25 May, 2024


Rt Hon Sir Desmond de Silva QC & Fishing In Troubled Waters

By Rajasingham Jayadevan

Rajasingham Jayadevan

Rajasingham Jayadevan


“The Rt Hon Sir Desmond de Silva QC is head of Argent’s International Law team and is one of this country’s leading criminal Queen’s Counsel. He has particular expertise in Fraud (both national and international), Business Crime, Extradition, Human Rights, Kidnap & Blackmail, Large Scale Importation of Drugs, Money Laundering, Murder, Tax & VAT Fraud and Terrorism. The high standing in which he is held as a lawyer has been underlined by the honour of a Knighthood that was conferred upon him in the New Year Honours of 2007. Regarded as a superb tactician and a powerful and penetrating cross-examiner who gets to the heart of the matter, he is also known as a great jury advocate for his persuasive skills. Known as one of the most successful defence counsel in serious criminal cases of the kind referred to above, he has also attracted national sporting personalities who have come to him when facing grave offences”. (Argent Chambers)

“Sir Desmond de Silva, QC – Sterling Pounds 407,336.00 or Rs. 85,550,666.37. Thus he has been paid a total of exactly Sterling Pounds 764,672 or over Rs. 164 million (or precisely Rs. 164,705,357.50) so far. Sir Geoffrey Nice, QC and Lady Nice – Sterling Pounds 86,358 or Rs. 18,060,558.98. Thus, he has been paid a total of Sterling Pounds 122,358 or Rs. 25,697,251.08 so far.David M. Crane – US$ 67,500 or Rs 8,796,799. Thus, he has been paid a total of US$ 127,500 or Rs. 16,611,060.50.

Sir Desmond de Silva QC

Sir Desmond de Silva QC

‘The payments revealed today appear to be only a fraction of what has been found out so far. The fuller magnitude of the expenditure, which would have been enough to build houses for hundreds, install electricity schemes for villages, provide medical assistance to the North, or to build and equip a few schools, will unfold only when investigations now under way are complete. Even the few disclosures today raise a number of important questions. The role of foreign advisers and eminent persons, in their own way, remains an important question. Since they did not sit at the sessions of the Disappearances Commission, and visited the one time battle areas on their own, were they involved in a process of formulating their own report to counter the one due at the UN Human Rights Council next month?

Is that effort credible and worth more Rs. 400 million that has already been spent on the exercise and more large amounts surfacing as the investigations continue? Was such a project formulated after careful study of its acceptability by the international community, more so since public funds are involved? This was particularly at a time when living costs soared and the public were deprived of relief during the previous UPFA regime. To make matters worse, would the present Government accept any report prepared by the foreign advisors hired at great cost? This is particularly in the light of the new Government’s position that it is in favour of a ‘credible domestic mechanism’ to conduct a probe. Quite clearly, in its efforts to re-build credibility abroad for Sri Lanka, the Government will not want the international community to believe in the previous government’s efforts to pay colossal amounts of money and obtain a report seemingly to its advantage? Even to the most dim-witted, it is clear; it would pose issues of credibility.” Sunday Times Sunday, February 15, 2015.

“The skeletons are quickly coming out of the Central Bank (CB) cupboard with news of another high profile contract involving a well-known barrister from the UK with Sri Lankan roots. Sir Desmond de Silva, QC, the Sunday Times reliably learns, was paid a fee of UK sterling pounds 60,000 per month (about Rs.12 million) to prepare a strategy for the regulator on how to counter human rights issues against Sri Lanka”.(Sri Lanka Brief)

“From the outset, Sri Lanka’s Presidential Commission on Missing Persons has been beset by controversy. We have previously written about our concern that it is little more than an attempt to undermine international attempts for accountability via a discredited mechanism containing inherent conflicts of interest. Since the demise of the Rajapaksa regime there have been further revelations, with the Sunday Times alleging that the Commissions lead international legal advisor, Sir Desmond de Silva, was paid a salary of around £60,000 per month. Subsequent allegations suggest that payments to Sir Desmond, the others five international legal advisors (David Crane, Geoffrey Nice, Avdhash Kaushal, Ahmer B Soofi, and Motoo Noguchi) and another British QC (Rodney Dixon) totalled around £660,000’.” Sri Lanka Campaign.

“Based on my instructions, my analysis of the relevant law, from the factual matrix made available to me and other research, my opinion is that the great mass of civilian deaths which occurred in the final stage of the conflict were regrettable but.. permissible collateral damage. It was occasioned in the process of the security forces fighting to overwhelm and defeat the LTTE who had taken hostages in such large numbers. that this may well be considered to be one of the largest hostage takings in history The human stakes were colossal considering that the hostages were being murdered if they had tried to escape. The end result of saving some 290,000 hostage lives and the defeat of the ruthless LTTE were legitimate military and humanitarian objectives and the collateral damage was not disproportionate to the military advantage and was wholly consistent with the humanitarian imperatives that prevailed at that grim time.” (Conclusion Sir Desmond De Silva’s report)

“I state with responsibility that Sir Desmond de Silva was previously retained by the then Government of Sri Lanka to provide it with an opinion with respect to the legality of the conduct of the Government forces during the last stages of the war. On 23rdFebruary, 2014, five months before he was appointed by former President Mahinda Rajapaksa to chair the Advisory Council to the Commission, he provided his client – the Government – with a legal opinion stating: “Based on my instructions, my analysis of the relevant law, from the factual matrix made available to me and other research, my opinion is that great mass of civilian deaths which occurred in the final stage of the conflict were regrettable, but permissible collateral damage.

“Sir, this is the most serious matter. What this means is that when Sir Desmond de Silva was appointed as Chair of the Advisory Council to the Commission of Inquiry – a Commission under our law is supposed to function independently and impartially – Sir Desmond de Silva had already come to a conclusion on, at least, some of the questions the Commission he was asked to advise, was mandated to investigate and had communicated this position to the Government of Sri Lanka. In other words, the Government appointed a person who it already knew, had formed an opinion on the question to be investigated by the Commission, to advise that Commission. What then, is the independence of this Commission? In fact, the framing of the expanded mandate of the Commission suggests that the questions may have even been drafted, based on the opinion provided by Sir Desmond de Silva. This is the most perversion of justice and I demand that the new Government immediately constitute an investigation into the conduct of Sir Desmond de Silva and the previous Government, in conspiring to undermine the independence of the Commission of Inquiry. I also demand that His Excellency the President immediately rescind Sir Desmond de Silva’s appointment to the Advisory Council as a matter of urgency in order to secure the Rule of Law and Good Governance.

“But, that is not the end of the matter. Sir Desmond de Silva was clearly retained by the Government prior to his providing the Government with the opinion on 23rdFebruary, 2014. There was, therefore, an attorney-client relationship between Sir Desmond de Silva and the Government on questions of liability pertaining to loss of civilian life during the last stages of the war. It was in the context of this prevailing relationship that Sir Desmond de Silva was appointed to chair an Advisory Council to a supposedly independent Commission that would inquire into the guilt or otherwise of the Members of the Government – his client. This is a clear case of blatant conflict of interest and on this count too, I demand that the new Government of Sri Lanka, not only immediately rescind Sir Desmond de Silva’s appointment but also forward a complaint to the Bar Standards Board of the United Kingdom against Sir Desmond de Silva’s patent professional misconduct. I also urge other interested parties to do the same. This behaviour must not be tolerated by this country or by the Bar of which Sir Desmond de Silva is a Member. What then of the Commission of Inquiry that has been stripped of any independence in this way? I do not understand why the Government continues to let this Commission of Inquiry to function. I propose that the existing Commission be discontinued for it is too flawed for any good to come of it. Instead, I propose that a fresh investigation with real investigative powers be constituted to actively seek out the fate of the disappeared. The complaints and proceedings of the Paranagama Commission can be used by this new investigation, if necessary. That body should have the power to search, seize and even detain, if necessary. They should be mandated with bringing victims, sons and fathers, back.” M. A. Sumanthiran MP in the Parliament.

A case to answer

Mr Sumanthiran has articulated his claims very well. Neither the government nor Hon Desmond de Silva have so far countered or responded to his well thought arguments. So far, there is no official inquiry into the dealings with Hon Desmond de Silva & Co by the new government.

Sunday Times and Mr Sumanthiran’s findings have revealed the extent of the conflict of interest and the lack of cost consideration in engaging Desmond de Silva. Has such a costly biased report improved the status of Sri Lanka on the war crimes issues internationally? This meaningless report has been done and dusted upon its release as no one considered it seriously so far.

