhaps, because I dont know. Nobody told me that PM is Hon. Prime Minister.

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Anyway, would you accept that RK and PM are persons with whom Aloyius had contacts?

W: Because as per my messages it looks so (in a hesitant manner told).

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Who else would stand for PM in your opinion?

W: I would not know. I just noted abbreviations pointed out by Aloysius.

At this point perusing the forensic extraction document Justice Prasanna Jayawardena in a sarcastic manner added amusement to the query asking the witness Who is this Rohitha Abeygoonawardena? Who would that be? RA?

Text message 4  and an E-mail correspondence (Serial number 4050) Samuel to Aloysius- Date : November 6, 2016

Reminder: follow up meeting with Ravi Karunanayake at 9 a.m.

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: What are the initials of that person in this text message?

Witness was silent and perusing the document the State Counsel again asked.

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: What are the two letters in that name?
Witness was not answering

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Was that RK, right?

W: Yes

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Now looking at this message would you be able to refer RK to the same person as Ravi Karunanayake?

W: I cannot acknowledge that because how would I know. I was given only abbreviations as RK but here it was told to me as Ravi Karunanayake so I mentioned it

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Now, here Aloysius was going to have a follow up meeting with Ravi Karunanayake, so it was a follow up meeting, right? There would have been a meeting before that, right?

W: He has told me to give a reminder about a follow up meeting which I did

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Do you know who Ravi Karunanayake is in this country?

W: At the moment yes. He was the former Finance Minister.

Two text messages 5 & 6 (Serial numbers 4020 and 4023) Samuel to Aloysius- Date : November 8, 2016

Serial numbers 4020

Reminder: Next meeting at 7 a.m. with Ravi K 

Serial numbers 4023 (same text)

Reminder: Next meeting at 7 a.m. with Ravi K

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: These messages were sent by you, right?

W: Yes

Text message 7 Samuel to Aloysius- Date : November 9, 2016

Ravi K tonight

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Is this message correct?

W: Yes

Text message 8  (Serial number 3842)Samuel to Aloysius- Date : November 17, 2016

Reminder a meeting with RK at 7.30 pm


SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Now it appears that Arjun Aloysius had met RK or Ravi Karunanayake whoever that may be, on several times in November 2016, is that correct?

W: Yes

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Do you know what those meetings were about?

W: No

Text message 9  (Serial number 3769)Samuel to Aloysius- Date : November 22, 2016

Reminder: I do have it on my notes for today RK/ TO DO LIST 

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Do you have any idea what this list was?

W: No

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Do you know who constructed the RK list?

W: No 

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: So, it was not by you?

W: No

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: If that list was not prepared by you, then it appears that this already existed before you came into employment at PTL, is that correct?

W: That I cannot comment

Text message 10  (Serial number 3766)Samuel to Aloysius- Date : November 22, 2016

We have the A Mahendran to do list

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Do you know who this A Mahendran was?

W: Anjali Mahendran (daughter of Arjuna Mahendran and the wife of Aloysius)

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: You are very sure about that, right?

W: Yes

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: So, in this case you are very familiar with the abbreviation as opposed to RK, right?

W: I know Anjali Mahendran

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: But this says A Mahendran?

W: I call her A Mahendran

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: So you call her face to face A Mahendran was it?

W: No. I meant when I note it down

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: And would that be the only person that you would write in abbreviation as ‘A Mahendran’?

W: Yes

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: So, since you are very familiar with this Anjali Mahendran, what is this to do list to Anjali Mahendran?

At this point Presidents Counsel Anuja Premaratne objected to the question and said that was something relating to his clients wife.

The Commission also emphasized that it has nothing to do with the matters relating to Aloysius and his wife.

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Do you know the name of Anjali Mahendrans father?

W: Arjuna Mahendran

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: So, could it not be him?

W: I dont know because I dont do any correspondence for Arjuna Mahendran

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: That is so, but this appears to be a file you are reminding Arjun Aloysius about? Anyway we will come to that.

Text message 11  (Serial number 3754)Samuel to Aloysius- Date : November 22, 2016

Chairman, awaiting an update on today ‘to do list for Arjuna M and RK

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Now, this text message says Arjuna M, In this case who would be Arjuna M?

W: I dont know

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Didnt you just say that you are aware of the father of Anjali Mahendran is Arjuna Mahendran?

W: Yes

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: So, would this not be reference to Arjun Mahendran?

W: This just says Arjuna M so I cannot admit that it was Arjuna Mahendran

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: So, when it was A Mahendran you are familiar that it was Anjali Mahendran but when it was Arjuna M you do not know who that was, is that your position?

W: Yes

Text message 12  Samuel to Aloysius- Date : November 22, 2016

Legal letter to be delivered to Hon. PMs office 

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Again is that your position that you dont know who Hon. PM is?

W: No

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Do you what Hon. Stands for in the abbreviation?

W: Not clearly 

Justice Jayawardena: Now, you have worked with Aloysius for the last few years, right? Other than the time period you were in hospital, you would have worked with Aloysius, right?

W: Yes

Justice Jayawardena: You would have been talking with him on what things to done for him as well, right?

W: Yes

Justice Jayawardena: And you would have also told him that you were summoned to give evidence as well, right?

W: Yes

Justice Jayawardena: And he knew that you were coming to give evidence and we were told that you were here through PTL, right?

W: Yes 

Text message 13 (Serial number 3139)  Samuel to Aloysius- Date : January 3, 2017

Meeting at 10 p.m. with RK/new to do list file and AM to do list file will be sent home

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Is this Aloysius home you are referring to?

W: Yes

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Would that be around Flower Road?

W: Yes


Text message 13 (Serial number 3125)  Samuel to Aloysius- Date : January 3, 2017

Im just leaving office and going to your flower road residence to deliver both AM and RK files and try to catch Dilshad at the Ministry

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Who is Dilshad at the Ministry whom you were trying to catch?

W: Friend of mine and he was in the Ministry of Finance 

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Do you know what the designation of him is?

W: He was an assistant 

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Whose?

W: Not sure. But he was at the Finance Ministry

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: And the Finance Minister at that time was Ravi Karunanayake, right?

W: Yes

Text message 14 (Serial number 3082)  Aloysius to Samuel- Date : January 4, 2017

Did you by any chance managed to locate the old RK file 

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: So, it appears to be an old file, right?

W: It appears to be. But I have not been exposed to these files.

Text message 15 (Serial number 3123) 
amuel to Aloysius- Date : January 4, 2017

Just saw you at Ministry dashing into the elevator have a great meeting.

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: So, would that be again at the Ministry of Finance?

Witness was silent

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Because you referred Dilshad at the Ministry.

W: Could be the Finance Ministry

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Now you say just saw you, would that be Aloysius?

W: Im not sure

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: You say Have a great meeting, so do you know what that meeting was about?

W: No

Text message 16 (Serial number 3111)  Samuel to Aloysius   2017 January 

Good luck with the RK meeting and I hope Mr. Arjuna has a good meeting in this evening. I saw Governor Coomaraswami at the Ministry waiting for the meeting with RK then I saw Arjuna getting into lift.

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Who is this Arjuna? 

W: I dont know

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: You say good meeting

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Now who is this Lasantha (his name transpired earlier and was a Personal Assistant at the Finance Ministry)?

W: I dont know

Justice Jayawardena: Now, all these texts are from your phone, right?

W: Yes

Justice Jayawardena: You have no doubt about that, right?

W: I cannot recall them exactly 

Justice Jayawardena: These are extracted from your phone, so at the time you sent these messages you knew what you were talking about, right?

W: Yes

Text message 17  (Serial number)  Samuel to Aloysius   2017 January 

As per Dilshad there is no London trip scheduled anywhere 

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Whose schedule are you referring?

Witness was silent

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Could that be the Minister of Finance?

W: Not sure

At this moment Justice Jayawardena asked Additional Solicitor General Yasantha Kodagoda to put the relevant text messages to the witness as he had admitted that he had sent them.

Now witness admits that he had originated the text messages and sent them to Aloysius, so are we to now blindly accept the fact that he had sent them without knowing the meaning of the content, ASG Kodagoda asked.

Justice Jayawardena: It is very clear to us exactly who he was talking about.

ASG Kodagoda: And he is lying under oath.

Justice Jayawardena: We will take the appropriate steps on that. 

ASG Kodagoda: If the commission is so aware of the fact that he is misleading the Commission, then it would be fine.

Justice Jayawardena: It is very clear.

ASG Kodagoda: That, he is lying.

Justice Jayawardena: That we cannot say now, because that would accuse us for prejudging, but his evidence is very clear.

Justice Jayawardena then questioned the witness again and asked whether he knew at the time he was sending these messages about the content and the people he was referring to. The witness answer was affirmative. The witness also said that he cannot recall them at the moment.

Text message 18  (Serial number 3130)  Samuel to Aloysius   2017 January 

Meeting with Saman Indika Kumara at 5.30 p.m.

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Do you know who Saman Indika Kumara was? (former EPF dealer who was interdicted later)

W: No

Justice Jayawardena: Now, Saman Kumaras name transpired eight or nine times in these text messages, surely you would know who he was? 

W: No

Justice Jayawardena: Havent you read the news papers recently?

W: Not really

Justice Jayawardena: You dont read newspapers?

W: No

Justice Jayawardena: Are you aware that Saman Kumara was working at EPF?

W: No

Justice Jayawardena: Be aware that you are giving evidence under oath and be cautious of the fact that if you lied under oath and if we found that we will take appropriate actions.

W: Im not lying

Text message 19 Samuel to Aloysius   2017 January

Saman is already in the office to meet with you at 3.30 p.m.

Justice K.T. Chitrasiri: But anyway this text message shows that a person called Saman Kumara had come to visit Aloysius but you dont know him?

W: Yes

Text message 20 Samuel to Aloysius   2017 January

Reminder: 5.30 P.M. a meeting with AM and Lasantha at flower road residency 

Text message 21 Samuel to Aloysius   2017 January 6

A meeting with Saman Kumara

At this moment after perusing the extraction further, Justice Jayawardena asked the witness: Who is this Ravi Karunamurthi?

W: Dont know

Justice Jayawardena: He also had met Arjun Aloysius many times, was he a primary dealer?

W: I dont know

Justice Jayawardena: Who is Chanuka Ratwatte, who had met with Aloysius many times? Was he the man who owns the Entrust (Primary Dealer)

W: I dont know

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: In summary, on several times in January 2017, former EPF dealer Saman Kumara had been scheduled to meet Aloysius, right?

Witness didnt answer.

Text message 21 Samuel to Aloysius   2017 January 6

Update- Saman Kumara stated you need him to speak with chairman of lotteries board asked if you would be making the meeting or .

Justice K.T. Chitrasiri: Now this says that Saman Kumara stated, so stated to whom? He spoke to you, right?

W: Yes

Justice Jayawardena: Who was Saman Kumara?

W: I dont know (Justices smiled in a sarcastic manner)


Text message 22 Samuel to Aloysius   2017 January 

Important meeting with Naveen 

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Do you know who Naveen is?

W: No

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Have you ever heard of a person called Naveen Anuradha (NSB dealer)?

W: No

E-mail correspondence - Samuel to Aloysius   2017 March 29

Subject: Meeting boss/RK/reminder/proposed auction for the week 

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: What is this proposed auction?

W: I dont know

SSC Dr Avanti Perera was of the view that there was a Treasury-bill auction on March 29 and a treasury-bond auction on April 4, 2017.

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: Finally, do you not say that Aloysius had meetings and exchanges of documents relating to business transactions of PTL with the person by the name of RK, Hon PM, AM, broader reference to those names would be Ravi Karunanayake, Prime Minster and Arjuna Mahendran also appears in these text messages including dealers like Saman Indika Kumara, right?

W: I cant admit that because I dont know the PTLs trading deals

SSC Dr Avanti Perera: But you arranged these meetings

W: That was my job

Justice Jayawardena: You wrote these text messages on instructions of Aloysius and other people regarding the meetings and other activities of Arjun Aloysius, where he meets RK, AM, PM, right?

W: Yes

J: So, There is no reason to believe such things did not happen, right?

W: Yes

J: At any point did Aloysius dispute that these meetings were rubbish?

W: No

J: Who maintained the RK and AM files?

W: I dont know

J: Definitely that is within the knowledge of Arjun Aloysius, right?

W: Yes probably

J: Therefore, Arjun Aloysius maintained files under RK and AM


At this point Dr Avanti Perera pointing another text message showed to the Commission to verify the fact that the witness was lying.

Samuel to Aloysius  

Saman Kumara could not contacted so a message copied to Amals phone too

SSC Dr Avanti Perera told the Commission at this point that Amal is the brother of Saman Kumara.

After the questioning of the Attorney Generals Department concluded, Counsel Chanaka de Silva who appeared on behalf of Arjuna Mahendran drew the attention of the Commission to text messages in the extracted report reflecting about a meeting that had been taken place with Arjun Aloysius and current Governor Coomaraswami as well.

Counsel Jeewantha Jayatilleke, who was appearing on behalf of Steve Samuel, then moved to explain the current situation of the witness as Samuels mother had been admitted to Durdens Hospital over a minor stroke.

At this moment, when he was questioned by his counsel about his mother, Steve Samuel broke down into sobs while sitting in the witness dock. Samuel said that he is the only person who is there to take care of his family as his brother is handicapped.
Samuel pleaded that he was unaware about the names that transpired in the text messages as he had only done what he was asked to do.

He also said that he had not maintained any of files on behalf of PTL hence there was no file in the custody of him at the moment.

After the conclusion of the evidence of Steve Samuel, while he was getting off from the witness dock, Justice Prasanna Jayawardena in a sarcastic manner quipped to Samuels Counsel Bring him (Samuel) here one day to educate us also on how to forget things, its a remarkable talent.

Justice Jayawardena’s leg fractured in car accident

 

• Says he will continue to participate in Commissions proceedings

 

By Shehan Chamika Silva

 

Yesterday’s proceedings commenced one hour late as PCoI member Justice Prasanna Jayawardena came late in crutches as his leg had been injured. Justice Jayawardena had difficulty in getting into the bench as he had to rely on the crutches.

 

During the proceedings, however, Justice Jayawardena explained as to what happened to his leg.

 

The Justice said:  “While I was having my evening walk on Friday (13) within the premises of the apartment I was residing, a car accidentally hit me, and as a result my ankle is fractured. My doctor will do what is necessary in due course. However, in the meantime this commission of inquiry will proceed with my full participation.”

Samuel discharged from hospital; PCoI asks him to come today

 

By Shehan Chamika Silva

 

At the end of the yesterday’s proceedings, Justice Prasanna Jayawardena informed a counsel who was appearing on behalf of Arjun Aloysius’ Personal Assistant Steve Samuel that the Commission wants Samuel to be present before the Commission today (17) as he was discharged from the hospital.

 

However, Counsel Jeewantha Jayatileke who was appearing for Steve Samuel was not present before the Commission.

 

An assisting counsel thereafter speaking to the Commission said that he will make every endeavor to communicate the Commission’s directive to his client.

PTL’s inter-group transactions concealed ultimate destination of funds: Senior Banker

DSG Gunatillke said a transaction amounting to Rs. 1 million was identical to an amount that transpired in a phone conversation played before the Commission which speaks of a payment given to one ‘Little Johnny’ Senior Banker and current Monetary Board member Nihal Fonseka says EPF and CBSL suffered millions of losses due to EPF not bidding up to its full potential at the Primary Auction but purchasing the same T-bonds in the Secondary Market from PTL   By Shehan Chamika Silva Testifying before the PCoI today, current Monetary Board member and senior banker, Mr. Nihal Fonseka said that the ‘routine’ in which Perpetual Treasuries Ltd transferred funds through its related group companies was to conceal the ultimate destination that the payments were intended to. At the onset of yesterday’s proceedings, current member of the Monetary Board (of CBSL) Mr. Nihal Fonseka testified before the Presidential Commission of Inquiry (PCoI). Deputy Solicitor General Milinda Gunatilleke led the evidence producing several bank statements and swift messages relating to Perpetual Treasuries Ltd and its related group of companies. DSG Gunatilleke submitted those documents through the witness to show that PTL had transferred money to its related companies. On the same day (most of the times) the related company had sent cash cheques to PTL and the officials at PTL had kept the money on PTL CEO Kasun Palisena’s chair after encashing the cheques from relevant banks. The following three grids show how these transactions had been carried out. 1 -Perpetual Treasuries Ltd had transferred a total of funds amounting Rs. 15.6 million (through Union Bank account) to Perpetual Capital Holdings (2015-16 period). -Thereafter Perpetual Capital Holdings had drawn cash cheques corresponding to the payments it received from PTL. (Cheques were signed mainly by Arjun Aloysius, Geoffrey Aloysius and Surendran Muthuraja who was the Chairman of W.M Mendis & Company) -Cash cheques had been sent to PTL office again. -PTL officers had encashed the cheques at different times. -The money had been then given to PTL CEO Kasun Palisena - PTL officials were unaware what happened to the money thereafter 2 -Perpetual Treasuries Ltd had transferred a total of funds amounting to Rs. 44 million (through Pan Asia Bank account) to Perpetual Capital Pvt (2015-16 period) -Thereafter Perpetual Capital Pvt had drawn cash cheques corresponding to the payments it received from PTL. (Cheques were signed mainly by Arjun Aloysius, Geoffrey Aloysius and Surendran Muthuraja) -Cash cheques had been sent to PTL office again. -PTL officers had encashed the cheques at different times. -The money then given to PTL CEO Kasun Palisena - PTL officials unaware what happened to the money thereafter 3 -Perpetual Treasuries Ltd had transferred a total of funds amounting to Rs. 79 million (through Bank of Ceylon) to W.M. Mendis & Company (2015-16) -Thereafter W.M. Mendis & Company had drawn cash cheques corresponding to the payments it received from PTL. (Cheques were signed mainly by Arjun Aloysius, Geoffrey Aloysius and Surendran Muthuraja) -Cash cheques had been sent to PTL office again. -PTL officers had encashed the cheques at different times. -The money had then been given to PTL CEO Kasun Palisena - PTL officials unaware what happened to the money thereafter These transactions which took place between PTL and its related companies were regarded as the ‘netted off’ transactions by Kasun Palisena. It was revealed that the payments made by PTL to its related companies were born out of these netted off transactions. During this questioning, DSG Gunatillke also pointed out a transaction amounting to Rs. 1 million and said that it was a significant fund transfer which is identical to an amount that transpired in a phone conversation played before the Commission which speaks of a payment given to one ‘Little Johnny’. DSG Gunatilleke then asked the witness several questions on the routine that PTL adopted to transfer money as the witness was an expert in the banking industry. DSG Gunatilleke: Is this how a corporate entity would withdraw its money? Witness Nihal Fonseka: No DSG Gunatillke: What could be the purpose of having such a routine to withdraw cash? Witness: In my opinion the person who was originating the fund transfers would have wanted to conceal the ultimate destination of the money. At this moment Justice Prasanna Jayawardena adding some amusement to the query said ‘Ultimate destination other than a chair.’ DSG Gunatilleke then questioned the witness on the auctions held in March 2016 and the state banks meeting which was said to have been called by then Finance Minister Ravi Karunanayake before the auctions. When questioned by the DSG, the witness said that state banks biding at lower rates had material effect in the auctions. Referring to a particular ISIN (International Securities Identification Number) advertised on March 29, 2016 auction, the witness said that there was a loss of Rs. 550 million to the government from that particular ISIN mainly due to EPF not bidding at the auction with its full of potential. March 29, 2016 auction -EPF bids Rs. 1 billion at the Primary Auction for a particular ISIN at a price of Rs. 87 for a Rs. 100 bond. -The settlement date of that auction was on April 1, and the EPF carries an excess of Rs. 9.9 billion funds on the settlement day. -However, without bidding at the Primary Auction and having possessed enough funds, the EPF buys Rs. 10 billion worth of bonds bearing the same ISIN in the secondary market after a week from the auction (first week of April 2016) at a price of Rs. 95 and 97 from PTL. -EPF had bid a volume of Rs. 1 billion at a rate of 13.6% at the auction for that particular ISIN. -But the CBSL needed to accept up to Rs. 10 billion at the auction. -The rest of the accepted bids were at a rate of 14.8% largely from PTL. The witness was of the view that if the EPF had bid at the Primary Auction a larger amount (Rs. 10 billion) without buying the same bonds in the secondary market, the CBSL could have obtained the borrowings at a lesser rate (13.6%) without accepting the amount at a higher rate (14.8%) at the auction. According to the witness it was revealed that by buying the same bonds just after the primary auction in the secondary market by the EPF it had incurred losses to itself while at the same time the CBSL had also incurred losses for accepting bids at a higher rate while having the opportunity to obtain them at a lower rate from EPF. Samuel discharged from hospital; PCoI asks him to come today At the end of the yesterday’s proceedings, Justice Prasanna Jayawardena informed a counsel who was appearing on behalf of Arjun Aloysius’ Personal Assistant Steve Samuel that the Commission wants Samuel to be present before the Commission today (17) as he was discharged from the hospital. However, Counsel Jeewantha Jayatileke who was appearing for Steve Samuel was not present before the Commission. An assisting counsel thereafter speaking to the Commission said that he will make every endeavor to communicate the Commission’s directive to his client. Justice Jayawardena’s leg fractured in car accident Says he will continue to participate in Commission's proceedings  Yesterday’s proceedings commenced one hour late as PCoI member Justice Prasanna Jayawardena came late in crutches as his leg had been injured. Justice Jayawardena had difficulty in getting into the bench as he had to rely on the crutches. During the proceedings, however, Justice Jayawardena explained as to what happened to his leg. The Justice said:  “While I was having my evening walk on Friday (13) within the premises of the apartment I was residing, a car accidentally hit me, and as a result my ankle is fractured. My doctor will do what is necessary in due course. However, in the meantime this commission of inquiry will proceed with my full participation.”

