– During submissions before court, President’s Counsel Shavindra Fernando, appearing for former State Intelligence Service Director Suresh Sallay, contended that based on the findings contained in the reports of the five consultant psychiatrists who examined the suspect, the court should consider granting appropriate relief under the provisions of the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA).

Counsel submitted that, in terms of Sections 9B(3), 9B(4) and 9B(5) of the PTA, the suspect should be provided with the necessary medical treatment and a suitable environment conducive to his mental health condition. He further argued that the relevant authorities should take any necessary legal action to determine whether the suspect had been subjected to torture or any form of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment while in custody.Counsel maintained that the medical opinions expressed by the panel of psychiatrists warranted the court’s consideration of measures aimed at safeguarding the suspect’s health and wellbeing in accordance with the provisions of the PTA.

Responding to the defence submissions, Additional Solicitor General Dileepa Peeris strongly rejected the allegations and claimed that the suspect was engaged in what he described as an “Oscar-worthy performance.”Additional Solicitor General Dileepa Peeris submitted that the suspect, who was arrested on February 25, had sought extraordinary relief from court and was attempting to mislead the court by claiming to suffer from a mental condition only after medical reports were obtained in May.He argued that if the suspect had genuinely suffered from a psychiatric disorder, it should have been disclosed much earlier through medical evidence. The ASG alleged that the defense was attempting to use the psychiatric reports to gain an advantage in related legal proceedings and divert attention from the investigation.Referring to the psychiatrist’s report, the ASG noted that the suspect had reportedly cried throughout the examination, but pointed out that he had never displayed such behaviour before court and had no prior history of mental illness. He further questioned claims of memory loss, stating that investigators had recovered passwords to the suspect’s devices despite his assertions that he could not remember them.

The ASG also rejected allegations of ill-treatment, maintaining that the suspect had received proper care and medical attention while in custody, including access to specialist clinics and regular communication with family members. He submitted that the CID had taken extensive measures to ensure the suspect’s welfare and security.The ASG contended that the filing of motions alleging mistreatment and mental illness was an attempt to mislead the court and shift the focus of the proceedings.Responding to the submissions made by the Additional Solicitor General, President’s Counsel Shavindra Fernando, appearing for the suspect, told court, “We did not use this medical report as part of any conspiracy, as suggested by the Additional Solicitor General. We received the medical reports on May 21 and filed our motion only yesterday. This report has been prepared by a panel of five consultant psychiatrists. The medical reports concerning the suspect were prepared under the supervision of specialist medical professionals. Consultant psychiatrists do not submit false reports.“It was said that someone deserves an Oscar award. There is a person in this courtroom who deserves an Oscar award. The Director General of Health Services cannot independently undertake this exercise because it is a political appointment. This is a matter that should be addressed independently by the Attorney General. This investigation has now reached a stage where even the slightest degree of public confidence in the process has been undermined.”

After considering the submissions made by both parties, the Magistrate stated that an order on the respective applications and requests would be delivered on June 10.