Impeachment motion against the Chief Justice

Phoney-Judgement of the former shotgun terrorist who turned the Rajapaksa’s Andare on CJ’s submission

| by Upasiri de Silva

( December 5, 2012, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) A friend of mine who knew this man who known as “Thadi Priyantha” since 1980’s as a controversial character suspected of having  a hand in the  1988/1989 JVP insurrection, posted a  column written by him to the “Wham Ivura” of Divaina Sinhala Daily paper for me to read it. The column was about the impeachment motion and the submission of facts by the CJ, Hon. (Dr) (Mrs) Shirani Bandaranayake to the PSC. In that column Chandraprema has, pronounced his ill advice judgement requesting the PSC to concluded the inquiry on her ladyship’s submission damaging her character and violating her legal rights enshrined in the Constitution.  He has used this column to ridicule the learned lawyers who prepared this submission and the Hon. MP’s of the PSC inquiring these facts by writing his controversial phoney-judgement using two purported claims of the CJ’s submission. He has ignored the age old legal dicta followed by many, not to discuss any ongoing court cases (SC cases) and violating the standing orders of the Parliament by insulting the Parliamentary Select committee inquiring these purported charges. As it is my democratic right, I thought of writing my opinion about this Rajapaksa’s column denigrating the Judiciary as well as the PSC by the writer. Leaving everything aside we should concentrate on the implication in Law about this column and how a “journalist” can make his subjective = bias submission about a very important Legal issue when that legal issue is before the Supreme Court and the Parliamentary Select Committee. If this man has violated the laid down Judicial and Parliamentary protocols by pre-empting his judgement on a parliamentary inquiry while the same inquiry is challenged before the SC under Article 107(3) of the Constitution  he should be punished for this blatant misdirection and violation of Judicial autonomy.

I first heard about this writer as the man who wrote the Gota’s War creating a false angle to the 30 years of the LTTE war, in addition to his other duties of throwing ‘mud’ at anyone who opposed the Rajapaksa regime. He has now turned to act as a ‘Legal Expert’ and an unofficial judge to shed his expert opinion about Hon. (Dr) (Mrs) Upatissa Attapattu Bandaranayake Wasala Mudiyanse Ralahamilage Shirani Anushamala Bandaranayake the present Chief Justice and the Ex- officio Chairperson of the Judicial Service Commission in terms of the Sri Lankan Constitution and her well prepared legal submission by many learned counsels to counter the ill prepared charges against the CJ by the Rajapaksa regime.

After reading the column to the “Wham Ivura” of the Divaina News paper, I draw a conclusion that the writer is trying to force Hon (Dr) (Mrs) Shirani Bandaranayake to resign from her post as the Chief Justice as she is the Ex-officio Chairperson of the Judicial Commission saying that her replies to the charges were not properly answered and the CJ has lost the match in the first round. The man who wrote this piece banality, a lackey of Mahinda and Gotabaya Rajapaksa is trying to throw mud at the judiciary without an iota of knowledge about the legal system in Sri Lanka or any knowledge about the Sri Lankan Constitution.

He then concentrates his ‘expert’ opinion and opts to pronounce his judgement on PURPORTED CHARGE No 5 and states that it was not fully answered in CJ’s submission. If this man can read English and capable of understanding legal terms this charge was well answered by the CJ’s Lawyers, and as they have stated there is NO case to answer as what they have accused the CJ has not yet occurred. As she is the Chief Justice and the Ex-Officio Chairperson of the Judicial Service Commission she can influence the Magistrate who is supposed to hear the case against Mr. Pradeep Gamini Suraj Kariyawasam the lawful husband of the said Hon.(Dr) (Mrs) Shirani Anushamala Bandaranayake is like accusing a man sharing  the same house with a woman and charge him for anticipated alleged rape for having being a male person.

The nest purported charge about Hon. (Dr) (Mrs) Shirani Bandaranauayke about her legal eligibility to appear as a legal representative for her sister and the brother-in law is well answered in her submission and if the writer is not able to understand the legal jargons he should get some legal advice from some experts in that field.

“Is it mandatory under Article 107 (3) of the Constitution for the Parliament to provide for matters relating to the forum before which the allegation are to be proved, the mode of proof, the burden of proof, the standard of proof etc. of any alleged misbehaviour or incapacity in addition to the matters relating to the investigation of the allege of misbehaviour or incapacity”.

If the writer is able to read the above Article 107 (3) he shouldn’t have undertaken a contract on behalf of Rajapaksa Regime to force the Hon.(Dr) (Mrs) Shirani Bandaranayake the Chief Justice by inducing the minds of the ordinary people in Sri Lanka to resign from her position when she has not committed any offence.

I wonder what was this man doing during the “White Flag Case” when the Presiding Judge Deepali Wijesundera, invited the President Mahinda Rajapaksa, who had a direct connection to that case as the Commanding Officer of the Forces to be an attesting witness to the Judges’ daughter’s wedding.
Impeachment motion against the Chief Justice Impeachment motion against the Chief Justice Reviewed by Sri Lanka Guardian on 19:55 Rating: 5
Powered by Blogger.