|
He faced no challenge, but posed several
Arsecularatne
talks about his tenure at the Bribery Commission
 Following
his removal from the post of Bribery Commission Director General,
President’s Counsel Rienzie Arsecularatne was quoted as saying,
“I’d rather die standing than live on my knees.”
Speaking about his tenure at the Bribery Commission in an interview
with The Bottom Line, Arsecularatne said, “Nobody interfered
with my work and any interference would not have been tolerated
either.”
His removal from the post came as a bombshell – after all,
this was the man who breathed new life into the commission, which
was virtually dead. Arsecularatne pointed out that he was removed
from the post not so much because he could not face the challenges
it posed, but because others could not face the challenge he posed.
Following are excerpts:
Q: What are the most effective
ways of tackling bribery and corruption?
A: There is nothing called a ‘most effective’ way.
What is important is proper investigation and amassing the material
necessary to prosecute the offence. To that extent, one must be
conscious of the ingredients of the offence that one is going to
prove and the investigation must be directed to amass the material
to prove the relevant elements of that offence. That does not mean
that one must amass material through any means. In the first place,
material must be available and the material must be amassed following
the parameters of the investigation process.
Q: What are the main issues
that the Bribery Commission is facing in discharging its duties?
A: I am unable to tell you the problems that the Bribery
Commission is facing now because I am not privy to what the on-goings
in that institution. But certainly, as far as my recollection goes,
I can tell you what issues the Bribery Commission faced at the time
that I was there.
As you may recall, we started the Bribery Commission almost afresh
after a breakdown period, when a third commissioner was not appointed
to fill the vacancy that came about with the death of then Commissioner,
Justice Siva Selliah. After new members were appointed to the Bribery
Commission, I moved there in addition to my duties in the Attorney
General’s Department, as Additional Solicitor General in charge
of the Criminal Branch, to function as Director General.
When I took over as Director General of the Bribery Commission,
beginning with suitable accommodation for commissioners and other
staff, to successful criminal prosecution for bribery offences,
all these issues had to be addressed.
Getting down the requisite number of police personnel to investigate
bribery offences was one problem. Training them was another. Sorting
out the files and getting them together was another. There wasn’t
any supervision system or categorisation of files in place. So,
the categorisation of files had to be put in place. The lines of
supervision had to be established.
That is the way that I started to get the Bribery Commission to
move into action. I must say many such matters, which are too numerous
to mention in an interview like this, were addressed and during
my 20-month period acting in the post of the Director General, the
Bribery Commission was brought to a fairly good functional level.
Q: Is there legal empowering
needed to be done?
A: In my view, Act No. 19 of 1994 gives wide powers to the
Bribery Commission. I think that if those powers are used fully
and meaningfully, there is sufficient empowering via that statute.
But I must say that there are certain lacunae in the Act itself,
which need to be addressed.
Q: Do you need police powers?
A: I don’t think that there is a need to enhance police
powers. The police officers attached to the Bribery Commission,
who are functioning as authorised officers, being policemen, have
all the powers that have been given to them under the Code of Criminal
Procedure Act No. 15 of 1979.
Whatever powers that the Bribery Commission gives them are supplementary
to the powers which they already have, specifically to address matters
that are caught up within the purview of the Bribery Commission.
Therefore, I do not think that further empowering of powers to the
policemen attached to the Bribery Commission will be of any significance.
Q: Could you describe one key
decision during your tenure?
A: During my tenure, I made several key decisions. I am afraid
I am unable to talk about any of these decisions because of the
Oath of Secrecy that I took when I was functioning there. I still
feel that – although I am not a part of the Bribery Commission
– the oath I took with regard to the official matters in the
Bribery Commission must be kept.
Q: What was the biggest challenge
you faced during your tenure at the Bribery Commission?
A: I think I faced no challenge. I went on with the work
that I had to do.
Q: But you were then abruptly
removed from your post?
A: That was because of the challenges that others faced,
not because of any challenge that I came across.
Q: What was your biggest success
during your tenure at the Bribery Commission?
A: I cannot take a case or two and say that was my biggest
success. Getting the Bribery Commission working and moving into
action, doing proper investigations, instituting cases, imparting
training to the investigators as well as to the legal staff and
seeing that the Commission was working properly – that, I think,
was my success.
Q: What is the main obstacle
to success in that institution?
A: Getting things done the way you want at the time you want
due to financial constraints was an obstacle. Apart from that, I
must say nobody interfered with my work and any interference would
not have been tolerated either.
|
