Romesh de Silva, Jayampathi Wickramaratne, MA Sumanthiran And JC Weliamuna Receive Threatening Letters

By AHRC –January 18, 2013 

 de Silva PC is one of the topmost lawyers in Sri Lanka, a former president of the Bar Association of Sri Lanka. He led the legal team which represented Dr. Shirani Bandaranayaka (CJ) in all forums during the impeachment saga. Jayampathi Wickremaratne PC, who was formerly the senior consultant in the Constitutional Affairs Ministry is a well known constitutional lawyer and submitted a petition to the Court of Appeal opposing the impeachment, MA Sumanthiran is an MP from the Tamil National Alliance (TNA), and an active member of the legal team which represented the CJ. He spoke during the parliamentary debate on the impeachment, opposing the impeachment and voted against it. JC Weliamuna is a prominent lawyer, an active member of the Lawyer’s Collective and an internationally known human rights campaigner. He is also a former director of the Sri Lankan branch of Transparency International. This week they all received threatening letters from a secret agency which identified itself as the Patriotic Front. The letters named all of them as traitors and those who are opposing the enjoyment of the victory over the war against terror and declaring that drastic actions will be taken to silence them.

During the United National Party press briefing held yesterday (January 17) Mangala Samaraweera who was formerly a Minister of Foreign Affairs stated that a plot to cause accident to, or assassinate JC Weliamuna had come to their notice. He went on to name a criminal who had been recently released from prison as the person assigned to carry out the attack.

Yesterday in a statement issued by the Asian Human Rights Commission we gave details of the letters that are being sent by this secret agency to all those who have taken an active part in various legal actions relating to the attacks on lawyers, judges and in particular, the government’s move to impeach the CJ.

The extent of the gravity of the threatening letters is demonstrated by the kind of persons against whom the letters have been sent. Mr. Romesh de Silva PC is perhaps the topmost commercial lawyer in the country who is sought after by almost the entire commercial establishment. He has also been the leading lawyer in some of the most important political cases in recent years such as the case of General Sarath Fonseka and the case against the Chief Justice. While sending threatening letters has become a part of the repressive activities for several decades now there has hardly been any instance where persons as prominent as Mr. de Silva has received such threats. This is an indication that the machinery of repression now threatens even persons at the highest levels.

Thus, the impeachment of the CJ who is, of course, the topmost judicial officer in the country, has not been the last act of the government against the legal establishment of Sri Lanka. The list of persons mentioned in this statement shows that any person who will bring up a case before the courts against the government will become a target for extrajudicial attacks of the government’s repressive mechanism.

In the past journalists of the highest levels became the target of attacks. The cases of Lasantha Wickrematunge, Keith Noyar, Upali Tennekoon, Potala Jayantha, Sanath Balasuirya, Fredericka Jansz, Uvindu Kurukulasuriya, Mr. Gnalingam Kuganathan and Prageeth Eknaligoda are among those who faced such threats. While Lasantha Wickrematunge was assassinated and Prageeth Eknaligoda was made to disappear all others had to flee their country and become exiles elsewhere to frustrate the execution of these threats. A large number of other journalists had to follow suit and more names are being added to this list regularly. The practice of journalism as independent journalists exercising their critical faculties was thus severely curtailed.

Now the attacks are directed towards the legal fraternity. A rational legal administration is now regarded as a basic threat to the political regime in power. Lawyers who exercise their normal functions to utilise the law in order to assist their clients who are involved in various disputes and who are trying to protect their legal entitlements are now treated as being engaged in activities that threaten the peoples’ enjoyment of the victory against terrorism. This threat has now been extended to the topmost lawyers of the country.

The identity of the people who refer to themselves as the Patriotic Front which sends these letters is no secret either. All these letters emerge from the Ministry of Defense. Selected intelligence officers, police and military officers and paramilitary groups are mobilised by the Ministry to pursue those who are identified as targets for these attacks. Thus, these letters are not products of some loose elements but rather come through a process of selection by those who are assigned to carry out such actions. The Ministry of Defense also has all the capacity necessary to carry out these decisions.

This is one of the reasons why the complaints made to the police regarding these letters, or any other act which creates suspicion of an attack being planned, does not lead to a credible investigation. Investigations do not take place when the threats are made, nor do they take place when the threats are carried out.

