Supreme Court invalidates a presidential pardon given by Ranil

The Supreme Court has invalidated the presidential pardon granted under former President Ranil Wickremesinghe to an individual who was released after being sentenced to 29 months in prison for failing to pay maintenance of Rs. 1.74 million. The court has now declared him a 'fugitive from justice' as his sentence remains valid.

A fundamental rights petition, bearing number 319/2024, was filed against this individual, Mohamed Ameen Mohamed Naseem, by his former wife, Ahmed Jaleel Farmila Begum. He was sentenced to this prison term in July 2024 for defaulting on a maintenance order issued by the Quazi Court. However, he was released under a general pardon granted on September 12, 2024, to mark Prisoners' Day. At that time, he had served less than two months of his 29-month sentence.

In its verdict delivered on October 23, the three-judge bench pointed out that this release constituted a violation of the fundamental right to equality and equal protection under the law, as enshrined in Article 12(1) of the Constitution.

The court observed that Naseem received this special privilege because his imprisonment was recorded as being due to the non-payment of a 'fine'. However, another prisoner incarcerated for a similar non-payment of maintenance received only a one-week reduction in their sentence under the same general pardon. The court emphasized that such unequal treatment cannot be justified merely by a difference in the wording of the two prison warrants.

Accordingly, the Supreme Court ruled that former President Ranil Wickremesinghe, the Secretary to the Ministry of Justice, and the Commissioner General of Prisons had violated the fundamental rights of the petitioner.

The court, invalidating the commutation of Naseem's sentence, reinstated his original prison term. The verdict explicitly states that he must immediately surrender to law enforcement authorities.

The court pointed out that the original warrant issued by the Negombo Magistrate's Court for his detention and the execution of his sentence remains legally valid. The Supreme Court also clarified that since the relevant Magistrate's Court has the power to take the necessary steps, issuing an additional order for this purpose is not required.

Finally, one important point was noted in this verdict, which was pronounced by Justice Janak de Silva and concurred with by Justices Dr. Sobhitha Rajakaruna and Sampath K.B. Wijeratne. That is, this verdict does not impede the President's ability to grant a new pardon legally, after considering all relevant facts.