This article analyzes the adaptation of international criminal law concepts to enhance prosecutorial strategies in Sri Lanka, suggesting greater accountability for systemic crimes.
This article examines how international criminal law (ICL) concepts, particularly the doctrine of Command Responsibility (CR), can shape domestic prosecutorial strategies in Sri Lanka, despite the absence of formal incorporation of ICL into its legal system. Using several recent indictments filed by the Attorney General as central examples of this prosecutorial strategy, it analyses how prosecutors have relied on domestic liability theories to approximate the attribution of responsibility to high-ranking officials. Through doctrinal analysis, case review, and insights from prosecutorial interviews, the author argues that while Sri Lanka’s legal framework does not explicitly recognize CR, its core elements can be adapted to support accountability for systemic crimes. The article explores how existing provisions of the Penal Code, combined with interpretative practices and an openness to ICL principles, offer a pragmatic, if still evolving, pathway to bridge a domestic accountability gap.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Senuri De Silva (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: