In a stunning display of political overreach, NPP MP Lakmali Hemachandra admitted she had instructed police not to enforce a court decision on evictions, raising fresh concerns over the rule of law and political interference in Sri Lanka.
During a Regional Coordination Committee meeting regarding the eviction of unauthorized residents in Narahenpita, Lakmali Hemachandra openly stated that she had directed law enforcement not to proceed with carrying out the court’s ruling. She went further to note that an “agreement” had already been reached to halt the process, effectively placing political negotiation above judicial authority.
Her statement sparked immediate concern within the meeting, where Deputy Minister Sunil Watagala intervened to underline that the government does not interfere in the execution of court processes. Watagala’s response reflected the growing unease about politicians stepping beyond their boundaries, particularly in sensitive cases involving public housing, unauthorized settlements, and eviction orders.
The incident has reignited debate about political pressure on law enforcement and the erosion of judicial independence in Sri Lanka. Critics argue that when elected representatives instruct the police to disregard court orders, it undermines the credibility of the judiciary and sends a dangerous message that legal rulings are subject to political convenience.
The Narahenpita eviction dispute itself has been a contentious issue, balancing the rights of residents who have lived in unauthorized settlements for years with the state’s mandate to enforce land and housing laws. While Hemachandra framed her intervention as an act of protection for vulnerable residents, legal experts warn that bypassing judicial rulings sets a precedent that weakens the entire justice system.
The confrontation highlights the fragile state of governance where political actors often blur the lines between representation and interference. As Sri Lanka grapples with questions of transparency and accountability, the episode serves as yet another reminder of how quickly the sanctity of court decisions can be diluted by political expediency.