Hon Desmond de Silva QC, who undertook the ‘The Report of the Patrick Finuance Review’ for the UK government in 2012 on the murder of Patrick Finuance by the paramilitary group of the Ulster Defence Association (UDA) in 1989, specifically addressed his report to the House of Commons. But he could not see the necessity to be transparent and impartial when acting for the government of Sri Lanka. No one knows what his terms of reference are and the charge out rate being applied by him.

Though Sri Lanka is not a signatory to the 2002 Rome Statute to prosecute individuals for serious war crimes, it is a signatory to the Geneva conventions on war crimes. In his findings, he did not relate the Geneva Convention and the responsibility of the government on the accountability issues that the Rajapaksa government was attempting to hide in a devious manner.

Such a shallow and partisan finding of the QC only proves that he too has stretched beyond his professional repute to cash in from the troubles in Sri Lanka. It is a big haul for him from the pains and tears of the war victims.

The central issue is, who is answerable to such a colossal sum of payment to Sir Desmond de Silva QC. Was his conflict of interest assessed by anyone or even by the Attorney Generals department of Sri Lanka? Why did he act in a secret manner and was paid discretely for such an onerous task? Why didn’t he reject the tempting financial reward to uphold his professional standing? ‘A conflict of interest is a set of circumstances that creates a risk that professional judgment or actions regarding a primary interest will be unduly influenced by a secondary interest.’ The definition originally appeared in Thompson (1993) and a person of such standing, by negating this principle, decided to undertake the engagement to bolster the confrontational Rajapaksa regime.

‘Chapter 3 on Conflicts of interests of the Solicitors Regulation … deals with the proper handling of conflicts of interests, which is a critical public protection. It is important to have in place systems that enable ..to identify and deal with potential conflicts. Conflicts of interests can arise between: ‘you and current clients (“own interest conflict”); and… You can never act where there is a conflict, or a significant risk of conflict, between you and your client. If there is a conflict….you must not act for …. unless the matter falls within the scope of the limited exceptions ….’ The advice further states: ‘you do not act if there is an own interest conflict or a significant risk of an own interest conflict;’ and that ‘you do not act if there is a client conflict, or a significant risk of a client conflict’. Will Desmond De Silva QC counter this guideline that there was no ‘own interest conflict’ in his engagement with the Mahinda government?

A report of public interest is produced in utter secrecy without disclosing the remit of such engagement. Production of the report and payment of fees was not debated in the parliament and there is no knowledge of any such decisions made at any cabinet meetings. There is even no clear evidence who was responsible for the payment of the fees and one of the news stated: ‘The skeletons are quickly coming out of the Central Bank (CB) cupboard with news of another high profile contract involving a well-known barrister from the UK with Sri Lankan roots’. If this is true, what is the level of engagement of the former Central Bank Governor Ajith Navard Cabraal who himself has outstepped his remit to extend the hostile foreign policy of the Rajapaksa regime?

The opposition too was not made aware of the deal involved in engaging Sir Desmond de Silva and to this date, even after the change of government, the true facts of his engagement are not revealed. In a democratic country, the opposition too is a stakeholder to dissect any issues publicly but unfortunately such a disingenuous contract found its way through without any public outcry.

Sir Desmond de Silva must have been very well aware of the public criticism of Mahinda Rajapaksa to the extent of being branded as an authoritarian by none other the former head of the UNHCR Mrs Navi Pillay. He could not foresee that his report will be relevant to the efforts of the UNHCR. His engagement has fattened his purse with irreparable reputational damage to him, discredit to his legal profession and thus compounding the pains of victims of the war. His effort proves to be a heartless crusade to earn wealth.

