BASL warns against ‘undue interference’ over AG’s decision on Lasantha murder case

The Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) has expressed concern following media reports that suggest the Cabinet of Ministers may be considering a review of the Attorney General’s decision regarding the discharge of three suspects in the Lasantha Wickrematunge assassination case.

While acknowledging that the Attorney General is a public official accountable to the public for his decisions, the BASL emphasized that the Attorney General performs a quasi-judicial role in criminal matters. 

“As such, the Attorney General has to decide whether or not to charge a suspect based on the material available and submitted to him by the investigating authority. In doing so, he will be required to consider whether such material is admissible in law and whether based on such material there exists a reasonable prospect of a conviction,” the BASL said in a letter address to the President. 

The Bar Association says that it has been held by the Supreme Court that decisions of the Attorney General are amenable to review and that such a review can be done either by way of exercise of writ jurisdiction or by way of the exercise of the fundamental rights jurisdiction. 

“As such any decision to either discharge or prosecute a suspect would be subject to review by the apex courts according to law,” it said. 

The BASL said it is firmly of the view that decisions of the Attorney General in criminal matters should not be reviewed by the political authorities including the Cabinet of Ministers as that would “undermine the independence of the office of the Attorney General, which is crucial to uphold the rule of law.” 

It further said that, whilst public debate on decisions made by any public functionary is a vital element of a democratic society, the need to safeguard the independence of these functionaries is equally important. “It must be understood that judicial officers and quasi- judicial officers have to take decisions according to law, which sometimes may not necessarily reflect the popular view.”

The letter further notes that in the Victor Ivon v. Sarath N. Silva case (1998), Justice Mark Fernando observed:

“A citizen is entitled to a proper investigation - one which is fair, competent, timely and appropriate - of a criminal complaint, whether it be by him or against him. The criminal law exists for the protection of his rights - of person, property and reputation - and lack of a due investigation will deprive him of the protection of the law.”

Therefore, the Bar Association of Sri Lanka urged President Anura Kumara Dissanayake to ensure that there is “no undue interference with the Attorney General’s powers” and emphasizes the importance of protecting the independence of key institutions, including the office of the Attorney General, to uphold the rule of law in Sri Lanka.