{"id":86801,"date":"2019-03-28T21:53:31","date_gmt":"2019-03-29T03:53:31","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/?p=86801"},"modified":"2019-03-28T14:47:05","modified_gmt":"2019-03-28T21:47:05","slug":"yahapalana-and-corruption-part-3b","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/2019\/03\/28\/yahapalana-and-corruption-part-3b\/","title":{"rendered":"YAHAPALANA AND CORRUPTION Part 3B"},"content":{"rendered":"

KAMALIKA\u00a0 PIERIS<\/em><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n

There were three sets of inquiry into the\nCentral Bank bond scam, the Pitipana committee, the Presidential Commission of\nInquiry   and the COPE inquiry. These\nbodies could only probe and make recommendations. They could not issue charges.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Prime Minister Ranil Wickremasinghe appointed\na three-member commission of lawyers, Gamini\nPitipana (Chairman) Mahesh Kalugampitiya and Chandimal Mendis.  This committee was critiqued on two counts.  Firstly, they were dubbed UNP lawyers. They\nhad been affiliated to the ruling UNP at one time or the other. Secondly, they\nknew nothing about the subject. A new committee\nwith relevant expertise should be appointed said critics.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In Parliament, some of the MPs refused to\naccept the UNP report. Therefore Speaker Chamal Rajapaksa set up a 13-member\nCOPE team, headed by DEW Gunasekera, to inquire into the matter. This report\nfaced two obstacles. Parliament was dissolved before the COPE report could be\npresented. Also UNP MP Sujeewa Senasinghe \n went to District court of Colombo\nto obtain an injunction to stop the release of the COPE report ahead of the\ngeneral election of August 2015.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A Presidential\nCommission of Inquiry appointed by the President on January 27, 2017. The\nPresidential Commission of Inquiry was only a fact finding one. It could not\ndeclare anyone guilty. It lacked the power to take action against the culprits.\nTherefore In its present form this Commission would not be able to achieve what\nthe public really wants to see happen, said critics. The Commission should have\nbeen appointed in accordance with the Special Presidential Commission of\nInquiry Act. The Commission would then have comprised three sitting Supreme\nCourt judges and it would have had greater powers.  The\ncommission sat for 11 months. Its report was handed over to the President and\nwas thereafter submitted to the Attorney General. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Presidential Commission of Inquiry   and the COPE report provided the eager public\nwith the \u2018inside story\u2019\nof the Bond scam.  The Presidential\nCommission of Inquiry, in particular, exposed much information on the bond scam.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Preparations for\nthe scam had started early. A major shuffling of Department Heads took place in\nthe Central Bank after former Governor Arjun Mahendran took office, said an\nofficial at the Presidential inquiry. Altogether,\n34 transfers took place in 2015 among 30 CBSL department heads. I have worked\nunder eight governors and never in my entire service did I witness such a major\nshuffle,\u201d the official said. “The CBSL usually undergoes around 250\nDepartment Head transfers. After Mahendran came, it went up to a 500\u201d.\nPreviously not more than five to six departmental heads and 195 of general\nstaff had been transferred. The internal transfers were done in a justifiable\nmanner without upsetting the workings of the departments.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

14 heads of\ndepartment had been transferred along with 20 other key persons. “Among\nthose transferred were heads of four vital departments of the Central Bank   the transfers made were not helpful. Head of\nInternational Operations was transferred to the Communication Department. The\nHead of Supervision was transferred to Exchange Control. The Head of Exchange\nControl was sent to the Regional and so on. Other experienced\nofficers were also removed from their positions. Pathuman of the EPF was\ntransferred to Public Debt Department. He was one of the most experienced\nofficers in the EPF and the head of department wanted him back. <\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

These transfers\nof key officers had \u2018shaken the very foundations of the Central Bank\u2019.\nMahendran\u2019s action had caused dissent and dejection among the senior officers\nof the bank. The earlier practice had been to consult Deputy Governors and\nDepartmental Heads prior to effecting transfers and to appoint persons with\nrelevant expertise to head the departments. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Evidence\npresented at the Presidential Commission indicated that Mahendran had made\nthese transfers with an ulterior motive. Mahendran had put in place as the Head\nof the Public Debt Department an officer who was not an expert in the subject. Deepa Seneviratne who was promoted to the\npost of Superintendent of the Public Debt Department in February 2015 told the\nSpecial Presidential Commission of Inquiry that she was surprised when she was\nappointed to that post because she did not have any experience or knowledge of\nthe duties and functions of that department. It\nappeared that she had been appointed, so that the Governor could brush her\naside and interfere with the decision making process. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

