Bribery Commission sees a corrupt-free Sri Lanka:

We are totally independent - Commissioner Wickramaratne

by Ranil WIJAYAPALA

Combating bribery and corruption which is rampant in the Sri Lankan society at present is vested with the Commission to Investigate the Allegations of Bribery or corruption. With the enactment of the Bribery Commission Act in 1994, so far five Commissions have been appointed for the task and they continue the process of investigating cases of bribery or corruption to fulfil the task of creating a country free of bribery and corruption.

Dr. Jayantha Wickremaratne, a former Inspector General of Police who has been appointed as one of the three Commissioners in the present Commission to Investigate the Allegation of Bribery or Corruption expressed his views to the Sunday Observer with regard to the role it plays in combating bribery or corruption.

As a member of the fifth commission, headed by a retired supreme court judge, Dr. Wickremaratne says the Commission is now geared to take up the task of investigating cases of bribery or corruption as it is now fully equipped for the task. He said the present commission has investigated the highest number of cases on bribery and corruption compared to the cases handled by the previous commission.

The vision of the commission is to make a corruption free Sri Lanka through its activities to combat bribery and corruption in the country, he said.

Following are excerpts of the interview the Sunday Observer had with Dr. Jayantha Wickremaratne.

Q:The present commission to investigate the allegations on bribery or corruption has completed almost one and a half years. What is the progress the commission has made within this period in combating bribery and corruption in the country?

A: We were appointed to the Bribery commission on the recommendation of the President to the Parliament Council in May 2011. Prior to that there was no commission from May 2009 to March 2011. Following our appointment to the commission we first thought of clearing the backlog of complaints since there was an unattended workload due to the non availability of a commission.

Nearly 2600 files were outstanding when we assumed duty. Under the Bribery Act the commission has to give directions to commence the investigations. The Commission has to give directions at two different stages, first, to conduct the fact finding mission and secondly to conduct a full investigation. After the completion of the investigation the commission has to give directions to file action before the courts. In all three instances the commissioners have to give an order.

At present there is no backlog and we are processing the complaints on a daily basis.

Q:There were many factors that hindered the process of investigating cases of bribery and corruption. Could the commission overcome the obstacles to expedite the process of investigating the complaints? Has the Commission been able to do so?

A: The day we assumed duties we had a discussion about basic requirements for the commission. We had a space problem and the, previous commission and the government gave sufficient funds to construct a new building. So we managed to lay the foundation for a five storied building.

Number two was the shortage of staff. We needed Police officers to handle investigations and legal officers for the legal division. We conducted interviews to enlist Police officers from different ranks and made inquiries regarding the selected staff. Accordingly we enlisted 20 Police officers in the first week of 2012. We enlisted four legal officers, but they left after sometime due to low wages. We are in the process of taking up the matter.

The third problem is the training of the staff. With the assistance of the Asian Development Bank we conducted seminars with experts from different fields. We conducted one seminar at the Hotel Galadari with the Supreme Court and High Court Judges.

The next problem was the obtaining of vehicles for the commission since the vehicles we used were 20 years old and were noted as bribery vehicles. We managed to buy two unmarked vehicles which are useful to conduct investigations.

Now we plan to open the new building which is nearing completion, in mid December or early January, and hope to invite the President as the Chief Guest.

With the fulfilment of all the requirements we are geared to conduct investigations.

Q:Awareness about the acts of bribery and corruption is important when we aim at a society free of bribery and corruption. So how will the commission make people aware of its activities and encourage them to report and make complaints?

A: After we assumed duties we conducted awareness programs for the public, because many people were not aware of the method of submitting complaints to the Bribery Commission. We have a 24 hour hot-line to receive complaints, namely 1954.

We conducted many awareness programmes through the electronic and print media and also by attending various SLBC programs. The UNDP funded the programs and we conducted question and answer sessions for the public. Because of these activities people are now aware and are familiar with 1954.

Q:Is there any increase in the complaints on bribery and corruption following the awareness programs?

A: We had responses from various parts of the country, such as Mankulam, Bandarawela, and Tangalle. When we receive complaints we promptly send a team of detectives to conduct investigations. Accordingly, we detected a large number of public servants, Grama Sevakas and other officers involved in corruption. Some people are reluctant to give their contact numbers due to repercussions.

Q:Can you give us the number of complaints the commission received and the number of raids conducted by the commission to detect people responsible for bribery and corruption?

A: In 2011 the commission received 1217 complaints of bribery and corruption. Together with the 225 cases left from

2010 we had 1442 cases to attend. Of the 1442 cases pending, we could conduct investigations on 544 complaints. In 2012 we received 2162 complaints along with the 898 cases left from 2011. So far the commission has completed inquiries on 851 cases. During this year up to November 21 the commission has conducted 137 raids in which 84 officers were arrested. Among the 84 , 22 are Police officers and 13 from the Forest Department.

We had four commissions, starting from 1994 and each commission was appointed for a period of five years. Ours is the fifth commission. A study has revealed that this commission has conducted the highest number of detections.

Q:What about the detention of senior officers and politicians caught in the bribery net ?

A: The impression among the general public is that we are going for the small fish but not the big ones. To correct the situation we conducted several detections against very influential people; some are on bribery cases and some on corrupt practices.

The most prominent case was that of the Beruwala Pradeshiya Saba Chairman who was detected while accepting Rs. one million from a private contractor to approve a building plan.

Then, the ASP Mirihana was arrested while accepting Rs. 500,000 from a complainant to get a permit for a land and detected a school principal. We also conducted raids on District Forest officers. The most recent was the Inspector who was accepting Rs. 100,000 in Pettah. Also we detected several Police officers, rural development officers, especially the Deputy Mayor of Dambulla.

Q: There are situations that lack transparency and institutional framework to monitor services rendered by government institutions. This situation has led to the increase in bribery cases and corrupt practices. Is there any way to tackle such situations apart from conducting investigations ?

A: Normally when we receive a complaint we conduct an

investigation. Accordingly we detected the Pradeshiya Saba Chairman and others and exposed them. But when there is a complaint against an institution if they do not follow the procedures or violate them we cannot conduct investigations, as they are administrative matters. Then we refer it to the Ministry Secretary. Now when we receive a complaint about corrupt practices of a Provincial Council Member, Pradeshiya Saba Chairman or a Mayor, if it is stated in an anonymous letter we refer it to the Secretary of the particular Ministry to take appropriate action and report to us.

Q: Among the people who are regularly caught for bribery are Police officers. It is a serious matter since they are the law enforcement authorities in the country. What are the reasons for them to adhere to such practices?

A: The highest number of cases conducted were against the Education Ministry officers and related institutions. Others are provincial administrative officers such as the Pradeshiya Sabha Chairman, Mayors and Grama Sevakas. The second highest category is from the Police. There are two reasons. The most common case is accepting bribes. The other is using Police officers and other officers in the Police Department for private activities. It comes under corruption.

Corruption means you are using your position to command the people under you for various private matters. We detected an ASP from Galle using six Police personnel and Home Guards to construct his house.

We filed action and the case is pending. We filed another case against a Headquarters Inspector who used his home guard as a helper in his wife’s flower shop. We arrested him and the case is pending.

Q: We see a tendency where complainants on bribery and corruption are being used as political tools by some politicians to achieve their political ends and for cheap publicity. How does the Commission see this trend and is there any way to avoid such occurrences ?

A: Whenever we receive a complaint from a politician, officer, Ministry Secretary or the public it will be viewed by the Commission on a daily basis. As you said some politicians complain against their opponents to put them in trouble.

We study complaints fully and only if there is material to proceed before the Court of Law that we take the next step. We are totally independent, as we are appointed by the Parliamentary Council which includes the Opposition Members also.

We go before the Parliament at the Parliamentary Consultative Committee. We are attending the whole Parliament debate on the Budget. Depending on the evidence available, if is not sufficient we will not proceed.

We are acting irrespective of politics. During our term we filed action against a Government Chief Minister for corruption by demanding a school principal to admit his supporter’s child. We have acted against senior Police officers, we have taken action against Titus Jayawardhana, Secretary, Power and Energy Ministry for buying the low quality petrol.

