Former President Ranil Wickremesinghe has rejected the findings of the Batalanda Commission report, claiming it was politically motivated.
Making a special statement, Wickremesinghe said that the commission was established with the sole purpose of discrediting him but failed to achieve its objective.
The report only mentioned his involvement in facilitating housing for police officers during the 1988-1990 insurgency but did not implicate him in any other allegations, he said.
“I was only summoned as a witness. According to the commission’s findings, I was implicated only in the matter of providing housing for police officers, which, as per regulations, should have been done through the Inspector General of Police. The report indicates that both Nalin Delgoda and I were indirectly responsibile for this process. Apart from this, I was not implicated in any other allegations in the commission’s report,” Wickremesinghe said.
The former president further noted that the report was made available in Parliament in 2000, yet no party, including the JVP, requested a debate on it.
The full statement by former President Ranil Wickremesinghe:
In 1987, following the signing of the Indo-Lanka Accord, the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) launched a wave of terror across the country.
During this period, President J.R. Jayewardene assigned the responsibility of securing key locations in the country to Cabinet ministers. Several economically significant sites were located in the Biyagama area, including the oil refinery, diesel power plant, the substation supplying electricity from Mahaweli to Colombo, and the free trade zone. The military was deployed to safeguard these locations.
To accommodate security personnel, it was decided to provide them with abandoned buildings and houses owned by the Lanka Fertilizer Manufacturing Corporation. At the time, several employees of the Ceylon Electricity Board were residing in some of these houses.
During this period of terror, the Sapugaskanda police station was attacked, and its officer-in-charge was killed. In response, Deputy Minister of Defence Ranjan Wijeratne contacted me, requesting that the vacant houses in the complex be allocated to military and police personnel for their security. Consequently, the administrator at the time took steps to hand over the houses to Kelani Police Chief Nalin Delgoda.
Several individuals, including a provincial councilor, a cooperative society chairman, and a police sergeant, were assassinated during this period. Additionally, an attack was carried out on the residence of another provincial council member.
The government in power took steps to restore the country’s stability, rebuilding the economy and ensuring national security.
After 1994, President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga appointed a commission to investigate allegations of a torture centre in the Batalanda area. Several individuals were summoned before the commission, and I was called as a witness. At that time, I was serving as the Leader of the Opposition. The establishment of the Batalanda Commission was politically motivated, but the attempt to use it for political gain was unsuccessful.
According to the commission’s findings, I was implicated only in the matter of providing housing for police officers, which, as per regulations, should have been done through the Inspector General of Police. The report indicates that both Nalin Delgoda and I were indirectly responsibile for this process.
Apart from this, I was not implicated in any other allegations in the commission’s report. The report also extensively documented the JVP’s terrorist activities between 1988 and 1990, detailing the background and listing numerous violent acts committed by the JVP in Chapter Three. The entire history of those events is included in the report.
Beyond these findings, no other accusations in the report are relevant to me, and I completely reject the report.
No one can claim that the Batalanda Commission report was hidden. It was made available as a parliamentary session record in 2000, yet no one, including the JVP, requested a debate on it. Many did not accept the report, which may explain why no steps were taken to debate it in Parliament.
It is also noteworthy that no political party that came to power has attempted to use the report for political advantage. Furthermore, there is no precedent in Sri Lanka or other parliaments for debating a session record 25 years after its publication. (Newswire)