The appointment of Ranga Dissanayake is making waves. He is a judicial officer with an unblemished record, and even critics of his appointment have not raised concerns about his track record.
Many commentators have pointed out that this is a well-thought-out and strategic appointment, demonstrating the President’s commitment to objectively and seriously tackling the menace of corruption and bribery.
Ranga Dissanayake is widely known for his fearless rulings, made without favor or malice. He assumes office at a time when more than eighty bribery and corruption cases have been withdrawn due to technical issues. With his extensive experience, Dissanayake is regarded as a highly suitable candidate for the post of Director General of the Bribery Commission.
Dissanayake has presided over several high-profile bribery and corruption cases. Notably, he ruled on the case against the former President’s Chief of Staff, Dr. I.H.K. Mahanama, and the former Chairman of the State Timber Corporation, P. Dissanayake. Dr. Mahanama was sentenced to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment, fined Rs. 65,000, and penalized Rs. 20 million, while P. Dissanayake received 12 years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 55,000. This remains the country’s biggest bribery case to date.
In another prominent case, Ranga Dissanayake ruled against Sujith Kariyawasam, husband of former Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake. Kariyawasam was found guilty of purchasing shares of The Finance Company using NSB funds while knowingly causing financial losses to the government.
As Fort Magistrate, Dissanayake made a landmark judgment by acquitting a woman arrested on charges of prostitution. He stated that earning a living through prostitution was not considered an offense in Sri Lanka, though operating a brothel was. Many civil activists have hailed this as a groundbreaking decision.
Dissanayake also presided over the case involving the purchase of MiG fighters for the Sri Lanka Air Force, in which the former Sri Lankan envoy to Russia, Udayanga Weeratunge, was charged. He questioned the prosecuting officers and criticized the CID for not following proper procedures when filing the case under the Public Property Act. He highlighted the procedural requirement that any misuse of public funds exceeding Rs. 25,000 must include an ASP’s report, pointing out that the USD 7 million in question far exceeded this threshold.
Experience Questioned:
Despite his impressive track record, some have questioned Dissanayake’s experience with legal procedures. Critics claim that his appointment may be illegal under the Anti-Corruption Act No. 09 of 2023. Section 17 of this Act stipulates that the Director General must be a lawyer with at least 15 years of experience and a strong background in handling criminal cases. However, this criticism is disputable, as Dissanayake, as a judge, has handled criminal cases for over 15 years. His integrity remains unquestionable.
This is not an issue that warrants splitting hairs. The opinion of the Attorney General can be sought to resolve any disputes, and if necessary, the Act can be amended accordingly. The government, elected with an overwhelming majority, has pledged to fight corruption rigorously and to uphold the law not only in letter but also in spirit.
