Ten doctors have been ordered to come before the Colombo Fort Magistrate’s Court in proceedings involving former State Intelligence Service Director Major General (Retd.) Suresh Sallay.
It is an easy development to sensationalise.
It is also one that needs to be reported precisely.
The notices do not, on the information publicly available, amount to an accusation against the doctors.
They do not establish that Sallay’s illness was fabricated.
They do not establish that his hospital treatment was unnecessary.
And they do not establish his guilt in the criminal investigation in which he is detained.
What We Can Establish About the Latest Court Development
Contemporaneous reports of the October 2 open-court proceedings say Colombo Fort Magistrate Pasan Amarasena directed ten doctors serving on the medical board, together with the Director of the National Hospital, to appear on October 6.
The reports say the medical board had recommended that Sallay remain in hospital until September 28.
That period had expired.
The Criminal Investigation Department subsequently moved court, after which the notices were issued.
The Medical Question Has Been Building for Months
Sallay was arrested on February 25, 2026 in connection with the continuing investigation relating to the Easter Sunday attacks.
Public accounts of subsequent proceedings say he has been receiving treatment at the National Hospital since June 7.
By the October 6 hearing, 223 days will have elapsed since February 25.
Approximately 121 days will have elapsed since June 7.
The Law Itself Expects Medical Oversight
The Prevention of Terrorism framework is important to understanding why medical evidence and a Magistrate have become involved.
Parliament amended the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act in 2022.
The amendment reduced the maximum aggregate detention period under Section 9 from 18 months to 12 months.
It also created additional judicial safeguards around detention.
What the 2022 PTA amendment requires
Within 48 hours: a certified copy of a Section 9 detention order must be made available to the relevant Magistrate.
Every month: the Magistrate must visit the place of detention.
During that visit: the Magistrate must personally see the suspect and examine wellbeing, welfare and detention conditions.
Complaints: observations and complaints by the suspect must be recorded.
If torture is suspected: the Magistrate may direct examination by a Judicial Medical Officer.
If a JMO report reveals torture: the law provides for necessary medical treatment and an investigation.
There Has Been More Than One Medical Question
The medical issues appearing in the proceedings should not automatically be treated as one continuous assessment.
In June, open-court reporting described a five-member specialist board involving psychiatrists and Judicial Medical Officers in relation to allegations concerning Sallay’s treatment in detention.
Later September reporting described a nine-member medical panel in connection with his physical and cardiac condition.
The October development refers to ten doctors on a medical board.
| Reported stage | Reported medical body | Issue being examined |
|---|---|---|
| June | Five-member specialist board | Reported examination relating to allegations about treatment or ill-treatment during detention |
| September | Nine-member medical panel | Reported cardiac condition and hospital treatment |
| October | Ten doctors | Reported request to clarify the next medical course after the earlier period ended |
The publicly available material does not establish that these were one medical board that simply expanded from five to nine and then ten members.
They may have involved different specialists, appointments or functions.
Until the underlying orders and reports establish their relationship, they should be treated separately.
September 28 Is the Key Date
Reports of the September proceedings say the medical board recommended continued hospital treatment until September 28.
From June 7 to September 28 is approximately 113 elapsed days.
The issue after that date is therefore narrower than asking whether Sallay had ever required treatment.
The question is what his medical position became once the period covered by that recommendation had ended.
The Doctors Are Not Deciding the Criminal Case
This distinction is essential.
Doctors can assess health.
They can advise whether inpatient treatment is necessary.
They can identify medical risks and prescribe monitoring.
They do not determine criminal guilt.
Likewise, investigators wanting access to a suspect does not establish that treatment should end.
The investigative and medical questions have to remain separate.
Detention Is Not a Conviction
Sallay remains connected to an ongoing investigation.
An arrest, investigation or detention order does not constitute a criminal conviction.
The Easter Sunday attacks have generated multiple investigations and judicial proceedings involving different individuals and different legal questions.
Those proceedings should not be collapsed into a single case or used to establish facts that a particular court has not decided.
The Unusual Part Is the Overlap
There is nothing inherently unusual about a person in state custody requiring medical treatment.
The unusual feature here is the extent to which medical assessment has become intertwined with the timetable of a high-profile investigation.
What October 6 Could Clarify
The doctors’ appearance may clarify whether continued hospital admission is medically required.
It may establish what treatment or monitoring is still necessary.
It may clarify the relationship between the medical panels referred to at different stages of the proceedings.
And it may affect the practical course of the investigation.
Until that evidence is given, none of those outcomes should be assumed.
The Safeguard That Is Easy to Miss
The 2022 PTA amendment makes an important point.
When the State uses exceptional detention powers, the law does not remove the court from questions concerning the detainee’s welfare.
It gives the Magistrate an express role.
That includes personal welfare checks and a statutory route to medical examination where necessary.
The medical process is therefore not automatically an obstacle sitting outside an investigation.
It is part of the legal framework within which detention must operate.
Related Lakbima News Coverage
Primary Legal Sources
