Front Page

Front Page

TNA agrees to consult Tigers

By Chris Kamalendran
TNA MPs have agreed to an LTTE directive that the Tigers be consulted before the TNA issues statements on important issues relating to the Tamil people.

The Sunday Times learns that the TNA MPs at a meeting with LTTE Chief Negotiator Anton Balasingham on Friday also agreed they would consult the LTTE regarding their stand on various matters that come up in parliament.

Significantly, TULF leader V. Anandasangaree was not present at Friday's meeting with Dr. Balasingham, just as he was not present at the earlier TNA meeting with LTTE political wing leader S. P. Thamilselvan.

Reports said Mr. Anandasangaree had left for India on Thursday and might meet Dr. Balasingham later, but it is known that Mr. Anandasangaree does not get on well with the LTTE leadership.

Dr. Balasingham on Friday had raised questions about his absence and TULF General Secretary R. Sampanthan said the party leader was on a private visit to India and would meet Dr. Balasingham later.

Mr. Anandasangaree was at the centre of a controversy last month over the Jaffna library reopening, at which he was to be the chief guest.The LTTE and other groups opposed the re-opening and the government postponed the ceremony, provoking all members of the Jaffna Municipal Council to resign.

Dr. Balasingham said that if the LTTE and the TNA went in different directions on certain matters, it would benefit their opponents.He said the cause of the Tamil people would get more weight if the LTTE and the TNA took joint decisions.

Death threat for doing his duty, alleges lawyer

By Laila Nasry
A lawyer has filed a fundamental rights petition in the Supreme Court alleging the Tangalle Police had prevented him exercising his rights as a counsel and threatened him with death.

In his petition, attorney-at-law H.K. Priyantha Nishantha states that having spoken to his client, Southern Provincial Council Minister of the Peoples Alliance M. K. Rajitha at the police station he had intimated to the authorities concerned that he sees no reason for his client's arrest on February 7.

He had charged that the respondents, Inspector CID Dilrukshan Perera and Sub-Inspector Dinesh Silva were trying to make out a case by attempting to introduce weapons to his client's possession.

When he had requested that his client be permitted to make a statement against them with regard to the illegal acts attempted, he had been verbally abused by Inspector Perera.

When he had explained that he was acting in his capacity as a lawyer and should not be prevented from exercising his duties, Inspector Perera had taken out his revolver and asked him to leave the station without getting killed. He had done so out of fear for his life.

He had stated he had received a call at 4 a.m. from his client who had been arrested by the CID and thereafter taken to the Tangalle Police. On meeting his client at the police station he had been informed that CID officers had arrived at 3 a.m. at his client's residence at Dammulla, Beliatta and ordered him to open the door. When his client declined to do so due to the threats he had been receiving, they threatened they would force open the door.

They had entered the residence of his client, assaulted him and thereafter taken him to the Tangalle Police. At the station he had been questioned after which he had been asked to place his signature on a typewritten statement that had not been read out to him. He had signed the statement as he had been threatened when he had first refused.

Priyantha Nishantha says that as counsel he is entitled to assist and advise his clients and the treatment accorded to him at the police station was degrading and in violation of Article 11 of the Constitution. He alleges he was prevented from engaging in a lawful profession of his choice, which is a violation of his fundamental rights. He requests court to grant leave to proceed and to declare that his fundamental rights have been infringed and award him Rs. 10 million as compensation.

Back to Front Page