From January 2014\ntill January 2015, money needed for the government was raised mostly through\ndirect placements. Auctions were certainly held during this period, but only\nfor very small amounts compared to the amounts being sold through private\nplacements. But after the new\ngovernment came into power in January 2015, and especially after March 2015,\ndirect placements ceased completely and bonds are sold exclusively by auction. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

 Mahendran told the Commission that it was\nPrime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe who gave the directive to stop direct\nplacement method. Mahendran under cross examining stated that Prime Minister\nRanil Wickremesinghe ordered him to issue TBs only through public auctions,\nreported the media. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Doing away with\nthe direct placement method is not within the purview of the Governor, said\nformer Deputy Governor of the Central Bank Dr. W. A. Wijewardene .Governor\nMahendran did so without obtaining Monetary Board approval.  He had claimed that the move would bring in\nforeign investors to the country.  Stopping direct placement\nalso meant that the government could not obtain loans at lower interest rates, Wijewardene said. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

 Auditor General observed that the auctions\nsystem has increased costs and worked to the benefit of the primary dealers who\nwere able to dispose of their bonds in the secondary market at higher rates. If\nthe government wanted funds immediately to settle payments, a one-year Treasury\nBill could have been issued and rolled over periodically. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Central\nBank Deputy Governor Dr. Nandalal Weerasinghe, said that the Central Bank had\nbeen compelled to print a large amount of money in 2015 and 2016 as the then\nGovernor Arjuna Mahendran opted for long-term bond auctions. Never in the\nhistory of the Central Bank had such a large amount of money been printed\nbefore.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Governor\nArjuna Mahendran had ordered Deepa Seneviratne to accept Rs. 10 billion worth of\nbids on Treasury bonds. Seneviratne said that the order had been given in the\npresence of two Deputy Governors and officials of her department and she had\nbeen left with no alternative but to comply with the Governor\u2019s order. Governor\nMahendran had used the words, “Do it”, in ordering her to proceed\nwith the particular bond sale, Seneviratne said, giving evidence before the\nCommission. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Additional\nDirector Dr M. Z. M. Azim had tried to point out the negative repercussions of\nthe bond sale, four times but in vain, while the two Deputy Governors were\nkeeping silent, she said. Seneviratne\nput up a note registering her strong opposition to Mahendran\u2019s move. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mahendran had\nwalked into the Bank\u2019s Market Operations Committee meeting on February 27, 2015\nand told those present that the standard deposit rate of 5 percent would be\nremoved and an auction held to issue 30-year Treasury Bonds. There was no\ndiscussion and no reason given. Officials\nwere surprised when Mahendran walked in. CBSL Governors did not usually attend\nmeetings of the Operations Department.  When questioned as to why they followed\nMahendran\u2019s orders, officials said that the Governor has enormous power within\nthe CBSL.\u2019 The officers will yield to what the Governor says.\u2019 <\/p>\n\n\n\n

the need to\nissue 30-year bonds as opposed to those of shorter tenure was queried at the\ninquiry. According to Mahendran, the Secretary to the Treasury was facing the\ncrunch\u201d on massive payments including the unpaid bills of the year 2014 which\nwere amounting to a large sum of Rs. 1.4 trillion.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The decision\nto scrap the 5 percent deposit rate was highly sensitive and if that\ninformation leaked to one of the bidders, it would have given the bidder a\ndefinite advantage over others, said the Bank\u2019s Deputy Governor Nandalal\nWeerasinghe. <\/em>If a primary\ndealer had found out that the interest rate had been raised while the bond\nauction was ongoing, that particular dealer would have stood to profit far more\nsignificantly than others who were not privy to the information. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Thereafter, Mahendran instructed the Operations Department to draft\na circular raising the rate to 6.5 percent. The instructions were given while a\nbond auction was taking place.  They were\nalso instructed to take all the bids that had been received. There were dummy\nbids as well. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The 30 year Bond carrying a fixed interest\nrate of 12.5% was advertised by the CB for a value of Rs.1 Billion for the\nAuction to be held on 27th February 2015. Most\ndealers had made preparations to provide bids for the already announced Rs.\n1.0b. . But at the auction, the amount was increased to Rs 10 billion, on the instructions\nof Mahendran.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

