The law is a dangerous thing

By Basil Fernando

(A Dialogue on investigations. Written for the occasion of the commemoration of six months after the assassination of Lasantha Wickrematunge, a Sri Lankan journalist, on 8th January 2008)

(July 06, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) This is a discussion among several imaginary characters. These imaginary characters do not represent any living persons.

The Characters

A journalist who is conducting the interview, a senior police officer who had agreed to speak on the condition of anonymity, a retired judge, a political scientist and a philosopher.

Journalist- This discussion is about the assassination of Lasantha Wickrematunge, six months ago. It is common ground that no inquiry has been done. The first question I wish to put to you is why no investigation has been done?

Senior Police Officer- May I start? Let me tell you two things. Firstly, no one has asked us not to investigate and secondly, I can tell you no one is investigating the matter. Do not ask me why. All that I can tell you is facts. That’s all.

The philosopher – There is a science called semiotics, meaning the science of reading signs. Maybe you are an expert on that.

Police officer – I do not know about any science. About 30 years of experience is I think sufficient to know what is going on.

Retired Judicial Officer – Allow me to play devil’s advocate. What good will come from any investigation? Let me explain, if some senior officer orders an investigation, he may be in trouble and then, the next person who comes in his place, will not want to continue to investigate. Suppose, an investigation is ordered, the subordinate may not obey and it may not be possible to make him obey. Or he may obey, but get himself killed. Even if he is not killed, witnesses who give evidence may be killed or forced not to give evidence. Even if that stage is passed, the Attorney General’s Department may not file charges. If they do the responsible ones may be changed. Same may happen at courts also. In short more problems will be caused by investigating than by non-investigation.

Does anyone disagree that this is the real situation?

Political scientist - I can neither disagree about the facts as told by the police officer or the former judicial officer, but, what is the way out?

Police officer- I see no way out.

Retired judicial officer- I do not see any way out either.

Philosopher- One conclusion is that we have to learn to live with it. In which case, our journalist here today may be the next to be killed. Next may be the political scientist and then me. Only the other two will survive.

Police officer- I do not know whether even both of us are safe.

Retired judicial officer- Well, may I raise the same question. Even if we are killed, will not inaction do less harm than doing anything that we might do to enforce law.

Philosopher- You mean, the law is a dangerous thing?

Retired judicial officer - Well you may not want me to be brutally frank. But, the fact is that to insist on law is now a very dangerous thing. Law is always dangerous when justice does not exist.

Journalist- Well, I am going to publish this dialogue. You all are safe because, I will not disclose your identities. But, I must stick to my professional obligation. Perhaps all that all of you will do when they visit me, is to deny that you ever knew me. May you all live long.

-Sri Lanka Guardian