IPU Logo-middleInter-Parliamentary Union  
IPU Logo-bottomChemin du Pommier 5, C.P. 330, CH-1218 Le Grand-Saconnex/Geneva, Switzerland  


Resolution adopted unanimously by the IPU Governing Council at its 189th session
(Bern, 19 October 2011)

The Governing Council of the Inter-Parliamentary Union,

Referring to the case of Mr. Nadarajah Raviraj, a member of the Parliament of Sri Lanka who was assassinated on 10 November 2006, as outlined in the report of the Committee on the Human Rights of Parliamentarians (CL/188/13(b)-R.1), and to the resolution adopted at its 188th session (April 2011); referring also to the report of the on-site mission to Sri Lanka carried out by the Committee in February 2008 (CL/183/12(b)-R.2),

Taking into account the information with which Minister Mahinda Samarasinghe, Special Envoy of the President of Sri Lanka for Human Rights, provided the Committee on the Human Rights of Parliamentarians at the hearing held during the 125th IPU Assembly,

Recalling that Mr. Raviraj, a member of the Tamil National Alliance (TNA), was shot dead in Colombo in the morning of 10 November 2006 along with his security officer while travelling in his vehicle along a main road in Colombo; the gunman escaped on a motorcycle,

Recalling the following information about the investigation provided in the past by the authorities, which have repeatedly stated their commitment to fully elucidating this crime:

  • Investigations revealed that the motorcycle was sold by two brokers named Nalaka Matagaweere and Ravindra to Arul, who at the time was living at the house of S.K.T. Jayasuriya; the latter was taken into custody together with Nalaka; Jayasuriya revealed that Arul was a former Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) member; Nalaka and Jayasuriya were later released on bail as inquiries revealed that they were not in Colombo when Mr. Raviraj was shot dead; arrest warrants were issued for Arul and Ravindra, who, according to the police progress report forwarded in April 2009, were strongly suspected of having gone to the areas then controlled by the LTTE;

  • A Scotland Yard team arrived in Sri Lanka on 4 January 2007; it conducted investigations and recommended that further tests be carried out; the team commended the Sri Lankan investigators for their work; according to the police report of March 2010, no real breakthrough was possible, investigations were continuing, and the case was regularly reported to the Chief Magistrate Court Colombo;

  • Since the defeat of the LTTE in May 2009, the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) has attempted to trace Arul and Ravindra among the refugees from the north and has even checked 300,000 displaced people without so far having been able to trace them; a report was sent to the Attorney General seeking advice for further investigation; moreover, reports by NGOs, including University Teachers for Human Rights, about the murder were checked but no useful information was found; as regards Scotland Yard, the team traced the bloodstain in the bag found at the crime scene in which the firearm was hidden and brought for Mr. Raviraj’s assassination; the swabs taken during the visit were profiled by Scotland Yard and preserved for matching if and when the suspects are apprehended,
Considering that, according to the latest information provided by Minister Samarasinghe, the case was to be called next for 7 December 2011, the wife of one of the suspects had been interviewed and had stated that she had no news of her husband since 2007; noting that Minister Samarasinghe concluded that the authorities had done everything in their power to elucidate the murder,
  1. Thanks Minister Samarasinghe for his cooperation;

  2. Acknowledges the efforts made by the authorities to elucidate this high-profile crime; remains nevertheless deeply concerned that, five years after Mr. Raviraj was murdered in broad daylight on a main road in Colombo, those responsible have yet to be identified and held to account;

  3. Urges the authorities to revitalize the investigation and, if need be, re-examine every possible lead to help advance the course of justice; wishes to ascertain what further steps they intend to take for this purpose and what advice the Attorney General may have given regarding further investigation;

  4. Recalls that Parliament, in the exercise of its oversight function, is entitled to follow an investigation, especially when it concerns one of its members; wishes therefore to ascertain the views of Parliament on taking such an initiative;

  5. Requests the Secretary General to convey this resolution to all parties concerned;

  6. Requests the Committee to continue examining this case and report to it at its next session, to be held during the 126th IPU Assembly (March/April 2012).
Note: you can download a complete electronic version of the brochure "Results of the 125th IPU Assembly and related meetings" in PDF format (file size 718 Kb approximately). This version requires Adobe Acrobat Reader, which you can download free of charge.Get Acrobat Reader