 Raising the bids to Rs 10 billion has been\ndone before ,but  the February\n27 issue was of a scale) that was totally unprecedented, said Bank officials.  It was ten times the original offer. There was also a difference in the bid\noffer ratio. This was usually around two to four times the offer, but the\nbids on February 27 were 20 times the original offer.  In the earlier Rs 10b\nbids, the Bank had accepted offers which exceeded by 50% at the most, In the February 2015 issue the\nBank accepted ten times the amount originally offered.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The media reported that  money markets were in an uproar on Friday,\nFebruary 27 when the CBSL announced that it was accepting bids worth Rs. 10.0b\nat 9.50%-12.50% whereas clients and most primary dealers had made bids between\n9.50% and 10.50%. Only a few bids, including those by Perpetual Treasuries were\nmade in the 12% range. As a result, Perpetual Treasuries was the successful\nbidder, getting 50% of that amount at the highest price. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bonds\nwhich\nwould have been sold in the market for Rs.121\/= was sold around Rs.91\/=to\nPerpetual Treasuries , causing losses amounting to Rs.1.5 billion immediately\nto government  This caused heavy losses\nto other primary dealers and investors too. The biggest loser was the National Savings Bank.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Bank of Ceylon (BOC) had submitted\na bid on behalf of their customers at 9.5% and Rs 121. However, after getting\nan extension of the closing time of the bid (during the last 30 minutes before\nthe closure of the tender) the same BOC submitted bids at prices ranging\nbetween Rs.87 and Rs.97 on behalf of another Primary Dealer, Perpetual\nTreasuries. The Chief Dealer of BOC when questioned about this strange behavior\nsaid that the CEO of Perpetual Treasuries told him Awoth atha thamai\u201d meaning tremendous profits, if successful. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Clearly Perpetual\nhad access toinformation that other\ndealers did not have, which enabled them to come to the February 27 auction\nfully prepared to bid for bonds worth Rs 10b or more and also get the Bank of\nCeylon to bid on its behalf for an additional Rs 3b. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Treasury bond dealings had been planned in\nsuch a way that the company which gained the most couldn\u2019t be identified.\n“There was a pattern of trading designed to mask the real\nbeneficiary.” “Through this pattern of trading the lion\u2019s share of\nprofits went to Perpetual Treasuries while the lion\u2019s share of the entire loss\nwent to the EPF. Small net cash inflows went to Pan Asia Bank and DFCC.”\nFormer Pan Asia bank chairman had attempted to influence a witness, regarding\ngiving evidence at the bond scam.\n(Sunday Times 9.7.17 p 20)  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The pattern of\nactivity of Perpetual Treasuries before, at, and after the auction gives rise\nto reasonable suspicion of that company having acquired some inside, privileged\nknowledge, said Samarasinghe and Mendis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

 Perpetual had sold large amounts of bonds in\nthe market on February 26 when the market was under the impression that CBSL\npolicy interest rates would remain unchanged\nat 5% and were not aware of\nthe CBSL decision to scrap the 5.0%. The abolition of the 5% window meant that\nthose who held the old bonds will see the market value of their bonds halved if\nthey try to sell them before maturity. . Perpetual thereafter purchased bonds\nin the market the following week thus making a massive profit. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

 <\/strong>An\nofficial of the Central Bank pointed out that the state had suffered an\nimmediate loss of Rs. 878 million because of decision to raise funds by selling\ntreasury bonds only through auction. Mahendran had ordered that bids for Rs 10\nbn be accepted without direct placements and, therefore, the government had\nreceived only Rs 9.6 billion. If both direct placements and auction methods had\nbeen employed the government could have raised as much as Rs 10.5 billion. The\nCentral Bank could have raised Rs 2.6 billion through auction method and the\nrest could have been raised through direct placements in accordance with the\nthen current market interest rates, he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

