සරත් සිල්වාගේ පුහු තර්ක
Former Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva used interviews in Mawbima and Ceylon Today to recast himself and to claim that Ivan’s campaign against him grew out of a grudge from the 1971 insurrection trial. Ivan answers point by point: Silva was the most junior of five prosecutors, and Ivan’s lawyer in later cases was the lead prosecutor; the fight began when Silva, as Attorney General, shielded Magistrate Lenin Ratnayake. He recounts his challenge to the Attorney General’s criminal defamation indictments, rejected by Justice Mark Fernando but upheld by the UN Human Rights Committee, and the pending Supreme Court inquiry when Silva was made Chief Justice.
19 වැනි සංශෝධන කෙටුම්පත ගැන
Ivan welcomes the campaign by Maduluwawe Sobitha’s National Movement for a Just Society to abolish the executive presidency, but argues its draft Nineteenth Amendment is a concept paper with a narrow vision. Every Sri Lankan constitution, and Chandrika Kumaratunga’s 2000 draft, was made by cunning or majority power rather than on the sovereignty of the people, as India and South Africa did. The draft ignores the unresolved question of who belongs to the nation, copies the flawed Constitutional Council of the Seventeenth Amendment, and keeps a simple-majority impeachment of judges.
ස්ත්රී දූෂක මහේස්ත්රාත්යළි අධිකරණ සේවයට
Ivan reports moves to reinstate magistrate Lenin Ratnayake, whom a Judicial Service Commission inquiry of Appeal Court judges Hector Yapa, Asoka de Silva and T.B. Weerasuriya found guilty on all four charges: two rapes of women connected to cases before him, and concealing his dismissal for fraud from the Insurance Corporation. He quotes the charges and the commission’s minutes, summarises the evidence of witnesses, and reproduces extracts of testimony from one victim and from the husband of another.
සරත් සිල්වා රගපාමින් සිටින්නේ ද ලෙනින් රත්නායක රග පෑ භූමිකාව ම ය
Ivan retells how magistrate Lenin Ratnayake, dismissed earlier from the Insurance Corporation for fraud, hid his past behind a pious image, won support from monks, lawyers, local councils and Attorney General Sarath N. Silva, and was finally found guilty by the Hector Yapa inquiry. He argues that Chief Justice Silva is staging the same performance through bodhi pujas, Bar resolutions and a Malwatte statement, and sets out allegations about Silva’s private life, misuse of power in related litigation and a loan he never repaid.