|
The Sunday Leader has made it clear to Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapakse in writing that he would also be sued for Rs. 2 billion in damages if any case was filed against the newspaper, its editor and chairman.
The newspaper also said based on the contents of his letter of demand, he should resign forthwith from his post.
Replying to Rajapakse's letter of demand through Attorney Prasad W. Sirimanne, the Chairman of the Sunday Leader Publications, Lal Wickrematunge and Editor, Lasantha Wickrematunge have also said that the Defence Secretary's letter of demand is malafide and intended to avoid the investigation into the MiG deal by the Bribery Commission.
Rajapakse has also been invited to file action at the earliest possible date so that the matter could come up for trial early and his action dismissed with costs.
Following are excerpts of the letter sent by Attorney Sirimanne to Rajapakse on behalf of the Chairman and Editor of The Sunday Leader.
Sanath Wijewardene Eqr.,
Attorney at Law & Notary Public,
No. D1/3, First Floor, Mihindu Mawatha,
Colombo 12.
Dear Sir,
Your letter dated 18th October 2007 addressed to my client has been referred to me with instructions to reply.
I have been instructed by my client to state that the following statement made by you causes concern:
"As a result of the aforesaid malicious and false campaign, you have orchestrated against my client, the role of Defence Secretary which my client performs with utmost commitment had been adversely affected thus creating adverse consequences to the war against terror in the battlefield. "
My client states that in view of the statement made by you it would appear that your client should forthwith resign from the post of Defence Secretary.
My client is confident that any action instituted by your client will be dismissed with costs. Thus my client invites your client to file action at the earliest possible date so that the matter could come up for trial early and your client's action will be dismissed.
Your client has defamed my client in several statements after the publication of the news reports. My client has neither the time nor the inclination to institute action against your client. However, in the event of your client instituting action against my client, my client will counter sue your client for damages estimated at Rs.2 billion consequent to such defamatory statements.
Your client will appreciate that my client's estimate of damages will be greater than that of your client since my client has always remained in this country and worked for its betterment and your client has voluntarily left this country and migrated to the United States of America and taking citizenship in that country by swearing allegiance to that country.
My client also instructs me to state that your client's instructions to send the letter of demand is mala fide in that inter alia:
a. It seems to circumvent the investigation by the Bribery Department; and
b. Publicity was given to it even before it could possibly have reached my client.
My client specifically denies that the publication was made with animus injuriandi and/or with malice.
My client admits the publication of the stories referred to in the letter under reference.
Subject to the aforesaid my client denies the averments contained in the letter under reference.
Yours faithfully
Prasad W. Sirimanne
SiberNews
|
Subscribe to this comment's feed