After the auction, Perpetual Treasuries, along\nwith a few other Primary dealers also made high profits by selling the bonds to\nthe Employees\u2019 Provident Fund, Sri Lanka Insurance Corporation, the University\nGrants Commission, National Savings Bank and Mahapola Scholarship Fund.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Perpetual Treasuries bought treasury bonds\nworth Rs. 8,594 million and resold them to Sri Lanka Insurance Corporation for\nRs. 12,708 million, within a few days, said the Centre for Human Rights.\nThe company made a profit of Rs. 4,114 million. loss\nto Sri Lanka Insurance Corporation was over Rs 4.11 billion. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

National Savings Bank and Perpetual Treasuries\nhad at least five transactions. The company made a profit of Rs. 819 million while\nthe NSB lost over Rs. 819 million. On March 17, 2015 the Secretary of the\nUniversity Grants Commission (UGC) issued a gazette to utilize Universities\nProvident Fund for long and short term investments. UGC invested around Rs. 1\nbillion in the Bond deal,   said the\nCentre for Human Rights. the minimum loss made by the UGC was Rs. 146 million. the\nCentre also said it might not be the only time that Universities Provident Fund\n(UPF) had been misused in a similar fashion. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The total loss incurred by Employees\u2019\nProvident Fund (EPF)  due to the bond\nscam alone was over Rs. 26 billion said \nCampaign for Free and Fair Elections (CaFFE. Employees\nProvident Fund Department sources at the Central Bank said   EPF had suffered losses due to the bond scam.\nThey attributed the loss to buying Treasury Bonds from primary dealer Perpetual\nTreasuries without buying them at the auction direct. They said details about\nthe losses had been already reported to the Central Bank and the Bank had\nlaunched an inquiry. The CB had\ninitially asked for a committee consisting of outsiders for the probe as some\nCB employees were also to be investigated. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

A special\ninvestigation, commissioned by the Monetary Board of the Central Bank of Sri\nLanka, in March 2017, showed that bond scams under the current government led\nto a staggering loss of about Rs. 10 billion to the Employees\u2019 Provident Fund\n(EPF). the report set out in detail the manner in which the EPF scam had been\ncarried out by the two high ranking CBSL officials. The deals were done\ndirectly with the primary dealer or routed through other intermediary primary\ndealers. The team had looked into the\ninvestment of EPF monies in Treasury bonds in 2015 and 2016. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

a CB official accused of committing\nirregularities had submitted his resignation on hearing about the proposed\ninvestigation, but the CB hierarchy had not accepted his resignation in view of\nthe investigation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

At the Monetary\nBoard meeting on March 23, board members demanded that the two officials found\nguilty for swindling public funds be interdicted immediately and disciplinary\naction taken against them. However, all that was done was sending two\n\u2018show-cause\u2019 letters to the officials, clearly named in the report as\noffenders. he soft-peddling of the issue and not taking clear action against\nthe corrupt officials and allowing them to remain in the service at the same\npositions would result in they doing further damage and intimidating other\nofficials who were against corruption, sources said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

One particular name\nhad emerged in the investigations. P.H.I. Saman Kumara was transferred\nto the EPF on 08 June 2015.(\nIsland 1.8.17 p 6)  The staff at the\nEPF  warned me against Saman Kumara whom\nthey claimed to be a questionable dealer said Assistant Governor  Jayalath. Dealers carry a big\nresponsibility. So I was scared. I put Saman Kumara in the Risk Management\nDivision of the EPF.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

 Then I\nreceived a telephone call from the then Governor Arjun Mahendran, continued Jayalath.\nHe called me and shouted at me for placing Saman Kumara in the Risk Management\nDivision.\u201d Mahendran told him I sent a fellow with CFA qualification and this\nfellow tells me he was not assigned to the EPF Front Office.\u201d <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mahendran had\nwanted Saman to be put in the front office. And directed Jayalath\nto do so. I told Governor Mahendran that we cannot rely on Saman Kumara,\nconcerns have been raised on his conduct. Then Mr. Mahendran asked me whether\nthese rumors had any proof. I told him we do not have proof. Then he asked me\n\u2018so with no proof how can you say Saman Kumara\u2019s conduct as a dealer is\nquestionable?\u2019\u201d <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Jayalath was\nunhappy about the order, \nbut did not want to shift Saman Kumara to another position because if I\n(Jayalath) had shifted him (Saman Kumara) I would also have to walk out of my\nposition.\u201d He had heard what happened to some of the persons in the Central\nBank who were against the then Governor Mahendran.\u201d <\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

