The Supreme Court has declared null and void a presidential amnesty granted under former President Ranil Wickremesinghe to a man sentenced to 29 months in prison for failing to pay Rs. 1.74 million in maintenance arrears.
In a judgment delivered on October 23, a three-judge bench ruled that the remission of the sentence granted to Mohamed Ameen Mohamed Naseem under the September 2024 general amnesty violated the fundamental right to equality and equal protection of the law guaranteed under Article 12(1) of the Constitution.
The judgment was delivered by Justice Janak De Silva, with Justices Dr. Sobhitha Rajakaruna and Sampath K.B. Wijeratne agreeing.
The case was filed by Naseem’s former wife, Ahamend Jaleel Farmilla Begum, who challenged his release after he had served less than two months of his 29-month prison sentence.
Naseem was imprisoned in July 2024 following his failure to comply with a maintenance order issued by the Quazi Court. However, he was released on September 12, 2024, under a general amnesty granted to mark Prisoners’ Day.
The Supreme Court found that Naseem had received preferential treatment because his imprisonment had been recorded as resulting from the non-payment of a fine, while another prisoner jailed for similar maintenance arrears received only a one-week reduction in his sentence.
The court held that the difference in wording between the two prisoners’ commitment warrants did not justify such unequal treatment.
Consequently, 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 petitioner’s fundamental rights.
The court declared the remission granted to Naseem null and void, restoring the legal effect of his original prison sentence.
In a significant observation, the Supreme Court stated that Naseem, having been released despite the continuing validity of his sentence, was now a “fugitive from justice.”
The judgment said the appropriate course of action was for him to surrender immediately to law enforcement authorities.
The court further held that the original warrant issued by the Negombo Magistrate’s Court remained legally valid and provided sufficient authority for prison officials to detain him and enforce the sentence.
However, the Supreme Court said no additional order directing the enforcement of the sentence was necessary, as the relevant Magistrate’s Court already possessed the authority to take the required steps.
The judgment also clarified that the President was not prevented from granting a fresh remission, provided it was done in accordance with the law and after considering all relevant circumstances.
The ruling was issued in Fundamental Rights Application No. 319/2024. (Newswire)