By Chas Raymonde

President Rajapaksa’s move to appoint an independent commission to look into the complaints against the Chief Justice has been greeted with a mixed review of opinions. Whether in fact this signals a volte face or not is a different matter – the committee it appears will have their work cut out.

Documents that have been made available indicate that significant sums of monies have passed through an account in the name of Dr. S.A. Bandaranayake. Documents also available and published exclusively reveal the purchase of an apartment at Trillium Residencies by Dr. Bandaranayake’s sister and brother-in-law.

Part of the explanations sought from Dr. Bandaranayake is as to exactly how the CJ sat on the same bench that was hearing cases related to the Golden Key debacle. In light of these matters Sri Lanka’s beleaguered Chief Justice (CJ) had asked the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) for more time to respond in detail – a request the PSC turned down. Dr. Bandaranayake walked out of the proceedings after members of the PSC had become offensive.

An initial study of the documentation suggests a very active account. However on the face of it, any person is permitted to credit and withdraw monies as and when they wish. There is no offence at all. However in this instance the account holder is Sri Lanka’s highest judicial officer and the methodology employed, according to a senior banker will arouse suspicion even amongst the most liberal minded of tax inspectors. In one month alone the turnover in the account was Rs. 33 Million.

Our banking source on conditions of anonymity, said that the habit of maintaining the account and then taking money out just before year-end dates and then populating the account around the 2nd week of April is not in itself illegal. However the same source said that unless the CJ had sufficient reason not to report the balances along with her tax declarations, she would not have broken any rules.

On the other hand the reverse is also true. If the CJ had concealed the funds and had no plausible explanation for the tax authorities, Dr. Banaranayake would have had serious explaining to do – not to the Parliamentary Select Committee but to the tax department.

Our sources familiar with the operation of bank accounts for money laundering – and there is absolutely no suggestion that Dr. Bandaranayake indulged in any of these activities including avoiding paying legitimate taxes – maintain that the presence of a large number of bank accounts is in fact consistent with persons who engage in money laundering, tax evasion and to avoid detection by a host of different agencies.

Dr. Bandaranayake’s involvement with Trillium Residencies will also need a rational explanation.

However whilst Dr. Bandaranayake may well have not broken any rules at the least Dr. Bandaranayake appears to have been rather naïve. Once it became clear that she was acting for her sister and she was hearing a case against Golden Key – a component company of the Ceylinco Group – a more circumspect personality may well have either not acted for her sister, but would have disassociated herself from the proceedings. Unfortunately Dr. Bandaranayake appears not to have done anything.COURTESY:THE SUNDAY LEADER