චන්ද්රිකා + රනිල් ඒකත් ජයසිරී මංගලම්
With the 19th Amendment blocked, Ivan sees a stalemate that could push Chandrika Kumaratunga and Ranil Wickremesinghe into a temporary political marriage: he to protect the peace process, she to halt inquiries into corruption and crimes linked to her security division and to secure her family’s political future. A second section argues she has turned to wrecking the peace process and defends talks with Prabhakaran. A third questions Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva’s handling of complaints against himself and his alliance with Hemantha Warnakulasuriya.
අන්තෝ ජටා-බහි ජටා
Ivan links four events of one week: charges finally filed against former railway general manager Wack Silva, first exposed by Ravaya in 1992; the removal of magistrate Lenin Ratnayake; a seminar on judicial independence addressed by Lord Brennan, Rohan Edrisinha and Ranil Wickremesinghe; and the launch of his book ‘Nonimi Aragalaya’ on the judicial crisis. He recounts the husbands of the two abused women, one later murdered after testifying, and lists unanswered questions about Sarath N. Silva, Upali Abeyratne and the inquiries.
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.
නීතියේ අනාචාරය
Ivan revisits the adultery case chemical engineer Jayasekera brought against Sarath N. Silva, then an Appeal Court judge. He shows how complaints to K. Palakidnar, Presidents Premadasa and Wijetunga went nowhere, how District Judge Upali Abeyratne’s handling of the case drew disciplinary charges that stalled once Silva became Attorney General and Priyantha Perera joined the Judicial Service Commission, and how Abeyratne was later punished lightly and promoted.
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.
නීතීඥ සංගමයට ප්රශ්න 6ක්
After lawyers Neil Dias, Chandrapala Kumarage and Sena Liyanasuriya urged the Bar Association to act against Ravaya, Ivan recounts how inquiries upheld Ravaya’s charges against Lenin Ratnayake and Upali Abeyratne and poses six questions: on Sarath N. Silva’s domestic life and judicial ethics, his appointment while disbarment petitions were pending, Abeyratne’s promotion, the trust land obtained while on the Vijaya Kumaratunga commission, his continuing trusteeship, and his ties to Rohana Kumara, a suspect in the Wijekoon murder.
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.
අධිකරණ සේවා කොමිසම කොයිබටද?
The editorial accuses the Judicial Service Commission of leniency towards judges found guilty of serious misconduct, including Upali Abeyratne, who handled the case against Sarath N. Silva, and Lenin Ratnayake, while dismissing some 21 others, many without charge sheets or inquiries and apparently for political reasons. It notes the commission’s composition has been changed and says the judiciary is becoming a branch of the ruling party.
සම්මානය සහ අධිකරණයේ අර්බුදය
Ravaya received the Editors’ Guild’s Sepala Gunasena award for defending judicial independence. Ivan recounts the background: his and W.A.B. Jayasekera’s petitions to disbar Attorney General Sarath N. Silva, Ravaya’s exposure of magistrate Lenin Ratnayake and district judge Upali Abeyratne, the Bar Association’s call for inquiries that found both guilty, the lenient penalties, and the protests by lawyers and MPs before Silva was made Chief Justice in September 1999.