MP Dilith needs pardon on interpretation of pardon invalidation of Gnanasara Thera

Fact Check

Following the Supreme Court (SC) judgement declaring null and void the presidential pardon granted to Ven. Galagodaaththe Gnanasara Thera by former President Maithripala Sirisena, MP Dilith Jayaweera claimed that what the judgement says is not that the Thera should be imprisoned. The MP thereby presents the effect of the SC judgement as one that does not require the Thera to return to prison.

To check this claim, FactCheck.lk examined the Constitution of Sri Lanka and the SC judgement referenced by MP Jayaweera (S.C.F.R. Application Nos. 256/2019 and 257/2019, decided on 10 September 2026).

What did the Supreme Court judgement decide?

The SC judgement (issued on 10 September 2026) held that the presidential pardon granted by then President Maithripala Sirisena to Gnanasara Thera was arbitrary and in violation of public trust and the rules of natural justice. It also held that the manner in which the pardon was granted was ultra vires (beyond the legal power or authority of the person performing an action) and infringed the fundamental rights guaranteed by Article 12 (1) of the Constitution. The Court therefore declared the presidential pardon “null and void and of no force or avail in law.”

What happens to a prison sentence when a presidential pardon is declared null and void?

In the case deciding the legality of the pardon granted by then President Sirisena (Nos. 256/2019 and 257/2019, pp. 28–29), the SC held that “the power conferred upon the President under Article 34(1) does not alter or set aside the judgment or sentence of a competent court but operates only to relieve the offender from the execution of the sentence to the extent specified in the pardon”.

Therefore, the presidential pardon granted to Gnanasara Thera in 2019 did not have the effect of altering or setting aside Thera’s conviction and six-year prison sentence. It only released him from serving the remainder of that sentence.

Therefore, when the SC declared the presidential pardon null and void, the function of that pardon to relieve Thera from serving the remainder of his sentence becomes null and void. The judgement, in effect, restored the position that existed before the pardon was granted (status quo ante). This is reinforced by the Attorney-General’s subsequent action of filing a motion before the Court of Appeal to enforce the prison sentence following the Supreme Court declaring the pardon invalid – having no force in law.

In sum, the MP misrepresents the overall legal effect of the SC judgement. Contrary to the MP’s representation, the judgement invalidated the pardon, thereby restoring the position that existed before (status quo ante) the pardon was granted, which required the Thera to be serving his sentence in prison.

Therefore, we classify the MP’s statement, interpreting the judgment as saying the Thera need not go to prison, as FALSE.

*FactCheck.lk’s verdict is based on the most recent information that is publicly accessible. As with every fact check, if new information becomes available, FactCheck.lk will revisit the assessment.