The Gotabaya Citizenship Saga: Could a US Federal Investigation Target Ali Sabry?
As Sri Lanka navigates its complex political landscape, a new legal storm is brewing on the horizon - one that could have significant implications for both Sri Lankan and US law. Recent reports suggest that US federal authorities are considering an investigation into the conduct of Presidential Counsel Ali Sabry regarding the Gotabaya Rajapaksa citizenship renunciation saga. The question at the heart of this matter: Did the legal advice provided regarding the timeline of Gotabaya's US citizenship renunciation constitute a federal crime?
The Citizenship Timeline: A Critical Legal Question
Gotabaya Rajapaksa's citizenship status was a contentious issue during the 2019 presidential election campaign. The record shows that Rajapaksa had obtained US citizenship in 2003 while living in the United States . However, Sri Lankan law does not permit dual citizens or non-citizens to hold the office of president, creating a significant legal hurdle for his candidacy .
Rajapaksa maintained that he had renounced his US citizenship to contest the election, and in fact, the Sri Lankan Court of Appeal dismissed a case in October 2019 seeking the cancellation of his citizenship, clearing the way for him to register as a candidate . A three-judge panel unanimously rejected the case, saying it had no merit .
However, the critical question relates to the timing of this renunciation. According to sources cited by the State Department, Ali Sabry provided details about the citizenship renunciation after the nominations were submitted in 2019 as the SLPP candidate . It was Sabry himself who appeared as Gotabaya's attorney in the citizenship case .
Potential Legal Framework: What Law Might Have Been Violated?
The US federal investigation is reportedly considering whether the conduct surrounding the citizenship renunciation might constitute a federal crime. Under 18 U.S.C. § 611, known as "Voting by Aliens," it is unequivocally illegal for non-citizens to vote in federal elections . While this section specifically deals with voting, the federal interest in citizenship matters extends far beyond the ballot box.
A more relevant statute may be 18 U.S.C. § 1001, which makes it a crime to make false statements in matters within the jurisdiction of the federal government and the any overseas territories . This section applies to statements made to federal agencies, including those related to immigration and citizenship status.
The Theory of the Case
The potential investigation appears to focus on a narrow but significant question: Was the citizenship renunciation process properly completed before the nomination was submitted, or was it effectively backdated or misrepresented? If it was not properly completed in time, the legal advice provided by Sabry - and the subsequent representations made to authorities - could potentially be scrutinized under federal law.
This legal theory draws parallels to fraud cases where material misrepresentations are made to government entities. While the Supreme Court is currently examining some of these issues, including the collision of federal election laws , precedent suggests that knowingly making false statements in citizenship-related matters can carry serious consequences.
The Sri Lankan Context
In Sri Lanka, the citizenship question was ultimately resolved in Rajapaksa's favor. At the time, the three-judge panel found no merit in the case . However, the US investigation would operate under a different legal framework. The Federal government has shown limited interest historically in enforcing citizenship-related statutes in some contexts , but in cases involving potential material misrepresentation, the US Department of Justice has been known to pursue investigations.
The Role of Ali Sabry
Ali Sabry, who later served as Sri Lanka's Minister of Justice, was intimately involved in defending Rajapaksa's citizenship status. Court records show he appeared as Gotabaya's attorney in the Sri Lankan citizenship case, arguing that then-President Mahinda Rajapaksa had the power to issue the dual citizenship certificate to his brother within days of being elected president and before a Cabinet was appointed .
The petitioners had argued this was irregular. Sabry successfully defended the position that the president could sign such papers until ministers were appointed .
The potential US federal investigation represents a new phase in this long-running legal saga. While a Sri Lankan court has already ruled on the citizenship question, the US Department of Justice appears to be examining the matter through its own legal prism. The outcome of any investigation could have lasting implications for the relationship between US citizenship laws and foreign political processes.
The case underscores how citizenship decisions made in one country can have cascading legal effects across borders. As the investigation reportedly continues, the legal community in both the United States and Sri Lanka will be watching closely to see how this intersection of international law, federal statutes, and domestic Sri Lankan politics ultimately unfolds.