Iqbal Athas intimidation case

IP grilled on identification parade

By Laila Nasry

In this case two Air Force officers Squadron Leader H. M. Rukman Herath, the bodyguard of a former Air Force Commander and Squadron Leader D. S. P.Kannangara the officer in charge of the Special Air Borne Force (SABF) have been indicted in the Colombo High Court for committing criminal trespass, intimidation and unlawful entry with weapons into Mr. Athas's home on February 12, 1998.

The trial continues before High Court Judge Sarath Ambepitiya on Monday. 

IP Dhammika answering a question by state counsel P. P. Surasena said having been assigned the case by CID director he proceeded with the investigation visiting complainant Iqbal Athas' residence, recording their statements and reporting the developments to the Gangodawila Magistrate. 

Identifying the two accused present in court as the two suspects who were taken into custody by the CID on May 5, 1998 he further said the arrest was made at the CID headquarters after informing them to attend further questioning. 

Following the arrest, IP Dhammika said he had handed them over to another officer Inspector M.L. Wijesekera to produce them before the Gangodawila Magistrates Court for an identification parade. He then informed Mr. Athas of the identification parade and assigned police constable Hemantha to escort them to the Gangodawila Magistrate's Court.

Thereafter he said together with Inspector ASP Palitha Perera he had proceeded to the Magistrate's Court by which time the accused had been brought to the court premises and subsequent to his arrival the witnesses came. 

Questioned on the reason for conducting the identification parade on the day of arrest IP Dhammika said in fairness to the accused it was decided to conduct the identification parade on the same day instead of remanding the suspects and producing them before the Magistrate on a later date. 

As for the media presence at the Gangodawila Magistrates Court on the day of the identification parade Inspector Dhammika said it prompted two suppositions either the identification parade pertaining to the Athas case or the fact that the Mirihana Police had deployed several police personnel in the vicinity of the courts as they were producing Nawala Nihal in court that day.

Answering a question by the state counsel, Inspector Dhammika said when an outsider came to the CID he had to tender some form of identification at the entrance. This was not exclusive to service personnel alone but had to be followed by all persons for security reasons. 

Cross examined by counsel for the first accused Srinath Perera PC, Inspector Dhammika said though he had not held an identification parade as a CID officer he knew that the procedure to be followed at a parade involved furnishing a "B" report before the Magistrate to obtain an order from him to hold an identification parade and until then the accused were kept in remand prison. 

Inspector Dhammika conceded to having recorded a statement from the first accused on April 22, 1998 adding that the accused was not questioned on suspicion. However, he said though he did not personally name anyone as suspects in his initial report he had identified the Air Force as a line of investigation. 

Asked whether he recorded any statement between April 30 and May 5, 1998 Inspector Dhammika said the statement of Attorney Jagathsena Gunesekera was recorded on May 1, 1998. As a result some doubts pertaining to the investigation were clarified. 

Questioned as to why the CID had called the two accused for a second time on May 5, 1998 Inspector Dhammika said it was to record a statement. Subsequent to their arrival at the CID office they were informed of the identification parade to be held at the Gangodawila Magistrate's Court. However, he said he could not recalls whether he informed them before or after the statement was recorded.

Answering Mr. Perera's question pertaining to the statement made by the accused that his service identity card was taken to an outside room and kept for around 45 minutes before it was returned, Inspector Dhammika said it had been said by the accused. 

He further said another officer recorded his statement and the need for sending the national identity card to the main entrance and obtaining the service identity card was for the purpose of perusing it and ascertaining the identity of the accused as a service person. 

Inspector Dhammika said he could not recall on which date the decision to hold the identification parade was taken but stated it was a date prior to May 5, 1998. 

Asked as to what time Inspector Dhammika left for the Gangodawila Magistrates Court he said it was around 12 noon by which time he had deployed police constable Hemantha. He further said he reached the Magistrate's Court around 1 p.m. and the identification parade started at 2 p.m.

Questioned whether an officer was generally deployed to accompany the witnesses to courts Inspector Dhammika said it was not the practice but denied the allegation that this case was treated with specialty. 

Mr. Perera asked whether Inspector Dhammika had informed the media. He answered in the negative. He also said he did not know whehter any other CID officer had done so.

Inspector Dhammika denied Mr. Perera's charge that since the case involved a journalist who had been harassed the CID had been under pressure to make a break through. Thus the accused were arrested on suspicion and the identification parade had been rushed in order to avoid any embarrassment caused to the CID. 

Answering a question by the defence counsel Inspector Dhammika said he had asked the accused change their clothes following an objection raised by them as they were in uniform. Asked who he sent to get a change of clothes for the two accused, he said he could not remember and conceded it as a slip on his part having not recorded a statement as to the change of clothes. 

Asked whether he saw the clothes that were brought for them or by whom, he said he had not so. Questioned whether he didn't find it important to see their attire prior to the identification parade, Inspector Dhammika said what he considered more important was the two accused taking part in the identification parade in civvies and not in their service uniforms. Mr. Perera then showed a colour photocopy of the service identity card of his client to Inspector Dhammika and asked him whether the picture in the photocopy was the same as that of the first accused in courts.To this question he said "yes."

However, he denied Mr. Perera's suggestion that a photocopy of the service identity card was obtained for the purpose of showing it to the witnesses. 

Anil Silva, counsel for the second accused, asked Inspector Dhammika whether he was aware that prior to the incident there were trishaws spotted around Mr. Athas's homestead. Inspector Dhammika conceding to such a knowledge said he was unaware that it was registered in the IGP's name.

Referring to the statement made by Mr. Athas to that effect, Mr. Silva questioned the CID officer as to why he had not investigated the trishaws and it was conceded by Inspector Dhammika that the vehicles should have been looked into in the process of investigation. However, he said the van which also figured in Mr. Athas's statement had been traced. 

Inspector Dhammika said he was aware of the allegations made by one Mr. Sentinathan that the LTTE obtained information by reading the "Situation Report' of Mr. Athas. Questioned by Mr. Silva whether it was not important for the TID unit or the intelligence unit of the CID to investigate such a matter Inspector Dhammika said he did not know. 

Asked whether this was due to an involvement on the part of Inspector Dhammika he denied the allegation stating that there was no necessity for other units to get involved in the case and added that even if there was any state involvement there was no cover-up of the facts by the CID. 

Reverting to the identification of the van Mr. Silva queried whether Inspector Dhammika knew that it was an Inter Press van. Inspector Dhammika said he was aware of it being a van owned by Walkers Tours 

Mr. Silva said the CID was biased as they had probed the van but not trishaws. He also charged that the CID investigation was unfair. Inspector Dhammika denied the charge levelled by Mr. Silva who said some cases were conducted thoroughly while others were not. Inspector Dhammika said the reason for non-investigation was that those angles did not warrant inquiry. He also said this made the CID neither inefficient nor biased. 

Inspector Dhammika conceded that the second accused made a statement to another CID officer called Peramuna stating that his service identity card had been taken at the time of recording his statement and returned over 45 minutes later. However, he denied that the service identity card was photocopied and a copy was shown to the witnesses to identify the accused. 

Daya Perera PC with T. G. Gunesekera and G.G. Ponnambalam watched the interests of Iqbal and Anoma Athas. Senior state counsel P. P. Surasena appeared for the prosecution. Srinath Perera PC appeared for the first accused while Anil Silva represented the second accused. 

CWC to back plantation-friendly party

By Chris Kamalendran

Mr.Thondaman told The Sunday Times already the Up Country People's Front (UPF) had decided to contest along with his party and they had invited other trade unions and political parties operating in the plantation sector to unite in contesting. He said the CWC-led alliance would support whichever party that would provide solutions to the plantation workers' problems.

He said though the plantation sector had been able to obtain certain benefits from the PA government, there was more to be achieved for estate workers. Mr. Thondaman said if they had a strong representation from the plantation sector his party would be able to bring maximum pressure on the government to resolve their problems.

He said the CWC along with other parties should be able to get at least 15 members elected.

Hakeem's open invitation to Ferial 

However, Mr. Hakeem said he would accommodate other dissidents only on their merit. 

Although Mr. Hakeem had reservation about other dissidents he said he was willing to take back Ms. Ashraff as she was the late leader's wife.

Nizam Kariyappa, a dissident SLMCer, said there was a strong possibility of the two factions uniting together. "We fought only as friends," he said.

"We have been on the campaign trail throughout the entire country. The feedback we get is that the people are angry with the government, Mr. Hakeem said. 

SLMC sources said the party was concentrating on the North and East. They said the SLMC would contest in the Eastern Province under the tree symbol. Talks were being held with the UNP, they said.

"We are in the process of negotiating, because by contesting we might sometimes spoil the UNP's chances of getting a bonus seat," Mr. Hakeem said. 

Mr. Hakeem said he had still not decided the electorate he would contest. He said Samanthurai was a "very secure seat." The other possible electorates are Kandy and Colombo, he said.

Meanwhile, the Muslim United Liberation Front's (MULF) overtures to join the SLMC were being viewed favourably, party sources said.

The SLMC leader said the will of the people would prevail despite possible attempts by the government to subvert the elections.

He said it would be interesting to watch how a PA President would function alongside a government formed by a rival party.

Mr. Hakeem said the economy was in the doldrums and the sudden improvement in the stock market showed the pulse of the business community. 

He said the recent lifting of the defence levy and other financial burdens was "a knee-jerk reaction in the face of snap elections."

The JVP simply played into the PA hands and were trying to play populist politics, Mr. Hakeem said. 

Reluctant parliamentarian

By Dilrukshi Handunentti

Sumanatissa Thambugala who filled the SLMC national list vacancy created by Rizvi Sinnalebbe's death on Tuesday joined the Presidential Secretariat as the co-ordinating director after his retirement.

The public servant-turned-legislator told The Sunday Times he had no political background or party affiliations though he later began to work closely with the President. 

"My life has been devoid of party politics until retirement. I was committed to my work as a public servant and saw no reason to get involved in this volatile area," he said.

Currently preparing for the Law College final examination, he said if not for the political uncertainty and the presidential request at a time when she needed the support of everyone he would have engaged himself in some other sphere. 

Asked whether he did not mind entering parliament when a dissolution was imminent, he said he was not worried about earning perks and privileges. He only wanted to support the President. "It could have been a dissolution or a prorogation or facing the no-confidence motion. There was a need and I catered to it," he said.

He said he was quite familiar with legislative functions of parliament although he was never a politician. " I have regularly followed the parliamentary proceedings and I know how the system works. Becoming a politician is an extension of being a public servant," he said.

He said SLMC leader Rauf Hakeem was among the first to wish him after he was sworn in as an MP. NUA leader Ferial Ashraff also was happy about his entry, he said.

Mr.Thambugala said he had no desire to pursue a political career as he had already returned to his desk at the Presidential Secretariat to assist in the PA political campaign.

"I am not involved in the campaign directly but I assist the secretariat in the administrative work," he said adding that he did not foresee a political future for himself despite having been a legislator for two days.