All kinds of public statements will be made and various gestures such as invitations to meet with top level politicians but none of this will affect the carefully organised activities of the Ministry of Defense.

Thus there is no legal means by which any person who is threatened can take any meaningful action to seek or to obtain legal protection. This leaves room only to plea for political patronage from the government itself. Naturally the prerequisite for obtaining such patronage would be a promise not to engage in any kind of legal action on behalf of any client who has any cause to complain about the affairs of the government. The “affairs of government” is broadly interpreted to mean any kind of business engagement that those who are linked to the regime are engaged in. In short the price to be paid for political patronage to guarantee protection could be obtained only through an assurance that one will not exercise one’s professional rights to practice law according to the practices and principles governing the legal profession.

Every morning the Sri Lanka Broadcasting Corporation (SLBC) both in Sinhala and English begin with a one hour long programme which, for the most part, is a vitriolic propaganda attack on those who are identified as ‘enemies of the people’ that are attempting to obstruct the peoples’ victory over terrorism. Names are mentioned and sarcastic comments are made without any regard to the norms of journalism. In fact, the two commentators behave not as journalists, but as interpreters of events on behalf of the government. In these programmes any kind of language can be used anything including the making of curses expressing the wish that lightning should fall on the particular characters mentioned. These propaganda attacks are a preparation for physical attacks. When someone is attacked it could be said that it is “the people who have attacked them”.

What all this points to is a government strategy to move away from law based social relationships to a situation where whatever the government does is considered permissible. This will affect not only violations from physical harm but also property rights. Anything can be taken away from anybody, whether it be a job or a title to a property without any recourse to law. If the more affluent classes think this could happen only to the poor and the socially weak they had better reconsider. Today there is no basis for such belief given the type of persons now being attacked; for example the Chief Justice and even the topmost lawyers.

Impeachment of the Sri Lankan Chief Justice

17 January 2013 by Crisis Group

The impeachment of the Sri Lankan Chief Justice, Shirani Bandaranayake is possibly a watershed moment in Sri  law and politics. President Rajapaksa’s 13 January decision to ratify the impeachment decided two days earlier by a parliament controlled by his ruling United People’s Freedom Alliance is the latest step in the gradual but systematic dismantling of the rule of law. The move, in violation of the Sri Lankan constitution and basic principles of due process and in disregard of rulings by the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal, leaves Sri Lanka’s already battered democracy on life-support.

The decision to impeach the Chief Justice is a direct message that the Rajapaksas will continue to consolidate their power without regard to democracy, the rule of law or human rights.  In that sense, it complements the administration’s disregard of international law in the military actions that resulted in the deaths of some 40,000 or more civilians in 2009 and its refusal to investigate credible allegations of war crimes.

Indeed, the two issues – this assault on the independence of the judiciary and the accusations of war crimes – are interlinked and must be seen as such.  The Sri Lankan government’s insistence that Sri Lanka should be left to investigate and remedy its own shortcomings with regard to the latter looks increasingly (if more evidence were required) implausible as one of the last remaining independent institutions – the court – is so openly dismantled.  Further, without addressing, fully and transparently, the facts of the war’s denouement the seeds of future conflict remain embedded in Sri Lankan society.  Ongoing persecution of Tamils; the shrinking of political space for Sinhalese civil society; and the neutering of the courts creates an alarming trifecta which, if left unaddressed, does not augur well for the country’s future.

Sri Lanka’s international partners need to take note and frame their policies in light of the Sri Lankan government’s persistent rejection of domestic and international law.

The initiation of impeachment proceedings against the Chief Justice, in November 2012, was seen in large part as a politically-motivated response to the Supreme Court’s decision in theDivineguma case. In a judgment signed by the Chief Justice, the court temporarily blocked legislation to establish a new government department that would usurp many provincial powers over welfare and development policy and bring hundreds of millions of dollars worth of government programs under the control of the economic development ministry, headed by the president’s brother, Basil Rajapaksa.

The impeachment proceeded in disregard of basic principles of due process:

• the eleven-member parliamentary select committee considering the case was composed of a clear majority of government members who had already expressed their belief in the Chief Justice’s guilt;
• the committee denied the Chief Justice sufficient time and information to prepare her defence, even refusing her access to documents and evidence used by the panel members;
• the Chief Justice was verbally abused by government members of the committee;
• after informing the Chief Justice that the panel had no plans to call witnesses to give oral evidence, the committee did just that, summoning witnesses to testify immediately after the chief justice and her lawyers quit the hearings in protest at the lack of due process;
• the committee’s report, which found the Chief Justice guilty on three charges, was completed within twenty-four hours of concluding its hearings.

