Deputy Minister writes to Bond Commission

Deputy Minister of Power and Renewable Energy Ajith P. Perera in a letter to the Presidential Commission of Inquiry to Investigate and Inquiry into the Issuance of Treasury Bonds, stated that he has been vilified, over the mass media, including the internet, with false details of an alleged conversation between him and Arjun Aloysius are being circulated.

In a letter sent through Attorney-at-Law Manjula Balasooriya, the Deputy Minister vehemently stated that such details are absolutely false.

‘My client is gravely concerned that the proceedings of the Bond Commission have been used to cause harm to the character and reputation of my client and hence would appreciate if this letter is placed before the Members of the Commission, and, if required, to allow my client’s Counsel to make representations before the Commission’ Mr. Balasooriya added.

It was reported through the media that on Thursday, November 16, 2017, evidence was led before the Commission from Investigating Officers, by officers of the Attorney General’s Department, of information of alleged telephone communications between Arjuna Aloysius and members of the Committee on Public Enterprise of Parliament, including my client.

In respect of Ajith P. Perera it is alleged that the telephone communication was limited to two telephone calls between my client’s mobile phone and that of Aloysius- one incoming call and one outgoing call. There have been no communications on viber or whatsapp.

By alleging that there had been telephone conversations between Aloysius and members of the COPE , there is insinuation that there has been some form of impropriety on the part of the said Members, who were conducting inquiries into the issuance of Treasury Bonds.

My client categorically states that he has not had any conversation with Arjun Aloysius on the Bond Issue. He further states that he is not acquainted with Aloysius in any manner, whatsoever, and has never met Aloysius.

My client draws the attention of the Commission to the following:1. The Additional Solicitor General who led evidence before the Commission on the alleged telephone conversations, failed to lead evidence on or present to the Commission, material particulars relating to the telephone calls, including the time duration of the calls, as well as the dates on which the calls were allegedly made.

2.The ASG failed to lead evidence on other Members of Parliament who were not members of the COPE Committee who had telephone communications with Aloysius. Such communications will be material, since Parliament itself considered the COPE report and debated the same during the relevant time. 3.The ASG has insinuated impropriety on the part of the relevant COPE members, without giving them an opportunity of being heard before the Commission, and, by selectively leading evidence on the said telephone calls.

In the aforesaid I am instructed by my client to request from the Commission the following:

(a)That my client be issued with copies of the reports pertaining to the telephone calls between all Members of Parliament including the members of the COPE and Aloysius, including the details provided by the relevant mobile operators;

(b)That my client be informed of the material particulars of the two telephone calls which had allegedly emanated between his phone and that of Aloysius including the dates, times and durations;

(c)That my client be informed if any recordings exist of such telephone calls and if so that such recordings be released to my client and to the public forthwith;

(d)That my client be given an opportunity to cross examine the relevant Investigating Officers at the earliest opportunity. 

Share on Google Plus

About Lankaimage lanka

This is a short description in the author block about the author. You edit it by entering text in the "Biographical Info" field in the user admin panel.