අධිකරණයේ හා විධායකයේ ගැටුම
After the university teachers, Ivan writes, the stage has been taken by judicial officers and lawyers, provoked by a thug attack on the Secretary of the Judicial Service Commission, who had been publicly criticised by the President. He argues that the 1978 system copied the American presidency without its checks, giving the president power to appoint judges and limiting judicial review. Neville Samarakoon, though appointed as a friend of J.R. Jayewardene, kept the court upright; the retreat came under Sarath N. Silva, whose misconduct his successors never corrected. The judiciary, he warns, cannot defeat the government within this collapsing system.
අල්ලස් කොමිසමේ හුස්ම හිරවීම
The President and two of the Bribery Commission’s members oppose Justice Minister W.J.M. Lokubandara’s proposals to change the commission’s membership. The editorial argues that filling independent commissions with retired judges and lawyers has failed and slights other professions, that both government and opposition want to control the commissions, and that the Constitutional Council has not appointed new members as the 17th Amendment requires. Commissioners need courage as well as learning, like Neville Samarakoon.
යුක්තිය පසිඳලන ආයතන ක්රමයේ බිඳවැටීම
Ivan likens the judiciary to a cancer patient: the President planted the disease by appointing a corrupt Chief Justice and the present government has let it spread. Further sections mark Mark Fernando’s early retirement and his rulings on presidential immunity, a petition by 22 professionals asking the Tyronne Fernando select committee to hear the charges against Sarath N. Silva, rising Muslim unrest in the East and the demand for Muslim police recruits, and a presidential commission on crime that ignores presidents’ own use of criminals.
මංගලගේ බළලා මල්ලෙන් එළියට
Mangala Samaraweera’s call to abolish the executive presidency, Ivan argues, reflects the SLFP’s real aim of making Chandrika Kumaratunga an executive prime minister after her term ends, just as Ranil Wickremesinghe wants the presidency intact for himself. Further sections cover the Elections Commissioner’s criticism of the hastily passed 17th Amendment and of Supreme Court rulings, and the Editors’ Guild submission on contempt of court.
Plotters of legal conspiracy stuck in mud
How a state metes out justice is said to show how civilised it is. The contents of the impeachment motion against the Chief Justice, and the way power is being used to abort that impeachment, show how uncivilised the affairs of this country have become.
දෝෂාභියෝගයක්
With an impeachment motion filed against Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva, Ivan recalls the only earlier one under the 1978 Constitution, against Neville Samarakoon. He recounts Samarakoon’s career and clashes with Jayewardene’s government: the reconstituted Supreme Court, the Kalawana seat, the referendum amendment, the Ratanasara and Vivienne Goonewardene cases and mobs outside judges’ homes, and his 1984 speech that led to a select committee and impeachment committee. The contrast with today shows how far politics has declined.
Judging the independence of the Judiciary
An independent judiciary is a precondition for the survival of a democracy. Sovereign power lies with the people, and it is the courts’ responsibility not to permit laws that reduce it. The test applied here is how the bench was constituted to examine the Seventeenth Amendment.
ශ්රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණය කොතරම් දුරකට ස්වාධීනද?
The editorial argues that Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva is serving the President’s political aims, as seen in government-related cases and the proposed 17th Amendment to change the electoral system. Unlike earlier amendments heard by the most senior judges, this bench excluded the four seniors and constitutional experts Mark Fernando, A.R.B. Amerasinghe and Ranjith Dheeraratne, and allowed a change that would give the alliance 201 of 298 seats and the JVP none without a referendum.
අධිකරණය කොයිබටද?
Ivan cites cases showing the judiciary’s decline: a Galle magistrate interdicted for fraud, judges accused of sexual abuse, a district judge found biased in a case against the head of the Court of Appeal, and a Chief Justice appointed while facing disbarment petitions. He explains the separation of powers, recalls J.R. Jayewardene’s purge of the Supreme Court and Neville Samarakoon’s resistance, the 1982 referendum ruling, and warns that without reform the executive will swallow judicial power.
The all important Chief Justice
Power has been understood since Aristotle as divisible into three — legislative, executive, judicial. Sri Lanka’s recent judicial history holds tragic instances of judges bending to the narrow political interests of government leaders, and famous instances of judges standing up to them. This column is about which way the office of Chief Justice now points.