Curbing crime: no time for grandstanding

When it comes to “naming and shaming” alleged criminals online, it could also be a major defamation risk if that person is misidentified

Following  the arrest of the person who allegedly killed Weligama Pradeshiya Sabha Chairman Lasantha Wickramasekara, a video footage went viral on social media showing his capture. It is not the first instance in which visuals or video footage related to breakthroughs in investigations into major crimes were leaked online.

These are possible incidents instigated or carried out by those involved in the manipulation of information in favour of the ruling side, facing brickbats over the rise in criminal acts and police inertia in arresting them. The opposition alleges that the police act with bias in dealing with criminals. To blunt such criticism or distract public attention away from issues in the limelight, government interlocutors may try to publicise breakthroughs in investigations. These videos are released well with the connivance of the police. The police make the arrests, of course.

However, legal experts are alarmed that such public release of video clips is unwarranted since it hinders prosecution, as reported by the Daily Mirror in its yesterday’s edition. They have raised serious concerns over the conduct of the police in sharing videos of suspects on mainstream and social media following their arrests, warning that such actions could undermine ongoing investigations and future prosecutions.

Former President of the Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) Saliya Pieris, in a Facebook post, emphasised that arrests and criminal investigations must be carried out strictly in accordance with the procedure established by law.

He observed that “parading suspects before the media, obtaining voice cuts from them, and circulating those clips on media and social media platforms may thrill certain sections of the public, but will not help the prosecution once the trial begins.”

Pieris described such actions as “childish acts” that fail to enhance the image of the police and are ultimately counterproductive. “It calls into question the professionalism of investigators and brings disrepute to the entire system,” he added.

The rule of law is rule of law, but not rule by power. The application of law should be even-handed for its benefits to reach across society. The dismantling of criminal networks and the arrest of criminals are acts to be done as a national priority. In that case, law enforcement should be professional. If childish acts by the police as the main law enforcement body hamper investigations unknowingly, criminals will benefit in the end. It is not time for grandstanding but to be responsible in dealing with crimes.

Attorney-at-Law Wasantha Sri Watagoda, commenting on Facebook, also criticised the practice, stressing that suspects who are to be produced before an identification parade under Section 124 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Act should not be publicly exposed.

He noted that a suspect’s face should remain covered until the identification parade is completed to ensure that the evidential value of the process is not compromised. When it comes to “naming and shaming” alleged criminals online, it could also be a major defamation risk if that person is misidentified. Identifying an alleged criminal online could also endanger police investigations and court proceedings.

Politicisation of law enforcement has been an issue for decades. It has remained the rule by power. Those with the political backing of the government of the day used to go scot-free. If there is rule of law implemented in its truest sense, any wrongdoer, either with links to the ruling side or not, can be charged after due procedure. That is the need of the hour. The rule of law, under any government, should be upheld without invoking it only when it is convenient.

The police should rise above populism, political interference, and media theatrics. What matters most is not how swiftly a suspect is caught on camera, but how credibly justice is delivered in the courtroom. The government, too, has a responsibility. It must ensure that investigations are conducted with transparency and independence, not as tools of political messaging. The police must act with restraint, discipline, and integrity, protecting both the rights of suspects and the public’s confidence in the justice system.

If the system continues to function on selective justice — where some are shielded and others paraded - faith in the law will erode further. The public may cheer viral arrests today, but tomorrow they will lament the collapse of cases in court due to procedural lapses.