It will be generous if Desmond de Silva views the recent Al Jazeera filming of the war widows Sri Lanka: Widows of War – Al Jazeera English and donate his questionable income after deducting his reasonable disbursements to a reputable charity that could help alleviate their sufferings. He will be the beneficiary of Gift Aid relief if it is paid through a registered charity. He would be able to at least mitigate his reputational damage with his farsighted magnanimity, instead of being clobbered into the bandwagon of bonus rich and knighthood stripped former head of Royal Bank of Scotland Fred Goodwin.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Latest comments

  • 13

    People like Desmond de Silva are [Edited out] who are a disgrace to the legal profession. He is commissioned at great cost to whitewash a pack of criminals who stand in peril of accounting for colossal human rights violations that have taken place in Sri Lanka. The movements in the law that hold leaders of states like Pinochet of Chile, Charles Taylor, Fujimori of Peru, Milosovic of Serbia etc. are an international evolution which ensure the accountability of leaders of states who kill their own people for political or racist ends. This law provides a safeguarding of human lives from the power hungry chauvinists who stoke racial or religious passions to secure their own political ends.

    There is a need for the use of this law in Sri Lanka. We have had a succession of mass killings which remain unaccounted for.We had the killings of several thousand young mostly innocent Sinhalese youth killed during the JVP uprisings with hardly anyone in the country raising the issue. We have had Muslims killed at Aluthgama and other places by the BBS which was inspired by identifiable political thugs of the Rajapakse family. Then we have had a series of Tamil killings from 1956 onwards which some say amount to genocide. These have to be accounted for if there is to be a meaningful restoration of a rule of law in Sri Lanka. A deterrent has to be provided through the trial of leaders who are still alive (including Chandrika Kumaraunge, who now pretends once more to be the saviour of the Tamils) . Likewise, the leaders of the LTTE who killed innocent Sinhalese civilians. These men who are still alive and within reach of the government (like Karuna and KP) must be brought to trial before the Sri Lankan courts as these were internal crimes committed under Sri Lankan law unlike the crimes of the heads of states who were committing crimes proscribed by international law.

    Desmond de Silva is a hired gun of a former ruling clan to rescue the clan and its underlings from such accountability. He must be made accountable for the colossal sums that have been paid to him. Since he was acting for a private group, there is no reason why the state has to pocket out these fees. A claim must be brought before the British courts for the recovery of this large sum that has unconscionably been paid to him unless he returns them to the government or pays it to a Sri Lankan charity as suggested here.

    • 5

      I quite agree with you that Dr. Desmond de Silva is disgrace for the legal profession. He has also degraded the knighthood that was bestowed on him, by his conduct. At a dinner meeting in London in April 2012, where he was the guest speaker, he said that killing of 40,000 Tamils in the process of liberating 300,000 of them from LTTE, cannot be a war crime. Fortunately the Tamils present at the meeting showed restraint and ignored him as a fool with skewed mind.

      • 4

        The QC is not only fishing, is also pissing in the troubled waters.

  • 12

    Sir Desmond, its your turn now to respond and address the Jury!

  • 15

    Well done. Soon after the UNP formed the government there was an inspired leak in the Sunday Times which is the unofficial spokesman for the Ranil UNP that Sir Desmond De Silva and several other ex-sri lankan lawyers and a few British lawyers had been pain fabulous amounts of money to lobby the UK government on behalf of the Rajapakse regime.

    As a man who professes so much love for his land of birth we expected Desmond De Silva QC to do this free. But we learn every day that there is no such thing when it comes to economic hit men like Sir Desmond.

    This very expensive team then spent a few wonderful weeks in expensive resorts around Sri Lanka in preparation for the lobbying in UK ! Before they could even begin their magic act the Rajapakse regime fell . Rajapakse has no idea of how things work in large democracies like UK and are taken in easily by big talkers like Sir Desmond who claim that they can bluff and talk the UK government into their way of thinking.The same thing was tried by Dr Nonis until humpty Dumpty was pushed down from his wall by thug Sajin Vass Gunawardena.

    But when you look at the reality chaps like Desmond who act like Uncle Toms in London are just wogs there, walking a thin line between professional con-men and bluffs. All his big cases have been out side of UK , in countries in Africa where there is a foolish respect for those who come from UK, even if black.

    But funnily now it appears the master strategist Ranil Wickramasinghe has also been charmed and he has again retained the Desmond team to lobby UK. Ranil who is a regular supplicant in UK may be ensuring good entertainment and refreshment for himself when in UK !

