- * Nation demands the President to reject Machiavellian style administration
- * President warned: Learn lessons from the bitter experience of master Machiavellian Ex Presidents
- * Response to ST’s invitation for 2011 budge proposals: Step down and let a man with a proven integrity to lead the Treasury
- * Stop Mohan Peiris who bring total disrepute to the govt both locally and internationally
- * All the President’s men: Beware of the consequences of your wrong deeds!
- * Presidents gets the blame for the sins of the corrupt officials
- * Remove the crooks if the President’s will is to last long!
Customs is made to commit hara-kiri in the Supreme Court case by the AG Mohan Peiris
by Vishvamithra
(September 13, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) After making the Customs committing hara-kiri and causing a 619 million rupees loss of public funds, the AG Mohan Peiris, who had been one of the key masterminds of the ‘Dockyardgate cover-up’ has made another low-level attempt to save face by sending a back-dated letter to the Customs. The AG seems to be determined to protect his interests and the interests of the ‘Customs Junta’ involved in this massive cover-up.
Brief of the ‘Dockyardgate’
- * On an information provided by a private informant, the Customs launched an investigation [Case No: P/Misc/93/2000] as far back as in October 2000 into the ‘Dockyardgate’. The key elements that revealed in the investigation are as follows.
- * The Colombo Dockyard Ltd [CDL], had sold 21 marine crafts manufactured with BOI privilege locally, which is prohibited unless authorised by BOI and Customs. The law requires that any enterprise which intends to sell any finished products manufactured with raw material imported on duty free basis for export trade, it should first apply for permission from BOI, followed by Customs authorization and then pay all fiscal levies [Customs duties and other taxes] on the value of the goods so determined by the Customs on a bill of entry [Customs Declaration] furnished for Customs purposes.
- * The CDL had not applied for BOI and Customs permission for the sale of 21 marine crafts.
- * The CDL included the duty component in the sale price of the marine crafts and recovered the total amount of fiscal levies amounting to Rs 619,483,827.00 from the buyers, namely Sri Lanka Navy and the Sri Lanka Ports Authority. Yet, the fiscal levies so recovered were never remitted to the Customs by the CDL.
- * By this fraudulent act the CDL had misappropriated the total fiscal component recovered from the buyers, amounting to a sum of Rs 619,483,827.00, thereby violating the provisions of Section 50A of the Customs Ordinance which attracts a minimum forfeiture of the value of the marine crafts. Further, for knowingly concerned in the fraudulent evasion of the fiscal levies, under section 129 of the Customs Ordinance the CDL was also liable to forfeit treble the value of the marine crafts.
- * Customs investigators had been betrayed by the ‘Customs Junta’ comprising of the then DGC Jayathilake, ZAM Jazeel Deputy DGC and Thilak Perera Director of Customs. It is apparent that this powerful Junta maintains a powerful network with the outside mafia and intervenes in almost all important fraud investigations.
- * Customs inquiry into this colossal fraud [P/Misc/93/2000] which was once terminated on 05th March 2004 by the Customs Chief with an ‘official pardon’ granted to CDL. This pardon was challenged by the investigators before the Court of Appeal [CA/1397/2004] on 25th June 2004 and the case was reopened. It was once again stopped by a writ of prohibition issued by the Court of Appeal [CA/1413/2005] on 20th March 2009 as a result of CDL challenging the Customs inquiry purportedly with the connivance with the ‘Customs Junta’.
- * The Court of Appeal ruling which was manifestly flawed was challenged before the Supreme Court [SC/SLA/100/2009] by the Solicitor General Priyasad Dep, on 05th June 2009, amidst strong opposition from the AG Mohan Peiris
- * AG Mohan Peiris dragged on the case for over 12 months and on 30th Aug 2010 withdrew the case without the concurrence of the new DGC Mrs Sudharma Karunarathna, who was appointed to the office of the DGC with effect from 24th May 2010.
The intention of the AG’s letter is obviously to safeguard the dirty acts of the head of the Treasury BP Jayasundara and the ‘Customs Junta’ that acted surreptitiously on AG’ss previous dodgy letter dated 10th May 2010. The Customs Junta’s attempt to circumvent the new DGC and to close the file did not materialise as the case record had gone missing. After realising what was happening behind her back, the new DGC Mrs S Karunarathna, further to representation made by the investigators, challenged the ‘Customs junta’ and the AG by disagreeing with the AG’s advice and expressing her wish to go ahead with the Supreme Court case. AG became dumfounded with the stern and unexpected response from the DGC by her letter dated 03rd August 2010 and sought refuge from the ST PB Jayasundara.
ST who had been a proven crook, immediately summoned the DGC and the other officials on 16th August 2010 to the Treasury, threatened and ordered them to comply with the AG’s irrational order made to protect the CDL. The DGC Mrs Sudharma Karunaratne’s meekly surrendered to the head of the Treasury [ST] and kept silence that finally sealed the fate of the misappropriation of 619 million rupees of public funds.
On 30th August 2010 the AG withdrew the case filed to challenge the Court of Appeal ruling that paved the CDL, the revenue fraudster, an easy way out without facing any penal sanctions. This has now opened the floodgates for all the past, current and future revenue fraudsters. It is a pity that such a massive damage caused by the AG and the ST has been kept out of the knowledge of the President who is also the Minister of Finance. This makes a mockery of the ST’s request for proposals from the public to make the ‘2011 Budget on our own’, which appeared in the print media last weekend.
Having withdrawn the case the AG now seems to be finding a face-saving exit from the great damage caused to the government coffers. This ‘back-dated’ letter to the Customs could be the first in a series of such attempts. However this latest endeavour by the AG Mohan Peiris has become nothing more than another laughable action that undermines the office of the Attorney General.
