The Supreme Court verdict earlier this month ejected Diana Gamage from the Parliament brings an end to a long running legal/political saga of the Sri Lankan governance landscape. 

The Supreme Court’s unanimous verdict and its damning indictment of Gamage, also extends to law enforcement agencies, and also part of the justice mechanism as well. Yesterday (21), after an ineffective search for the firebrand former State Minister, who had held multiple press conferences in the wake of the verdict, law enforcement officers who were tasked with taking her to custody, watched on as Gamage presented herself at Courts. Gamage was granted bail. However, the saga itself raises serious questions about the effectiveness and the selective impotence of Sri Lankan law enforcement and border control agencies when it comes to ‘persons of influence’.

Given all that has transpired over the last few years, it is clear to a keen observer that Sri Lankan law enforcement agencies and the Department of Immigration and Emigration were weak in their knees to enforce the law on this matter, raising questions about efficiency and integrity of both services and about the political leadership of the country. It also begs the question about the ‘deal’ culture of Sri Lankan politics – it must be noted that neither the Government nor the opposition seemed committed to push a robust investigation into how Gamage came to the Parliament, and obtained a diplomatic passport. Perhaps, that’s the nature of the island’s political class. Sri Lankans have long known that when interests align – politicians sing from the same hymn book.   

In early 2023, the Colombo Magistrate’s Court pointed out that an arrest warrant was not required for the Criminal Investigations Department (CID) to take action against former State Minister of Tourism Diana Gamage for her alleged violation of the Immigrants and Emigrants Act. Many raised questions as to whether the investigation into the matter was suppressed by political influence? At that point, the court had earlier ordered the CID to obtain a report from the British High Commission regarding Gamage’s citizenship and to conduct the relevant investigations. Accordingly, the CID had made a request to the British High Commission for that report. A lawyer appearing for the petitioner later said to the press: “The Magistrate pointed out that the CID should take the next course of action. Therefore, the CID should immediately arrest her. If they don’t do so, we will make a request on the next court day to summon the CID Director before the court…it is very clear to us that the CID is trying to suppress this case due to political pressure.” Lawyers also questioned if a person from a non-political background found guilty of such an offence would have been dealt with prompt legal action. However, they charged that no such situation can be observed in this case, as the case concerns a State Minister.

The Legislature of Sri Lanka, faults and warts included is the heart of the islands governance mechanism, if the Sri Lankan Department of Immigration and Emigration failed in the duties to vet those who should be checked for eligibility for entry to it, then it is a significant laps on the part of the border control regulatory authority. In most other countries, heads would have rolled, or better, senior officials of the department would have quit. 

However, such dutiful and refined action cannot be expected from the Sri Lankan bureaucracy. Same applies to the Criminal Investigations Department (CID), which seemed to have dropped the ball taking action on former State Minister Gamage. The CID has blundered, or as some have charged, ‘allowed’ certain high-profile cases to ‘drift’ or to ‘collapse’. While the Police defends its form of investigating and taking action on a case by case basis, what happens to investigators who blunder such cases are almost never heard of, after the fact. Sri Lanka has come to know the CID as an organisation that can act quickly and investigate matters well, in certain cases, however, when ‘persons of influence’ are involved, their efficiency seems to sink. Perhaps the only silver lining of the saga is that it shone a light on the importance of whistleblowers, like social activist Oshala Herath, who despite the odds stood their ground, endured the process and emerged victorious.