  • 10

    Desmond Sir, is indeed a stellar act in the legal firmament. But linen suits and Panama hats do not come cheap, and if some gullible bunch chose to impress their detractors with some ‘heavy hitters’, then, dammit! these are the people to have on your side. Let us not blame Desmond Sir and his fellow travellers; they are only doing what most would when faced with a stinking pile of moolah. Let us not forget those who commissioned these people to tidy up the mess, and give credibility to their waning defence. For these and more, let us keep MR and his merrie band in steady focus.

  • 6


    It is difficult not to wonder whether you are merely grand-standing or if you are sincere when you state “It will be generous if Desmond de Silva would… donate his questionable income … to a reputable charity that could help alleviate their sufferings.”

    [Edited out]

    • 7

      Kumar R

      I offered you a position of Caretaker at a community project I am involved in Sri Lanka and asked you to submit your CV and face an interview.

      You did not respond. The job is gone. There is another body in Sri Lanka that may need your service to spin stories to their advantage. If you are interested, pl. send me a note.

      Continue with you harp against Rajasingham brothers from your well fortified secret den.

      God bless you to come out of your deepening innermost crisis.

      • 2


        Ha! – Not unexpected. Unable to defend one’s own action, the only way out is again a shameless, spineless weaseling out. Your responses reflect your desperation, frustration and defenselessness – not add an iota of credibility for the education that you claim. Looking for cheap-shots is vividly an effort at diverting attention from an “inconvenient truth” — [Edited out]

        (CT: I was quite reluctant to add the last para, but hope you would tolerate my indulgence, given the wisdom of “use a thorn to take a thorn.” That seems to be the only option to dissuade Rajasingham’s type of undue, grossly irrelevant comment made in nothing but utterly bad taste, absolutely devoid any trace of civility, let alone higher education.)

        • 3

          Kumar R.

          What a fallacy and progressing irredeemable decay.

          Unable to digest the contents of my writing, you are on the spree to make unwanted comments. You have reflected this on going basis and it has become your preoccupation.

          Please consult your Dr for your progressing Rajasingham-phobia before it cracks your nuts. CT readers do not have an answer for your sickening obsession.

          My visit to Sri Lanka in 2008 was a very transparent one. I invited the senior staff of the Sunday Leader who gave the headline coverage about the visit in their printed edition. In addition, I have written enough about my experience in the web media and it appears you are remote to the factual accounts reported. There is no need for me to respond to your nonsensical and idiosyncratic request on matters that were well reported long time ago.

          Having eaten humble pies after humble pies and making mockery of yourself by attempting in this free comment area to reflect your senseless agenda against me and my brother, you are only prevaricating from the issues raised.

          Just to mention what I wrote about the Tuk-Tuk drivers comments about Mahinda Rajapakse’s victory. Despite your ridicules, what they said truly materialised on 9 January 2015. Then my analysis of the astrological predictions of Mahinda’s future was spot on, and Mahinda’s astrologer too have packed his bag and moved away head down.

          Without wasting your time on your crusade against us, do something positive in your residual life.

          For your info. I never received any hand-outs from your hero worshiping masters or anyone to that matter. Your obsession is taking you all over the place. You need serious treatment.

          The world is much bigger that what you think.

          Once again let God bless you.

          • 2

            Oh Rajasingham,

            What desperation?! You had to resort to the school boy tactic of screaming “I won! I won!” hoping passers-by may then believe you. Your infantile, if not imbecilic, tuk-tuk comedy was such a miserable piece that it almost single handedly tore your research credibility to shred. You had to resort to “my papa and his papa were sweethearts over the media” as the sole defense. Shameless!

            [Edited out]

            Credibility of your sincerity diminishes with every one of your postings. Your puerile postings and insincere intentions will not go unnoticed.

            Finally, your eager attention, possibly with much slurping over, my “nuts” is reprehensible. I had warned you previously as well when you swooned over the mere mention of knickers (as in “don’t get your knickers twisted”) not letting that go for three or four consecutive postings. Please keep you fantasy fetishes to yourself – no need to publicize these revolting personnel pleasures.

          • 2

            RJ:”Just to mention what I wrote about the Tuk-Tuk drivers comments about Mahinda Rajapakse’s victory. Despite your ridicules, what they said truly materialised on 9 January 2015. Then my analysis of the astrological predictions of Mahinda’s future was spot on, and Mahinda’s astrologer too have packed his bag and moved away head down. “

            Ha ha ha what a joke.!
            Perhaps Mahinda should have consulted Mr. Rajasingham Jeyadevan.