as the Chief Dealer of the EPF ,Saman Kumara\nwas responsible for buying treasury bonds purchased by Perpetual Treasuries in\nthe secondary market. Saman Kumara had violated regulations by conducting\ndealings exceeding his daily limits. Daily dealing limit for a Chief Dealer in\nthe EPF is Rs.2 billion.\n<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Further, Saman Kumara was difficult to\ncontrol, said  Jayalath. he was regularly\nnot in his seat and continuously used the mobile phone, disregarding the\ninstruction not to use mobile phones to carry out deals.\u201d <\/em>Saman Kumara was\nclose to  Governor Mahendran and it\nseemed Saman Kumara was divulging details of discussions held at the EPF to\nMahendran said Jayalath. (Island\n1.8.17 p 6) <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The government said initially  that it has not incurred any loss because the\nfrozen PTL assets amounts to Rs. 12 billion while the total loss was Rs 11\nbillion. This was hotly\ncontested. The total loss incurred by the state due to the bond scam was over\nRs 33 billion  said Campaign for Free and\nFair Elections (CaFFE)  .”Our\nexperts have gone through the transactions and found that the loss to be around\nRs. 33 billion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Nalaka\nGodahewa, former SEC Chairman,  pointed\nout that  Rs. 11 billion is just the\nprofit made by Perpetual Treasuries in one year through the bond scam. there\nare other factors to be taken into account such as the increase in the interest\nrates. This is no ordinary scam (horakama) but one that has affected the whole\ncountry and added to the cost of living of every citizen, Godahewa said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Lastly, the Treasury bond scam had caused a 10\nbillion-rupee loss to the government coffers alone, former Deputy Governor of\nthe Central Bank Dr. W. A. Wijewardene \nsaid. there had been an immediate loss of Rs. 532 million to the\ngovernment and the total loss for the 30 years would be Rs. 10 billion, he\nsaid, presenting a document outlining his calculation of the loss.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The loss to the\ngovernment resulting from the interest rate increase alone is in the range of\nRs. 126 billion. Further, he pointed out that as a result of the flight of\nforeign money from the bond market following this scam and other reasons, the\nvalue of the rupee depreciated by about 16% which resulted in the increase of\nthe government foreign debt by about Rs 512 billion. As a result of the\nincrease in the interest rates, the debt of companies and individuals had\nincreased by about Rs. 280 billion. Thus the actual direct and indirect loss to\nthe government and the people of Sri Lanka from the bond scam is over one\ntrillion rupees.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

the Central bank\nwill get back Rs 10.0b in interest earnings in about 8.5 years. Thus Sri Lanka\nwill be paying the amount of the original amount borrowed at least three times\nover by way of interest payments only. the bond issue also  raised interest rates causing a loss to the\ntaxpayer. The taxpayer is also affected, thought he does not know it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A second controversial bond auction took place\non the 29 march 2016<\/strong>.\nthis second scam,  was even worse than\nthe first scam. Central Bank issued treasury \nbonds worth Rs 80 billion in March 2016 after announcing that they\nwill  only issue bonds to Rs 40 million.\nThe amount accepted by the Central Bank at this auction was 07 times greater\nthan the amount accepted in 2015. Bank of Ceylon, the People\u2019s Bank and\nthe National Savings Bank\nhad\n twice received instructions    at this auction to make bids at lower rates. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Again Perpetual\nTreasuries benefited. PTL obtained 34% and 31% of the relevant bonds. Perpetual\nTreasuries borrowed from\nthe Employees Provident Fund (EPF), the DFCC Bank and the Pan Asia Bank to pay\nfor these bonds. Perpetual  was also\nhelped by the Central Bank  which allowed\nPerpetual to borrow from the Central Bank under the \u2018Intra-day Liquidity Facility\u2019\n(ILF). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

 Thereafter, Perpetual  had been charged an additional Rs. 88 million\n because of  an increase in the market rate. Central bank\nthereafter returned Rs. 88 million to Perpetual \nafter the market value went up. the payment of Rs. 88 million had been\ndone with the approval of the Central Bank. Central bank\nofficials said it was against the Central Bank regulations to pay money\nback  in this way. This had never been\ndone before. it was\nunusual and unprecedented. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Critics\ncommented, we have now  heard how a  primary dealer borrowed money from the\nCentral Bank at low interest rates to buy high interest yielding bonds issued\nby the Central Bank itself. Perpetual Treasuries Ltd made a Net Profit of Rs.\n5.124 billion in the
\nFinancial Year ended 31 March 2016 and a Net Profit of Rs. 6.365 billion in the\nFinancial Year ended 31 March 2017. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

DEW Gunasekera said that if Yahapalana  had allowed \nCOPE to present its report to Parliament, the second treasury bond scam\ncould have been  prevented. the 2016 scam was much bigger than the one\nperpetrated soon after the change of government. The PTL had, with political\nbacking, borrowed from the state and then the same funds were given back at a\nhigher interest,  DEW Gunasekera  observed. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Pitipana commission, though dismissed as ignorant\nand biased made several very  significant\nrecommendations. The Pitipana Commission said, inter alia, \u2018We have  determined that Mr. Mahendran directed that bids\nto the value of Rs. 10.058 billion be accepted for the improper, wrongful and\nBala fide collateral purpose of enabling Perpetual Treasuries Ltd to obtain a\nhigh value of Treasury Bonds at that Auction, at low Bid Prices and high Yield\nRates\u2019. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

We also find that Mr. Mahendran provided\ninside information (price sensitive information) to Perpetual Treasuries Ltd.,\nwhich Perpetual Treasuries Ltd used to its benefit at the Treasury Bonds\nAuction held on 27th February 2015 and that Mr. Mahendran acted in collusion\nwith Perpetual Treasuries Ltd. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

 in view\nof the determinations referred to above. the Commission to Investigate\nAllegations of Bribery or Corruption and the other appropriate authorities\nshould consider whether the aforesaid acts of Mr. Mahendran amount to acts of\n“Corruption” as defined in Section 70 of the Bribery Act and, if so.\nprosecute Mr. Mahendran under the Bribery Act and other applicable law. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

the Pitipana Committee continued, Perpetual\nTreasuries Ltd has made the major part of its profits by using \u2018inside\ninformation\u2019 (price sensitive information) and by market manipulation in the\nSecondary Market and, thereby, knowingly violated and acted in breach of the\nprovisions of the Code of Conduct for Primary Dealers, which has been issued by\nthe CBSL under and in terms of the Regulations issued under the Registered\nStock and Securities Ordinance No. 7 of 1937.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

given the complexity of the task and the\nexpertise needed. a Forensic Audit or similar process should be carried out to\naccurately estimate the quantum of the sum to which Perpetual Treasuries Ltd\ngained and benefited from the \u2018inside information\u2019 (price sensitive\ninformation) at the Treasury Bond Auction on 29th March 2016. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Pitipana committee continued, we recommend\nthat, appropriate proceedings be \ninstituted against Perpetual Treasuries Ltd for the recovery of these\nmonies. we consider that, the provisions of Section 21D (5) of the Registered\nStocks and Securities Ordinance are likely to be relevant. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

we recommend that. the Hon. Attorney General\nand other appropriate authorities consider whether Mr. Arjun Aloysius and Mr.\nKasun Palisena are parties to and directly responsible for the commission of an\noffence under section 56A(1) of the Registered Stock and Securities Ordinance\nand, if so, proceed against these two persons too, in terms of Section 56B of\nthe Registered Stock and Securities Ordinance, concluded  Pitipana committee. ( continued)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

KAMALIKA\u00a0 PIERIS There were three sets of inquiry into the Central Bank bond scam, the Pitipana committee, the Presidential Commission of Inquiry   and the COPE inquiry. These bodies could only probe and make recommendations. They could not issue charges. Prime Minister Ranil Wickremasinghe appointed a three-member commission of lawyers, Gamini Pitipana (Chairman) Mahesh Kalugampitiya and […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":true,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[118,104,106],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-86801","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-corruption-and-bribery","category-kamalika-pieris","category-106"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/86801","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=86801"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/86801\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=86801"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=86801"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=86801"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}