Millions kept on Palisena’s chair after encashing cheques: PTL Senior Dealer

<< PTL Senior Dealer Kaushitha Rathnaveera says he does not know what happened to the money so kept on Palisena’s chair

<< Salgado admits that the document he maintained on payments to ‘informants’ was a secret document

<< Counsel for PTL produce documents to show what the payments named ‘Car’ and ‘CP interests’ were for

<< Justice Prasanna Jayawardena pints out that no 
document was produced by Counsel for PTL to show what the payments named “Charlie” and “Tango” were for 

By Shehan Chamika Silva

Senior Dealer of PTL Kaushitha Rathnaveera yesterday told the PCoI that he had encashed cheques received by PTL from its related companies on several times amounting millions and left the money on PTL CEO Kasun Palisena’s chair but does not know what happened to the money thereafter.

At the onset of the yesterday’s proceedings, President’s Counsel Kalinga Indatissa appearing on behalf of Perpetual Treasuries Limited (PTL) cross-examined the PTL Chief Dealer Nuwan Salgado on the ‘document’ he is said to have maintained on the instructions of PTL CEO Kasun Palisena.

Earlier, Nuwan Salgado said that he had maintained a document, which contained payments allocated by PTL to ‘informants’ coded as ‘Charlie’, ‘Tango’ and ‘Car’ channelled through its related group companies on the instructions of PTL CEO Kasun Palisena.

Counsel Indatissa first contested the authenticity of the said document and said that the witness was only given the hard copy of the document by the Police officers who interrogated him at the Commission premises. He said the witness was not present when the extraction of that data from the said PTL computer was done by the investigators.

The President’s Counsel said that the witness had sworn in the affidavit dated October 3, 2017 about the said document he maintained, but the PTL’s computers were taken into custody by the CID on October 9, 2017.

He questioned the credibility of the document saying that it cannot be proven in the absence of the original soft copy, which is not available at the moment.

This document maintained by Nuwan Salgado has several columns which reflect fund transfers from PTL to its related group companies (Perpetual Asset Management, W.M. Mendis & Company and Perpetual Capital Holdings).

It was revealed that this document maintained on the instructions of PTL CEO Kasun Palisena was only regarding a few fund transfers which were reflected as payments in the document.

The witness said that he was instructed by his CEO Palisena to add a column on the right-hand side of the document under the category of ‘informant’ and include the names ‘Charlie’, ‘Tango’, ‘Car’ and ‘CP Interests’ relating to those specific payments.

Earlier, when questioned, the witness was of the view that he was unaware as to who were referred to as ‘Tango’ and ‘Car’ in the document. But he said that in the dealing room of PTL, the dealers had referred to the Primary Contact person of the EPF as ‘Charlie.’

Submitting several documents before the Commission, Mr. Indatissa contested on the payments reflected as ‘Car’ and ‘CP Interests’.

He said ‘Car’ in the document was not an individual, in fact, it was about a vehicle purchase of PTL. Mr. Indatissa said that this vehicle was subsequently used by PTL’s former CEO, Arjun Aloysius.

Mr. Indatissa PC also pointed out that the name mentioned as ‘CP Interests’ were payments made to the Safe Holdings company as borrowing interests and was not about an individual.

Mr. Indatissa was of the view that the fund transfers (payments) cited in the document were reflected in the CBSL system as well, since they were based on some bond transactions.

The President’s Counsel also suggested that the witness had been forced to give such evidence as there is an action filed in Fort Magistrate’s Court against four suspects including the witness for fabricating evidence.

During the cross-examination, the witness said that he did not see these payments being received by any of third party. Mr. Indatissa, therefore, said that the witness is not in a position to say that PTL paid third parties any ‘gratitudes’ based on the said ‘document’ maintained by Nuwan Salgado.

Counsel Harsha Nanayakkara who was appearing on behalf of former EPF dealer Saman Kumara also cross-examined the witness and said that the document is reflecting a time period between July 2014 to March 2015 but his client was appointed as the EPF dealer in October 2015.

The witness said that he is not hundred percent sure that the name depicted as ‘Charlie’ in the document, was the same Charlie that they used to refer in the dealing room. However, he said if so, during July 2014 to September 2015, the EPF primary contact person was ‘Udayaseelan’ and thereafter they called Saman Kumara ‘Charlie’ as well.

When questioned by President’s Counsel Anuja Premaratne who was appearing on behalf of Arjun Aloysius and W.M.Mendis & Company, the witness was of the view that he has no exact knowledge as to whether these payments were made to third parties.

