Sumanthiran To Withdraw As Counsel If SC Judges Allow 6th Respondent Mohan Pieris To Fix Bench To Hear Challenge Of His Own Appointment
July 16, 2013
SC FR 23/2013, the case filed by the Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) and its Executive Director Dr. Paikyasothy Saravanamuttu challenging the de facto appointment of Mohan Pieris to function as Chief Justice in place of Chief Justice Dr. Shirani Bandaranayake in which Pieris is named as 6th respondent, came up before a special bench nominated by Pieris himself.
The bench consisted of Justices Saleem Marsoof (PC), Chandra Ekanayake, Sathya Hettige (PC), Eva S. Wanasundara (PC) and Rohini Marasinghe.
Sumanthiran
When the case was called, senior counsel for the petitioner M. A. Sumanthiran told the court that he moves that all judges of the Supreme Court must hear it without Pieris making a choice. He urged that this is the only way in which the matter could be taken up without compromising the honour and credibility of the court.
The bench was informed that there are legal precedents which clearly uphold that it is all judges must hear such a case as a matter of duty and cannot withdraw except after coming on the bench and publicly giving reasons for withdrawing from the duty so parties could know and make any relevant submissions on the matter.
