ජනමාධ්ය හැසිරීම ගැන
A friend who has read Ivan’s book on the Lenin Ratnayake affair many times asked him why no newspaper reported the day a remand prisoner struck Magistrate Lenin Ratnayake with a bag of excrement in the Nikaweratiya court, after the magistrate had abused the prisoner’s wife. Local reporters, Ivan concludes, stayed silent to please the magistrate. He then recounts how a former court officer turned television court reporter brokered favourable judgments for his channel’s owner in exchange for coverage that propped up Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva. Sri Lanka’s media culture, he argues, is as corrupt as its political culture.
අධිකරණය හා නීතිඥයන්
When the Bar Association installed Upul Jayasuriya as president with the ousted Shirani Bandaranayake in the chair rather than Chief Justice Mohan Peiris, it signalled that lawyers still did not accept the new Chief Justice. Ivan welcomes the gesture but argues that judicial independence died with the executive presidency, not the impeachment, and that bench and bar share the blame: the referendum judgment, the Eighteenth Amendment, the Lenin Ratnayake scandal and a rapist High Court judge’s reinstatement show a profession unable to discipline itself. He sets out the English model of regulation.
අගවිනිසුරුට, ලෙනින් රත්නායකට එරෙහිව අල්ලස් කොමිසමට පැමිණිල්ලක්
In a formal complaint dated 30 July 2002, Ivan asks the Bribery Commission to investigate magistrate Lenin Ratnayake for concealing his dismissal from the Insurance Corporation for claims fraud when becoming a lawyer and magistrate, and Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva for abusing office to protect his relative: misleading the justice minister in a confidential report, suppressing the Supreme Court inquiry into himself, derailing prosecution through an illegal one-man inquiry and withholding the three-judge committee’s findings. Numbered exhibits are listed.
ලෙනින් රත්නායක විනය පරික්ෂණය අත්හිටුවන්නැයි ඉල්ලීමක්
In a letter to the Secretary of the Judicial Service Commission, Ivan, as complainant, objects that a one-man inquiry by retired High Court judge K.A.S. Gunatilake into magistrate Lenin Ratnayake is illegal under Article 114(2). He recounts the rape allegations, the Commission’s months of silence, the three-judge committee that upheld Ravaya’s charges, Ratnayake’s 32 months of paid compulsory leave, and asks for the inquiry to be stopped and the committee’s report released to him.
JSC: More questions than answers
The Judicial Services Commission has answered the criticism in an International Bar Association report on the state of the Sri Lankan judiciary. Its answer, Ivan writes, raises more questions than it settles — and he was the complainant in one of the inquiries it describes.
යුක්තියේ දෙවොල ගිනි ගනී
Ivan argues that judicial reform must come first and that a Judicial Service Commission reshuffled under the 17th Amendment will change nothing while the discredited Chief Justice stays. He traces magistrate Lenin Ratnayake’s career from an insurance-claim fraud at the Insurance Corporation, through patronage into the judiciary, to two rape allegations upheld by an inquiry committee, and accuses Sarath N. Silva, as Attorney General, of shielding his relative.
ලෙනින් රත්නායක, උපාලි අබේරත්න පරීක්ෂණ වාර්තා ගැන “රාවය” කර්තෘගෙන් අගවිනිසුරුට ලිපියක්
In a letter dated 27 August 2001 to Sarath N. Silva as chairman of the Judicial Service Commission, Ivan asks for the reports of the two committees that found Magistrate Lenin Ratnayake and District Judge Upali Abeyratne guilty. He sets out the history: Ravaya’s 1997 reports of a rape by Ratnayake and his earlier dismissal for fraud, Silva’s 1998 confidential report to G.L. Peiris, the Abeyratne divorce case, the Bar’s past presidents’ intervention, his disbarment complaint, and Silva’s appointment and the impeachment, and says he needs the reports for a case in Geneva.
Giving more teeth to constitutional council
A constitutional council with the power to recommend people for the top posts, with five independent commissions under it, would be a significant step towards taking the administration out of politics. What it would need to be worth having is set out here.
ඇති කරන්නට යන ව්යවස්ථා ක්රමයට ආවේණික සීමා
Ivan welcomes the proposed Constitutional Council and five commissions but says they lack any mechanism to monitor holders of high office once appointed. He cites cases where no one acted: a complaint to Court of Appeal President Palakidnar about Sarath N. Silva, an alleged assault attempt by a Supreme Court judge, a High Court judge accused of abusing a young domestic worker, and Lenin Ratnayake still in service, and faults the Attorney General, Elections Commissioner and Auditor General, proposing an ombudsman-type body under the Council.
අර්බුදය ගැන ආපසු හැරි බැලිමක්
Answering a reader who asks why Ravaya keeps writing about Sarath N. Silva, Ivan retells how his suspicions began with the Lenin Ratnayake affair: the rape allegation reported in 1997, police findings that Ratnayake had been dismissed from the Insurance Corporation for fraud, and a confidential 1998 report in which Silva as Attorney General shielded him. He describes the Bar’s past presidents’ resolution, the inquiries that found Ratnayake and Upali Abeyratne guilty, his own disbarment petition, and Silva’s appointment as Chief Justice, and calls for his removal.