After the cross- examination, Senior Additional Solicitor General Dappula De Livera started to re-examine the witness.

ASG Dappula De Livera: Now, You stand by with your affidavit, right?

Witness Salgado: Yes

ASG De Livera: Was this ‘document’ maintained by you?

W: Yes

ASG De Livera: Now this document was updated by you in which computer?

W: The Computer I used at PTL

ASG De Livera: Did anyone other than you have access to it?

W: No

ASG De Livera: Now, you earlier said that you maintained this document on the instructions of Kasun Palisena, right?

W: Yes

ASG De Livera: Who provided the information in that ‘document’?

W: Kasun Palisena

ASG De Livera: By what means?

W: Verbally

ASG De Livera: So, in that event, Kasun Palisena would have also looked at the computer and taken printouts of it, right?

W: Yes

ASG De Livera: That means only Kasun Palisena and You (Nuwan Salgado) knew about this document, which contained specific fund transfers (payments) from PTL to its related companies, right?

W: Yes

ASG De Livera: So, this is a secret document maintained by you and Palisena, right?

W: Yes

During this questioning the witness also explained that he started maintaining this document in 2014 on the instructions of Palisena and continued to update it. He also said from time to time he had e-mailed the document to Palisena.

The witness admitted that he deleted the document from the computer and from the sent items box of his e-mail account after sending it to PTL CEO Palisena.

ASG De Livera: Now, You referred to Udayaseelan (former EPF dealer) and Saman Kumara (former EPF dealer) as Charlie at different times, right?

W: Yes

ASG De Livera: Do you know other persons referred to as ‘Charlie’ in PTL?

W: No

ASG De Livera: Do you know who this ‘Tango’ was?

W: No

ASG De Livera: Who told you to add ‘Tango’ name to the document?

W: PTL CEO Kasun Palisena

During this questioning, the witness said that based on the way in which the document was maintained he realized that the payment allocated from PTL to its related companies were considerations for persons coded such as “Charlie”.

ASG De Livera: When you were shown this document by the CID officers, did you have any doubt about this document?

W: No

ASG De Livera: Now you have said that you had deleted this document, why was that?

W: I did not want any other person accessing it.

ASG De Livera: So, this was a secret document which carried sensitive information, which was known only to you and Palisena, right?

W: Yes

ASG De Livera: Were you at any time forced or suppressed by the CID or Attorney General’s Department’s officials when you prepared the affidavit?

W: No. I was not forced.

Thereafter, Deputy Solicitor General Milinda Gunatilleke also re-examined the witness with regard to the payments reflected in the document.

Drawing the witness’ attention to an outright transactions list produced by PTL CEO Kasun Palisena, DSG Gunatilleke explained that there were transactions referred by Palisena as ‘Netted off transactions’ which PTL engaged with its related group companies. DSG Gunatilleke said the payments depicted in the document maintained by Nuwan Salgado were born out of the netted off transactions.

DSG Gunatilleke explained, that through this netted off bond transactions by PTL with its other related group companies, there were “netted off payments” sent by PTL to its related companies.

When questioned by DSG Gunatillke, the witness said PTL had received ‘cash cheques’ from time to time from its related group companies (Perpetual Asset Management, W.M. Mendis & Company and Perpetual Capital Holding).

Justice Prasanna Jayawardena then questioned the witness.

Justice Prasanna Jayawardena: According to the document produced by Kasun Palisena, there was a bulk of ‘netted off’ transactions by PTL with its related group companies, right?

W: Yes

Justice Prasanna Jayawardena: But, Kasun Palisena wanted you to maintain a document with regard to only several transactions, right?

W: Yes

Justice Prasanna Jayawardena: Now, PTL Counsel showed you documents to prove what exactly ‘Car’ and ‘CP Interests’ refers in the document that you maintained, right?

W: Yes

Justice Prasanna Jayawardena: And they showed you several documents to prove that there was a vehicle purchase as well, right?

W: Yes

Justice Prasanna Jayawardena: But in relation to other transactions referred to as ‘Charlie’ (Rs. 97 million) and ‘Tango’ (Rs. 40 million) in the document, nothing was pointed out, right?

W: Yes

J: As PTL submitted documents to prove the transactions relating to ‘Car’ and ‘CP Interests’ were bona fide payments, there is no single document as to what happened with the funds transferred under the code name ‘Charlie’ and ‘Tango’, right?

