Unforgivable: Supreme Court Shuts Door on Krishanthi Kumaraswamy Convicts

Decades after a crime that shook the nation, justice stands firm: Supreme Court rejects Fundamental Rights plea by death row inmates in landmark ruling

In a unanimous decision that reaffirms the gravity of one of Sri Lanka’s most harrowing crimes, a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court today dismissed a Fundamental Rights application filed by five convicts in the infamous Krishanthi Kumaraswamy abduction, rape, and murder case.

The petition, led by the first accused Somaratna Rajapaksha, sought relief on the basis that the petitioners had languished on death row since their 1998 conviction. Arguing that their prolonged detention constituted cruel and inhuman treatment, the convicts urged the Court to consider commutation of their death sentences or to facilitate a Presidential pardon.

However, the bench—comprising Justices Kumudini Wickramasinghe, Achala Wengappuli, and Menaka Wijesundera—was unpersuaded. The judges sided with arguments presented by Senior Deputy Solicitor General Lakmali Karunanayake, who appeared on behalf of the Commissioner General of Prisons, Minister of Justice Harshana Nanayakkara, and the Attorney General.

"No Right to Mercy": Court Rejects Grounds for Appeal

At the heart of the state’s argument was a critical point of law: that the granting of a Presidential pardon is a discretionary act of the Executive and not a right that convicts can claim. The Attorney General also contended that the application was time-barred and that the petitioners had not come to court with clean hands—an assertion that the bench upheld in full.

The dismissal underscores the judiciary’s consistent stance on the Krishanthi Kumaraswamy case, which remains one of the darkest chapters in Sri Lanka’s recent history. In 1998, a special Trial-at-Bar found several members of the military guilty of abducting, raping, and murdering the 18-year-old schoolgirl, along with her mother, brother, and family neighbor. The brutal nature of the crime shocked the conscience of the nation and became a defining case in public discourse around justice and accountability.

The Supreme Court had already upheld the original conviction and sentences in a previous appeal, brought before a five-judge bench. Today’s ruling is yet another firm rejection of any attempt to dilute that judgment.

A Message from the Bench: Justice, Not Sympathy

President’s Counsel Manohara de Silva, appearing for the petitioners, argued that prolonged incarceration on death row constituted a violation of their fundamental rights under the Constitution. But the Court’s ruling signals a clear message: in cases involving the most heinous crimes, the passage of time does not soften the scale of justice.

Legal analysts say today’s verdict is significant not only for its reaffirmation of the judicial process but also as a reminder that mercy petitions cannot override the seriousness of crimes that breach the fundamental values of human dignity and public trust.

As the country continues to grapple with its legacy of violence and impunity, today’s decision marks a moment of resolve—where justice, long demanded and long delivered, is upheld without compromise.