April 30, Colombo (LNW): A high-stakes legal battle unfolded at the Fort Magistrate’s Court this week as Tilak Marapana, representing former President Ranil Wickremesinghe, challenged allegations surrounding a controversial overseas trip said to have cost millions in public funds.
Appearing on behalf of his client—who was absent due to reported ill health but remains on bail—Marapana argued that the former President could not be held accountable for the disputed expenditure of approximately Rs 16.6 million.
He suggested instead that irregularities may have arisen from external parties, including the Sri Lankan diplomatic mission in London and a private travel operator identified as Skywings.
In a pointed submission, counsel questioned the plausibility of the expenses, highlighting what he described as glaring inconsistencies. He noted that despite claims that transport had been arranged by British authorities, a substantial sum had allegedly been billed for vehicles. He also cast doubt on reported hospitality costs, arguing they appeared grossly exaggerated for what was described as a short stay.
According to Marapana, these discrepancies warrant a separate расслед investigation into possible financial misconduct involving third parties.
Countering these claims, Dileep Peiris told the court that the case raises serious concerns about the stewardship of public finances, particularly given the country’s economic constraints. He argued that the trip in question could not be dismissed as incidental, pointing to evidence suggesting it had been meticulously arranged in advance.
He further alleged that the scale of spending within a limited timeframe indicated deliberate planning rather than routine transit.
The case centres on accusations that public funds were improperly utilised during a visit to the United Kingdom, reportedly linked to an academic honour conferred upon Maithree Wickremesinghe at the University of Wolverhampton. Investigators claim the trip, which took place in September 2023, had no official diplomatic purpose.
During proceedings, the Criminal Investigation Department presented fresh findings, including correspondence and witness statements. According to information shared in court, the UK visit coincided with a private celebration marking the conferment of an honorary title, alongside a related luncheon.
Investigators further stated that there was no involvement by the British Government in organising or facilitating the visit. They also indicated that the invitation was received directly rather than through formal diplomatic channels, raising additional questions about the nature of the trip.
A statement attributed to Maithree Wickremesinghe suggested that the UK tour was incorporated into a broader travel itinerary that included visits to other countries, describing the event as a convenient stop rather than a standalone official engagement. Prosecutors argued that this account conflicts with the defence’s position that the trip was undertaken in an official capacity.
Addressing the court, the Additional Solicitor General emphasised that no diplomatic meetings had taken place during the visit, reinforcing the claim that the trip falls within the scope of alleged misuse of state resources under relevant law. He also noted that investigators are continuing to examine statements and evidence before determining whether further individuals may be implicated.
The Magistrate directed the Attorney General’s Department to expedite the filing of indictments before the High Court, citing sufficient preliminary evidence to proceed. The matter is due to be called again on July 08.