The Anuradhapura Road Passenger Transport Authority Chairman was also arrested. We also conduct investigations on government servants, so that they are careful. If action has not been taken for several years on a complaint one could write and request to know the position of the complaint.

Q: The Parliament Select Committee on Public Enterprises also investigates into corrupt practices in Government institutions and compile a report. The report was forwarded to the Commission last year. What is the progress on conducting investigations based on the findings of the COPE ?

A: The COPE report for 2011 was sent to us. We started investigating. If there is material we will file action in due course. Whenever there is no evidence to substantiate the charges it is a problem .

For instance, to investigate a complaint on the violation of the tender procedure to the Ministry Secretary he has to give a statement because he is responsible for the tender procedure as Head of the Department. If they say there was no corrupt practice then we cannot refer the case to the Courts.

Q: It is a serious charge for the acts of bribery to take place with regard to school admissions. What action has the Commission taken regarding this?

A: Whenever we have information containing the evidence to corroborate against the violators we have taken action. Since most of the cases came without any material there is no way for us to conduct investigations. But with regard to these cases we had discussions with the former Education Ministry Secretary and as agreed we refer these cases to the Education Ministry. They have their own investigation units and are conducting their own investigations and reporting back to us.

Q: What is the percentage of complaints that goes before the Courts ?

A: With regard to Bribery cases 70 to 80 per cent cases go before the Courts because we have direct evidence. In bribery cases there is a person coming and complaining to us and they are prepared to go and hand over the cases. With regard to corrupt cases we have to conduct lengthy investigations.

People are reluctant to go before the Court. When we conduct the investigation we know that the particular person admitted his child by giving money to the principal. But he does complain but another person informs us how that person admitted his child by offering a bribe.

Q: So what is the alternative to address this situation ?

A: To address this issue we have to amend the existing law to depend on materials such as letters and other documents to be taken as Corroborative evidence. But politicians will not get detected because they are very careful about submitting evidence. Under the Education Act principals cannot accept money. As an alternative, he has the Old Boys’ Union, and the School Development Society to accept money. The person accepting the money may be a retired person, or a civilian. So there is no way of taking action against the principals.

Q: Is there any initiative taken to amend these laws ?

A: We observed some of the lapses in the present law which needs amendments. These laws were introduced several years ago. The Bribery Act was enacted in 1958 and the Bribery Commission Act was enacted in 1994.

A committee has been appointed by the Chairman of the Commission in respect of three fields; Bribery , Corrupt Practices and the Assets and Liabilities. These are three different areas where we are conducting investigations.

Now we are in the process of identifying the required reforms and then it should be submitted to the Secretary to the President and to the Legal Draftsman’s Department and then to the Parliament. We have already initiated action and identified the areas. Three teams were appointed comprising lawyers and legal officers.

Q: It is not only the conduct of investigations on bribery cases. When making a society free of bribery and corruption we have to address other social issues also. In this regard what is the role played by the Bribery Commission ?

A: As a focal point we have taken several steps. We have conducted awareness programmes through government servants. But some people are reluctant to come forward. I request the public if there is any sign of demanding bribery or any information about people who earned money without any means to write and inform us. Corrupt practices such as violation of tender board procedures, enlistment of applicants at interviews can also be informed.

With regard to assets and liabilities we can act according to the Assets and Liabilities Act. All the government officers above the staff officers have to declare their assets and liabilities in respect of their families, in respect of their officer concern his wife and also about children above 18 years.

Q: Is this happening ?

A: It is happening. But it is also another area where you need legal amendments. Annually all the government servants are declaring their assets and liabilities and it is a confidential paper given to the Head of Department.

He has the authority to open and see it. Only they have the right to demand the assets and liabilities declaration. If they violate there is provision under the Assets and Liabilities Act to file action against them.

We are not conducting investigations on each and every assets and liabilities forms. We are conducting investigations when we receive a complaint regarding assets and liabilities. Only then we call for that document from the respective institution.

With regard to the National Savings Bank we did the same thing. With regard to the CJ case we followed the same rules.