Court of Appeal to deliver order on Trincomalee Buddha Statue case

The Court of Appeal has scheduled January 30 to deliver its order on the petitions seeking to invalidate the Trincomalee Magistrate Court's decision to remand Venerable Balangoda Kassapa Thera and Venerable Kalyanawansatissa Thera.

The decision was announced today (22) after the matter was considered by a bench comprising Justice Rohantha Abeysuriya and Justice Priyantha Fernando.

The case stems from an incident on November 16, 2025, involving the placement of a Buddha statue in Trincomalee.

The monks were remanded on January 14 and 19 on allegations of violating the Coast Conservation Act.

During today's proceedings, the court noted that while the Registrar of the Trincomalee Magistrate’s Court had submitted the order from 14 January as previously instructed, the order from 19 January was missing.

The legal counsel for the petitioners, President's Counsel Manohara de Silva, raised serious concerns in open court, pointing out that a specific portion of the certified copies provided to the court appeared to have been intentionally removed.

He described the situation as highly suspicious. Furthermore, President's Counsel Uditha Egalahewa requested the court to summon the audio recordings of the proceedings from 19 January, noting that all courts maintain such records.

In response, the Court of Appeal bench summoned its own Registrar to inquire into the matter and subsequently ordered the immediate submission of the missing 19 January order along with the relevant audio recordings.

Representing the monks, Manohara de Silva PC argued that the placement of the statue caused no public disturbance.

He alleged that the police had used reports of potential communal tension as a pretext to seize the statue and had physically assaulted monks during the process.

He further charged that the police intentionally reported the matter under the Coast Conservation Act to make obtaining bail more difficult, despite the government’s constitutional duty to protect and foster Buddhism.

Additional Solicitor General Vikum de Abrew, appearing for the state, contended that the petitioners' approach to the Court of Appeal was legally flawed.

He argued that the appropriate legal remedy would have been to file a revision petition in the High Court against the Magistrate’s order or to apply for bail through the High Court as per the provisions of the Coast Conservation Act.

The court directed all parties to file any written submissions by January 27 before delivering the final order at the end of the month.