The Colombo High Court on Thursday ordered four bank accounts and two luxury vehicles belonging to Attorney-at-Law Rakitha Rajapakshe, son of former Minister Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe, to be frozen for three months.
The order followed submissions by the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption (CIABOC) about assets the Commission had already frozen, according to reports.
The four accounts hold about Rs. 40 million, and the Commission froze them together with the two vehicles earlier as part of an investigation under the Proceeds of Crime Act.
The inquiry is linked to an allegation that Mr Rajapakshe, Charith Abeysinghe and another person obtained a bribe of Rs. 120 million from the wife of the drug trafficker known as “Harak Kata”.
The suspects are accused of taking the money in return for arranging Harak Kata’s release from detention under the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) and his transfer to a secure prison. These are allegations only, and no court has found any of the three guilty.
The Bribery Commission had earlier arrested the three suspects. They were remanded in custody and later released on bail by the Colombo Magistrate’s Court.
The Commission began its asset investigation because the alleged Rs. 120 million has not yet been recovered.
Background
CIABOC is the state body that investigates allegations of bribery and corruption and can bring prosecutions in court. Its work includes tracing money and property it believes was obtained through corrupt acts.
The Proceeds of Crime Act gives the authorities a legal route to seek restraint of assets linked to alleged offences. A court order of this kind restricts the owner from using or transferring the frozen property while the investigation continues. It is a restraint, not a finding that the owner is guilty of an offence.
The case involves two separate legal tracks. One is the criminal case over the alleged bribe, in which the suspects were arrested, remanded and then granted bail. The other is the investigation into assets, which is aimed at recovering money that has not been found.
What it means
For the public, the order is an example of the authorities pursuing assets as well as individuals in corruption cases. A three-month freeze gives the Commission time to continue its inquiries without the property being moved or sold.
The order does not decide the bribery allegation. That question will be decided by the courts in the criminal proceedings, where the suspects will be able to respond to the charges.