W: Yes

J: Why did you name those transactions with names, ‘Charlie’ and ‘Tango’? You could have used anything?

W: Those names were given to me by Kasun Palisena

J: Why did you consider that these payments were paid to a third party?

W: because of the way in which this document was maintained, I realized that these payments were made to informants.

J: Now who added that word as ‘informant’?

W: I did

J: Then Kasun Palisena would have seen it as well, right?

W: Yes, because I had sent him the document on several times.

--------------------------

After a short adjournment of the proceedings, PTL Senior Dealer, Kaushitha Rathnaweera was called to testify before the Commission and Senior State Counsel Dr Avanti Perera led the evidence.

During his testimony, Mr. Rathnaweera said that there were cash cheques received by PTL from its related group companies and then he had encashed them on the instructions of Kasun Palisena and handed over the money to Palisena.

When the witness was asked to elaborate the process as to how they encashed the cheques received from its related companies, the witness said “When my CEO refers me a cheque, I then communicate with the relevant related company’s accountant.

And then the cheque is received by us. Then I go to the bank to encash the cheque. Thereafter I give the money brought from the bank to Kasun Palisena.”

The witness said on several occasions he had done this process and there were other individuals too who had encashed these cheques at different times.

Senior State Counsel Dr Avanti Perera: Now, you said that you bring the money from the bank to PTL, correct?

Witness Kaushitha Rathnaveera: Yes

Senior State Counsel Dr Avanti Perera: Then what happens?

W: I keep the money in Kasun Palisena’s room

Senior State Counsel Dr Avanti Perera: Do you know what happens to that money thereafter?

W: No

Senior State Counsel Dr Avanti Perera: Where do you keep that money in Kasun Palisena’s office room?

W: On CEO’s chair

The Commission at this moment asked in a lighter vein as to why the witness thought of keeping that money on the CEO’s chair. The witness said “I just left the money on the chair”.

Justice Jayawardena at this moment in a sarcastic manner quipped:  “was it a bomb.”

It was also revealed that there were cheques received regularly amounting to Rs. 1 million by PTL from its related group companies.

Showing several deal tickets, Senior State Counsel Dr Avanti Perera asked the witness: Did you know at all that these transactions ever took place?

W: There was no fund movement in these transactions.

These transactions were regarded as the ‘netted off’ transactions by Kasun Palisena which took place between PTL and its related companies.

It was revealed that the payments made by PTL to its related companies were born out of these netted off transactions.

*PTL making payments –to- Perpetual Asset Management, W.M. Mendis & Company and Perpetual Capital (Related companies)

* Related companies sending cash cheques –to- PTL relating to the payments that were received. (Cheques were signed mainly by Arjun Aloysius, Geoffrey Aloysius and Surendran Muthuraja)

*PTL officials encashing them into money

*And handing over the money to PTL CEO Kasuna Palisena

*PTL officials unaware what happens to the money thereafter

Justice Prasanna Jayawardena then questioned the witness.

Justice Prasanna Jayawardena: Now, PTL makes payments time to time to its related group companies on the basis of some of T-bond transactions and the related companies from time to time send cash cheques to PTL, right?

W: Yes

Justice Prasanna Jayawardena: Then you encash them and hand it over to Kasun Palisena, right?

W: Yes

Justice Jayawardena then questioned the witness on the signatures reflected in some of the cheques that the witness had produced before the Commission.

During this questioning it was revealed that Arjun Aloysius, Geoffrey Aloysius and Surendran Muthuraja had signed these cheques, which came from PTL’s related companies (Perpetual Asset Management, W.M. Mendis & Company and Perpetual Capital Holdings)

Justice Prasanna Jayawardena: So, is it correct to say that Perpetual Capital Holding was the ultimate holding company of PTL?

W: Yes

Justice Prasanna Jayawardena: And that holding company is solely controlled by the father and son, Arjun Aloysius and Geoffrey Aloysius, right?

W: Yes

Thereafter, Counsel Arulpragasam appearing on behalf of PTL and the President’s Counsel Anuja Premaratne appearing for Arjun Aloysius cross-examined the witness.

During this cross-examination Justice K.T. Chitrasiri and Justice Prasanna Jayawardena both questioned the witness as to why he did not question Kasun Palisena when he handed over large amounts of money. The witness said he did not think about it and only thought that it was none of his business.

Mr. Anuja Premaratne was of the view that the process in which the payments were received from related companies to PTL was not illegal.

At this moment, Justice Jayawardena said “Payments are not illegal but the use of that money may or may not be illegal”.