Sri Lanka Brief
NewsI was transferred to jeopardize the sensitive, complex and high-profile investigations, argues Sharni Abeysekara in his FR petition.

I was transferred to jeopardize the sensitive, complex and high-profile investigations, argues Sharni Abeysekara in his FR petition.

by

The 18  investigations that have been commenced against the Petitioner [SSP Sharni Abeysekara]  to find materials to justify the transfer and the interdiction of the Petitioner cannot be sustained against the Petitioner whereas the said complaints are based on the fabricated and/or false complaint tainted with malice, argues the Fundamental Rights petition filed by SSP Sharni Abeysekara against his interdiction.

The 23-page petition further argues that he was transferred from the position of Director of the Criminal Investigation Department due to external influences and/or collateral reasons to jeopardize the sensitive, complex and high-profile investigations supervised by the Petitioner in his capacity as the Director of the Criminal Investigations Department.

“40. The Petitioner respectfully states that:

i) Out of 101 Senior Superintendents of Police, he was ranked 13th in the seniority list of the Senior Superintendents of Police at the time of his abrupt transfer and he was in the at the time of his interdiction;

ii) The Petitioner is the only Senior Superintendent of Police who is assigned to serve as a Personal Assistant to a Deputy Inspector General of Police;

iii) There is no specific list of duties to be carried out by a Personal Assistant to a Deputy Inspector General of Police and the work currently required to be carried by the Petitioner are opening of letters received by the Deputy Inspector General of Police and entering them in a register, relaying messages and orders to and from the Deputy Inspector General of Police to the relevant officers and divisions and answering telephone calls received by the Deputy Inspector General of Police when he is not in office;

iv) Therefore, the Petitioner’s transfer from the position of Director of the Criminal Investigation Department to the post of Personal Assistant to the Deputy Inspector General of Police Galle Range amounts to a degradation of service.

41. The Petitioner states that several high-profile investigations were conducted by the Criminal Investigation Department at the time the Petitioner was the Director. Many such investigations are still continuing. Therefore, the transfer of the Petitioner from the Criminal Investigation Department necessary resulted in the removal of the Petitioner from the supervision, direction and control of such investigations.

42. Some of the aforesaid investigations also pertain to complaints relating to high profile persons including several persons from security forces and politicians. The Petitioner verily believes that the aforesaid transfer of the Petitioner for which no reason has been assigned has been motivated for reasons other than service-related requirements and/or exigencies of service. The Petitioner verily believes that he was transferred from the position of Director of the Criminal Investigation Department due to external influences and/or collateral reasons to jeopardize the sensitive, complex and high-profile investigations supervised by the Petitioner in his capacity as the Director of the Criminal Investigations Department.

43. In the circumstance, the Petitioner states that by the aforesaid transfer, he has been penalized without any lawful or justifiable cause, reason or justification.

According to the petition, he has not been informed of the reasons for his transfer as personal assistant to a Deputy Inspector General of Police.

“The Petitioner states that as far as the Petitioner is aware this was the first instance in the history of the Sri Lanka Police, a Senior Superintendent of Police was appointed as a personal assistant to a Deputy Inspector General of Police. Nevertheless, it is evident the decision to transfer him as a personal Assistant of the Deputy Inspector General of Police was completely done with the malicious intention to harass the Petitioner. The Petitioner further states that the aforesaid transfer of the Petitioner was not a routine transfer. The Petitioner further states that he did not receive any prior notice of such transfer and no reason was either given or stated for such transfer. Therefore, up to date, the Petitioner is unaware of the reason for his transfer and in the circumstances; such transfer of the Petitioner remains a transfer without reason.

“The Elections Commission, it’s Chairman and the Commissioner-General of Elections are also cited as respondents: ” The 10th Respondent is the Chairman and 11th and 12th Respondents are the Members of the Election Commission of Sri Lanka. The 13th Respondent is the Commissioner-General of Elections. The Petitioner states that impugned transfer order has been issued purportedly with the concurrence of the Election Commission of Sri Lanka.”

Read the complete petition here as a PDF: FR Petition filed by SSP Shani Abeysekara

 

Back to Top