            • 1


              Very nicely said!

              Rajasingam-wisdom is similar to the crow’s conceit in thinking that it is the crow’s weight (strength)that brought the palmyrah fruit down!

              Every one of Rajasingham’s logic has traversed a similar infantile, ludicrous path – and every one, in the hope of a longing for a “pat in the back” it seems.

  • 8

    Rajasingham Jayadevan:

    When the Marzuki report came out, SL accused the panel of bias despite the fact that both adversaries were held liable for the atrocities, through with and in different proportionality. The same Marzuki was in the team headed by Bhagwathi and the final report before the team refused to continue had accused the Rajapakse regime of standing in the way of an independent investigation. So, the Rajapakses went for “gold-diggers” who would not hesitate to sell their soul and even compromised their credibility. It may be that they expected the dealings to be under wraps and would not be exposed. Well, now with the instant expose, hope he can be referred to the English Bar Council for necessary action.

    A very well written article.

  • 7

    As suggested by M A Sumanthiran MP, anyone concerned about Desmond’s unprofessional conduct can complain to:

    Professional Conduct Department
    Bar Standards Board
    289-293 High Holborn
    WC1V 7HZ

    DX: 240 LDE

    Phone: 0207 611 1444

    Email: assessmentcomplaints@barstandardsboard.org.uk

    Fax us: 0207 831 9217

  • 4

    Sir Desmond De Silva Q.C is a hired FLOATING ARMOURY of the former ruling clan/cabal.It was this ruling clan that finished off Lasantha Wicrematunga-a Kinsman of Sir Desmond.They say blood is thicker than water;
    Sir Desmond thinks otherwise!

  • 5

    It is unfair to criticize Sir Desmond without looking at his instructions. He is a hired gun advocating his client’s position. The only issue would be if Sir Desmond made any claim of independence with respect to his role, which I presume he hasn’t. If he has made a claim of impartiality then he may be a more odious individual than I had thought, but as far as I am aware he has not. It is a flawed process, and perhaps in the interests of his reputation he shouldn’t have participated. In any case a close reading of his findings show it is full of legalese that basically says very little, particularly considering there has been no investigation. He has been paid handsomely to lend his name to a flawed process – not sure who has been fooled here … probably the Sri Lankan taxpayer (as usual).

  • 7

    So it’s confirmed then – the two bit lawyer Sumanthiran and the rest of the troop have nothing to challenge Sir Desmond’s legal arguments based on merit :D

    Oh my god! A lawyer was paid money for doing lawyery stuff! He substantiated his conclusions using actual evidence and relevant law and torpedoed We Thamizh propaganda in the process! Kadavule! Genociiiiite :D

    • 2

      Imposter Sarma,

      You have done it again :D

      We Tamils cannot do good deeds :D Sumanthiran has become “insufferable” :D

  • 1

    Okay.500 million rupees has been spent on these white collar well bred pukka sahib exploiters of our country.So what?Did the people pay this?Of course not.Did a average house wife trying to feed her children pay this by paying on top of the dhal and other groceries value added tax?Of course not?Did she pay for this through the excise duties on fuel?Of course not.So what the hell is the fuss all about.Let these pukka sahibs wine and dine and get coronary heart disease and die.The house wife though having malnutrition trying to feed her children will not have those health problems at least.God has balanced everything nicely here.

    • 5

      But Mr Shankar, the house wives and innocent civilians had to pay extortion money and “taxes’ to Tiger fund collectors and that money is used to pay anyone willing to protect the Tigers and slander those who expose Tiger atrocities.
      We need more honourable people like Sir Desmond who have the guts to call a spade a spade.

      • 1


        are you comparing the tigers to Desmond?Good yardstick to measure the worth of an individual.One day i too hope to come back and do something for my motherland but will never charge for that.

        BTW 170 million rupees from a poor country is not charges but blood money akin to exploitation during colonial times.Can’t blame the fellow because his portuguese genes won’t be controllable by him.

  • 4

    All lawyers charge for their assessments on legal matters but how much Sir Desmond de Silva was allegedly paid for his opinion is errelevant. Darusman, Souka, Petrie and others who made allegations against the Sri lankan armed forces were also paid at the appropriate (very high) UN rate. The only thing that matters is whether Sir Desmond’s legal opinions are flawed and it is noticeable that this article nowhere adresses those issues apart from one brief and unsubstantiated reference to the Geneva Conventions.