The note ‘by hand’ appearing at the top of the AG’s letter denotes the urgency of the message that needed to be delivered to the DGC. On the other hand it also demonstrates that the letter was required to be ‘hand delivered’ merely because it was back-dated 26th August 2010. However to any watchful eye it becomes obvious that the Customs had received the letter only on 31st of August 2010. The date-stamps placed on the letter confirm this fact along with the minutes made therein by the respective officials. This so-called Attorney General who is responsible for strictly enforcing the law and order had been totally ignorant to the fact that his ‘hand-delivered’ letter to Customs would not take 5 days in transit and hence his dubious act of back-dating the letter would be badly exposed in no time.
The content of the letter implies that the AG wanted to give his opinion to the DGC on the case before 30th Aug 2010, the date on which the matter was due to be taken up at the Supreme Court. But what actually happened was that the AG Mohan Peiris withdrew the case on 30th August 2010 and to cover-up his unilateral action sent a back-dated letter to Customs on 31st August 2010. The purpose of this attempt was to show that the case was withdrawn with the consent of the DGC who had notified her disagreement of the withdrawal to AG by her letter dated 03rd August 2010. However, the minutes made on the letter confirm that the DGC to whom the letter was addressed and who were to take decision on the AG’s opinion had seen it only ‘two days after withdrawing the case’. The most startling revelation that came to light through this letter is that the AG Mohan Peiris had withdrawn the case without the consent of the DGC, the party who filed Supreme Court action.
The AG’s idiotic analysis of the high profile Supreme Court case
In his letter AG, Mohan Peiris maintains that the Supreme Court action was filed ‘in the ordinary course as a matter of caution only and there are no merits in pursuing the appeal’. This statement by the AG is fundamentally flawed as it was filed amidst his strong objections by the Solicitor General Priyasad Dep, who was fully convinced with the merits of grounds for appealing against the Court of Appeal ruling. The baseless statement by AG Mohan Peiris suggests that the thoughtful action taken by the Solicitor General Priyasad Dep in filing application before the Supreme Court is nothing but an action uncalled for, which could be considered as an insult to the Solicitor General and as a statement that undermines the Attorney General Department as a whole.
The dubious stand by the AG contradicts with his original opinion expressed to the Ex DGC Jayathilake on 04th Nov 2009 wherein he advised him to proceed with the Customs Inquiry on the basis that the Court of Appeal ruling in fact, did not preclude the Customs from doing so. The new DGC had been maintaining this stand throughout and it was displayed in her letter dated 03rd August 2010 addressed to AG [the letter reproduced]. In the said letter the DGC clearly explained that the AG Mohan Peiris’s subsequent advice contradicted with his original advice given to Customs on 04th Nov 2009.
Dangers of invoking of 18A of the Customs Ordinance in the ‘Dockyardgate’
The AG states in his letter dated 26th August 2010 as follows.
‘... while reiterating the contents of my letter dated 10th May 2010, I am of the view that the judgment of the Court of Appeal has dealt with the issue and should be complied with. Any recoveries due should be pursued in terms of Section 18A of the Customs Ordinance...’
The ST endorsed this view and ordered the Customs to follow suit. However, the opinion of the ST and the AG were absolutely disastrous from the ‘protection of government revenue point of view’ as the said provision of law [Sec. 18A] allows the CDL to pay the sum of money misappropriated in instalment basis Sec 18A (4) as they pleased. Further the said action absolutely ruled out any penal sanction that should have been invoked against the CDL for the wilful evasion of payment of fiscal levies, a deterrent provide by law to discourage revenue fraudsters.
Decision by AG and ST discourages the informants
The wrongful decision by the AG and the ST is purely against the public interest and protection of government revenue. On the other hand their collusive action completely negate the legitimate rights and expectations of the informant in this case, as the invoking of the provisions of Section 50A and 129 of the Customs Ordinance has been completely nullified by this short-sighted decision. The informant in this case has now permanently lost his legitimate rights to a financial reward of well over 200 million rupees, he would have been paid had the CDL been dealt with as required by the Customs Ordinance. Further their total ignorance has effectively prevented any future information about revenue frauds such as Dockyardgate. What these two so-called professionals in law and economics had conveniently ignored is that, the Dockyardgate would not have been exposed if not for a one single informant who provided precisely accurate information in response to the press releases by the Customs seeking such information from public in return for guaranteed financial reward under Customs law.
An SOS to the President
‘Dockyardgate’ should draw the attention of the President whose intent is to contest for a third term. Therefore it is imperative that the President selects a high calibre team with total integrity to ensure good governance. He should realise that is it the only way forward that could ensure another term in office. But it is very disturbing that the present team consists of men with proven dishonest tract records, occupying some of the nerve centres of the entire government mechanism. The best examples are the Attorney General Mohan Peiris and the Head of the Treasury PB Jayasundara. Another person was the Ex DGC Sarath Jayathilake who is responsible for ruining the Customs Administration for a period of almost a decade. All these three men together have caused an irreparable damage of 619 million rupees of public funds by deliberately manipulating the Customs law in the ‘Dockyardgate’.
This situation becomes a matter of serious concern to the appointing authority, the President who is required to select worthy people to the important public offices. The President should realise that ultimately the whole blame will come on him, ruining his realistic future opportunities. He should know that unless he commits himself to restore law and order and take steps in the right directions to protect the public interest where it matters he will not stand for the third term in office. It is obvious that the third term Presidency would not be served on a platter by the people of this country who have been taken for a ride by the politico-admin-legal-business mafia; probably self-governance was afforded to home-grown politicos. If the President can break this hoodoo he can be certain that his name would be given its right place in the history.
---End---
Post a Comment