(Sri Lanka Brief/14October 2025)In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka has upheld a Rs. 500 million defamation award against the Associated Newspapers of Ceylon Limited (ANCL), commonly known as Lake House, in favor of former Minister Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe.
The decision was delivered today.
The case originated from a November 2007 article published in the Silumina newspaper, which carried two full pages of allegedly defamatory content targeting Rajapakshe, who at the time was a Member of Parliament representing the United People’s Freedom Alliance (UPFA). The article was published shortly after his controversial decision to cross over from the Government to the Opposition.
In 2009, Rajapakshe filed a defamation suit in the Colombo District Court against ANCL and then-editor Karunadasa Suriarachchi, seeking Rs. 500 million in damages. The court ruled in his favor in 2010, awarding the full amount. ANCL’s appeal to the Civil Appellate High Court was dismissed in 2013.
The final appeal, filed by ANCL before the Supreme Court, was dismissed on October 14, 2025, effectively affirming the lower court’s decision. The case was heard before Justices Janak de Silva, Achala Wengappuli, and Sobitha Rajakaruna.
Legal Representation and Implications
Rajapakshe was represented by President’s Counsel Kuvera de Soysa, along with Senior Attorney-at-Law G.G. Arulpragasam, instructed by Sajana de Soysa and Randhiwari Arangala. President’s Counsel Faiz Mustapha appeared for ANCL.
This ruling is one of the largest defamation awards in Sri Lankan legal history and is seen as a strong message to state-owned media institutions regarding accountability and journalistic standards.
Conflict of Interest Concerns
The case has also drawn attention due to a potential conflict of interest. At one point, Rajapakshe served as Minister of Justice, under whose purview the Department of the Public Trustee falls — the entity that holds a majority stake (80%) in ANCL. Critics have raised ethical concerns about a sitting minister pursuing damages from a company indirectly under his ministry’s oversight.
However, legal experts note that the original case was filed years before Rajapakshe assumed that ministerial role, and the Supreme Court’s independent ruling affirms the legal merits of the case.
(With the inputs from NewsWire)