    No doubt the UN Human Rights Council at its meeting in September will consider all legal opinions (paid and unpaid)on these matters.

    • 5

      Meanwhile, in court…

      “Er, I have nothing your honour. I ask that the defence’s well reasoned arguments be thrown out based on the fact that he was paid for his services, and because he had made the same arguments before based on the same evidence and relevant law! Also if he could be disbarred and stripped of his knighthood, that’d be great”

      -M A Sumanthiran
      “Lawyer” :D

    • 1


      Please provide evidence as to Darusman was paid the UN rate. Who paid him? What is the going UN rate? How about the other two panelists; did they get the same rate as well? May be they got less; what rate did they get?

      By the way, you have a companion who is impersonating as a Tamil, Siva Sankatan Sarma, who will agree with you 100% :D

      You see according to the likes of you, no Tamil can level criticism against any Sinhala no matter how corrupt one is!

  • 5

    Good lawyers do not come cheap. How much money is spent by the LTTE diaspora on the prosecution?

    It would have been more productive if there comments were confined to the contents.

  • 2

    Do You think British Govt or even the Bar council will take on a person such as Desmond D QC? just because people such as IN minority WANTS???.
    Look at Tony Blair,George Bush(jnr),there was a huge cry about their actions(eg:Iraq)HAVE they been prosecuted or even reprimanded -ITS A BIG NO.
    I think the people who are trying to prosecute people such as Desmond Desilva will have to wait until the next millennia.

  • 7

    I am happy that Sir Desmond de Silva and other panellists have been brave enough to come out with the truth knowing very well the flak they will have to encounter from the well fed, well looked after and well orchestrated Tiger band wagon, as we could see from these articles and the comments by various parties. This is their modus operandi to prevent anyone exposing the Tigers for the crimes they committed.
    If anybody comes out with any report that is not favourable to Tiger terrorists and separatists, then, there is always a backlash from Tiger supporters and they will try to silence them by hook or by crook,with this type of ridicule, innuendoes and at times plain fabrications. These very same analysts, if they are neutral, why cant they analyse and comment on the veracity of reports prepared by the likes of Yasmin Sooka, Dharusman, Amnesty International, HRW and all those biased and shameless persons and NGOs. In fact some of these hypocrites accept “donations” from Tiger affiliated groups and have to prove their worth by attacking neutral commentators like Sir Desmond.

    • 0

      how do you differentiate between Yasmin Sooka, Dharusman, Amnesty International, HRW and all those biased and shameless persons and NGOs and Desmond Silva? Didnt the SL govt. used the same arguments like what you say “If anybody comes out with any report that is not favourable to SL govt, there is always a backlash from nationalists and racist Singhalese and they will try to silence them by hook or by crook,with this type of ridicule, innuendoes and at times plain fabrications, and fast unto death actions and Gotas special treatments.
      as stated above “I state with responsibility that Sir Desmond de Silva was previously retained by the then Government of Sri Lanka to provide it with an opinion with respect to the legality of the conduct of the Government forces during the last stages of the war. On 23rdFebruary, 2014, five months before he was appointed by former President Mahinda Rajapaksa to chair the Advisory Council to the Commission, he provided his client – the Government – with a legal opinion stating: “Based on my instructions, my analysis of the relevant law, from the factual matrix made available to me and other research, my opinion is that great mass of civilian deaths which occurred in the final stage of the conflict were regrettable, but permissible collateral damage”. if so How can anybody trust that the MR regime really want to have a fair investigation?

  • 5

    Desmond De Silva the [Edited out]

    “He has particular expertise in Fraud (both national and international), Business Crime, Extradition, Abuse of Human Rights, Kidnap & Blackmail, Large Scale Importation of Drugs, Money Laundering, Murder, Tax & VAT Fraud and Terrorism.”

    He had the above qualities all contained in one to serve the needs of the ousted EVIL EMPIRE but sadly the collateral damage inflicted by the above practices in his ancestral land ( Scottish Mother and Sri Lankan Sinhalese father) of plenty have been costly.

