Namal Rajapaksa arrest draws criticism from Udaya Gammanpila, who questions the evidence behind an alleged US$800,000 Airbus-related payment.
The Namal Rajapaksa arrest and remand has been described as unjust and illegal by former Minister Udaya Gammanpila, who questioned the evidence supporting the case.
Speaking at a media briefing in Colombo, Gammanpila claimed that Rajapaksa had been arrested solely on the statement of one individual.
He argued that investigators had produced no other evidence to support the allegation.
Rajapaksa faces an allegation that he received US$ 800,000 in connection with the purchase of Airbus aircraft for SriLankan Airlines.
Explaining his position, Gammanpila acknowledged that evidence existed showing a commission had been received from Airbus by Priyanka Wijenaike.
He further said that a portion of that money had subsequently been given to Nimal Perera, who resides in Australia.
However, Gammanpila claimed that investigators had no evidence linking the money to Rajapaksa beyond a statement attributed to Perera.
“Nimal Perera says that when no one was around, he went and placed 800,000 US Dollars on Namal Rajapaksa’s desk and left. Apart from this statement, there is no other evidence,” Gammanpila said.
“Namal Took Rs. 100M Airbus Bribe; Businessman’s Evidence Exposes Him” – CIABOC
Namal Rajapaksa was arrested over an alleged Rs. 100 million bribe linked to the SriLankan Airlines Airbus purchase investigation.
The Morning Telegraph • September 4, 2026 • 2 min readHe compared the allegation to what he described as earlier “fairy tales” involving claims about money hidden in Uganda, rockets, golden horses and Lamborghinis.
Gammanpila argued that allowing an arrest solely because a person’s name appears in another individual’s statement would place every citizen at risk.
He also criticised provisions of the Public Property Act, claiming that obtaining bail under the legislation had become extremely difficult.
According to Gammanpila, such restrictions reflected what he described as the characteristics of a repressive administration.
He concluded that the Namal Rajapaksa arrest had implications beyond the Parliamentarian himself.
Gammanpila argued that what he described as arbitrary action had created a wider sense of insecurity among the public.
His claims represent his position regarding the investigation and do not establish the truth or falsity of the allegations against Rajapaksa.
This idiot should write a novel about this, similar to his recently released book about easter sunday attack.
Sir, Google says that “The word idiot comes from the ancient Greek word idiōtēs, which meant a “private person” or a layman—someone who did not hold public office or lack professional skill in a specific area. I understand that Mr. G has a law license. Even otherwise, he or anyone else has the right to express an opinion or raise a question. Calling someone an idiot because you do not agree with that person’s opinion is like a turkey saying “You are what you eat”!