Wartime Navy Chief Vice Admiral Wasantha Karannagoda along with Rear Admiral (Rtd) Vijaya Bandara have sent letters of demand the newly appointed Navy Commander Admiral Travis Sinniah, stating that recent statements made by the new Navy Chief to the CID earlier this year have been extremely damaging to both of their reputations.    

Admiral Travis Sinniah was called as a key witness to the ongoing high-profile case involving the alleged abduction of eleven persons in 2008 by Navy personnel. During his statements, reports confirm that Admiral Travis Sinniah made the following statement, “Commodore Udaya Keerthi Bandara was aware of the existence of a torture chamber/detention centre at the Gunsite at the Trincomalee Navy Base; and those who were detained at Gunsite numbers 1 and 2 had been murdered and the former Navy commander and his staff were aware of this.” 

Taking recent events into consideration Attorney-at-law Wasantha Wijewardane, Counsel for Admiral Karannagoda as well as Rear Admiral Bandara informed Sinniah by letter dated Aug 13 their decision to proceed with defamation cases over accusation that Karannagoda and his staff had been aware of the detention and subsequent killing of those who were detained at the gun-sites numbered 1 and 2 at the Trincomalee navy base. 
The contents of the letter are provided below,

13th August 2017 
Rear Admiral Travis Sinniah, 

Demand  

I am instructed by my client Rear Admiral (Rtd) Udaya Keerthi Vijaya Bandara of No.153/B Koswatta Road Nawala Rajagiriya. 

I am instructed by my client that you have made numerous false and malicious allegations and statements against and/or in relation to my client. My client had also been made aware that you have made a false and malicious statement to the CID on or about mid July against and/or in relation to my client. The statement specifically being: “Commodore Udaya Keerthi Bandara was aware of the existence of a torture chamber/detention centre at the Gunsite at the Trincomalee Navy Base; and those who were detained at Gunsite numbers 1 and 2 had been murdered and the former Navy commander and his staff were aware of this.” 

I am instructed that the above has also been resourcefully brought to the attention of certain media institutions. 

I am instructed that the aforesaid allegations/statements are extremely damaging to my client’s reputation and have been calculatedly made to bring disrepute to my client and thereby caused the delictual wrong of actio injuriarum (defamation). 

I am instructed that your aforesaid actions have caused loss and damages to my client’s reputation which my client reasonably estimates at Rs. 500 million. 

I am instructed to and I hereby demand a sum of Rs. 500 million from you within 14 days from date hereof. 

In the event of your failure to pay my client the aforesaid sum from 14 days hereof, I am instructed to initiate legal proceedings to recover the same against you and the costs of litigation.

Following the submission Attorney at law Wasantha Wijewardene stated that the time at which the current Navy commander chose to inform authorities of his client’s involvement in the case was extremely opportune. He further stated that to his knowledge, Admiral Sinniah travelled to the United States post 2012 and had ample time to inform the authorities of the facts he later revealed. 

He questioned as to why the Commander prolonged his statements before the CID, and stated that legal action will be taken by his clients. It was also reported that neither of his clients had received any response from Admiral Sinniah after the letter of demand was submitted.