    Let us look at his expertise and his clients;

    1)FRAUD : Team headed by Mahintha and executed by the thief Basil who claims that he served the Nation ( 5.7 million who voted for MR) and who will disagree.
    2) BUSINESS CRIME: Again the above which was facilitated by Central Bank governor Ajith Nivard Cabral.
    3) EXTRADITION: Sadly here Desmonds services cannot come to the rescue of MR when he is indicted to the HAGUE for War Crimes.
    5) KIDNAP & BLACKMAIL: This applies to Gothas White vans syndrome but RW is an expert of protecting Gotha and MR so Desmond is not needed.
    6) LARGE SCALE IMPORTATION OG DRUGS: Clients include Sudu Sela , former PM, Police officers depending on the quantity.
    7) MONEY LAUNDERING: Gotha and his agents who included Douglas Devananda
    8) MURDER: MR and his cronies
    9) TAX & VAT FRAUD: Desmond himself for not declaring his income to UK Customs.
    10)TERRORISM: The state terrorism exercised by MR & Gotha.

    But sadly it was money wasted. What goes round comes round and when the UK [Edited out] by Desmond he will not only be stripped of his Knighthood [Edited out]

  • 2


    You need to grow up. What you have edited out is a perfect description of Desmond which is what hands out to those he cross examines. This is 21st Century and people even ridicule the Queen. What do you think Desmond is King of Sinhala Lanka. You annoy me.

  • 1

    No need for further comment, see what a clown this guy looks in the photo. The face tells it all. He cannot be that busy that he had to accept this pittance from the Mara.

  • 4

    Questions have been posed as to how much UN people get paid for their Reports. Much more important to me is the utter hypocracy of those responsible for attacking Desmond de Silva QC. In London where he practices top QC’s
    command fees of £5000 -10,000 per day in big commercial cases. The Bar Council in the UK will laugh at accusations of this kind.
    What is much more sinister is that the LTTE and their supporting diaspora are determined to push forward with the
    accusations against the Sri Lanka Army based on the Darusman Report. Darusman himself was part of a commission of so called independent persons who came to Sri Lanka in 2008 to observe the proceedings of a commission set up by the Rajapakse regime. That group left Sri Lanka having had a dispute with the government and condemned the way the
    Government was conducting the Inquiry. YET it was one of those very people , Darusman, who was chosen to head the
    UN Panels inquiry into the war.!
    Why didn’t the Tamil diaspora call foul! Why didn’t the Tamil diaspora accuse Darusman of not being independent? The simple reason is that they revelled in the so called credible evidence that Darusman claimed to have found implicating
    the army. This is a classic case of dishonesty and double standards. Their maxim is to attack , however dishonestly,
    and with venom anyone who dares to take a view with which they may not agree with. NOT VERY CIVILISED!

  • 2

    What is not transparent here is that how much Jayadevan Rajasingham [Edited out]

  • 3

    Mr Jayadevan and all his biased supporters, who are trying hard to demolish the reputation of a decent, honourable lawyer like Sir Desmond, should also read the opinion given by Prof Michael Newton, Prof. of the Practice of Law, Vanderbilt University School of Law, which report is a legal opinion for the Commission inquiring into Disappearances.

    Mr J and his band of mud-throwers will have to either castigate Prof Michael Newton for his opinion similar to Sir Desmond’s, or else apologise to Sir Desmond for insults and ridicule directed at him. However, knowing your and your followers’ blind bias, I wouldn’t think you would do the right thing.

  • 1

    Congratulations to Mr Rajasingham for
    highlighting this issue.

    I rememember after sunday times in Colombo
    bared the details, there was a response
    from these learned swindlers to articulate
    their position. They got published articles
    in the island newspaper giving details of
    the opinions they gave.

    What Mahinda Rajapaksa was seeking was
    legal opinions. Can anyone of these lawyers
    speak on the facts of what happened. One
    need not got to Shylocks of the legal
    profession to find legal loopholes if
    Mahinda Rajapaksa was correct in his
    actions and assertions. So why dole out
    like charity from the taxpayers money?

Leave A Comment

Comments should not exceed 200 words. Embedding external links and writing in capital letters are discouraged. Commenting is automatically disabled after 5 days and approval may take up to 24 hours. Please read our Comments Policy for further details. Your email address will not be published.