Despite rulings earlier this month by the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal that the parliamentary process was not constitutional and nullifying the conviction of the Chief Justice by the parliamentary select committee, the parliament nonetheless voted overwhelmingly on 11 January 2013 to endorse the committee’s finding and impeach the Chief Justice. On 13 January, President Rajapaksa ratified the parliament’s decision.

On 15 January, former Attorney General Mohan Pieris, one of the regime’s most loyal apologists, was sworn in to replace Bandaranayake, who was prevented by the police from going to court and forced to vacate her official residence. Nonetheless, Bandaranayake has defiantly asserted that she remains Chief Justice and retains strong support from lawyers and senior judges.

In addition to the immediate danger of violence against dissenting lawyers and activists and/or illegal detentions and other forms of repression, there is the longer-term damage the impeachment will do to democratic institutions; this in turn will threaten the prospects of sustainable peace in a country that should be seeking to emerge from the ravages of a particularly nasty civil war.

In the coming days and weeks, the international community should speak out against the government’s denial of due process in the case of Ms. Bandaranayake and warn clearly and publicly of international sanctions in the event of the violent repression of dissenting judges, lawyers and civil society activists.

The Commonwealth

The Commonwealth has an important role to play. In light of Sri Lanka’s clear and repeated violation of Commonwealth principles, and following his recent welcome expressions of concern about the impeachment, the Commonwealth Secretary-General should refer Sri Lanka to the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG). Already the Canadian government has called on CMAG to put Sri Lanka on its agenda – other Commonwealth governments should endorse this position and insist that CMAG acts. Unless the impeachment is reversed, the Commonwealth should shift the location of its next heads of government meeting, currently scheduled to take place in Colombo in November 2013.

The UN Human Rights Council

Member states of the Human Rights Council (HRC), which begins its next session on 25 February, should work for strong follow-up to their resolution of March 2012. The impeachment of the Chief Justice is only the most obvious and important example of the Sri Lankan government’s refusal to respond positively to the HRC’s many useful recommendations. Despite government claims to have implemented significant portions of the recommendations of its own Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) reporting on the civil war’s final months, in fact there has been next to no progress, and none with respect to accountability. On every major category listed in the HRC resolution, the Sri Lankan government has failed to take effective action:

• there have been no credible investigations into war crimes, disappearances or other serious human rights violations;
• no independent institutions for investigation or accountability have been established; instead the regime has dismantled the last traces of judicial independence through its assault on the chief justice;
• rather than moving towards a lasting and fair constitutional settlement of the ethnic conflict through meaningful power-sharing, the President and his brothers have expressed their intention to repeal or weaken the already limited provincial powers granted under the 13th Amendment. (For details see Crisis Group’s November 2012 report, Sri Lanka: Tamil Politics and the Quest for a Political Solution);
• despite the council and many others calling for the demilitarisation of the Tamil-majority northern province, the Sri Lankan military continues to control virtually all aspects of life in the north, with the civil administration intimidated and sidelined;
• the government has cracked down hard on Tamil protest in the north, with peaceful demonstrations disrupted by the military, students arrested on groundless charges of working with the LTTE and other forms of dissent denied;
• dissent among Sinhalese in the south is also under attack, with recent anti-impeachment protests attacked by government thugs while the police looked on and did nothing.

The HRC should note the failure by the government to implement last year’s recommendations and call for an independent investigation into all credible allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity, whose broad outlines were laid out in the April 2011 report of the UN Secretary-General’s panel of experts looking at the civil conflict’s conclusion.

Other responses

All of Sri Lanka’s international partners – both bilateral and multilateral – need to determine measures to be taken in response to the Rajapaksa government’s clear contempt for constitutional values and the rule of law.

All those providing bi-lateral and multilateral development assistance – especially the World Bank, Asian Development Bank and International Monetary Fund – should review their programs in light of the political attacks by the Rajapaksa government on the rule of law and its continued failure to address accountability issues stemming from the killing of thousands of non-combatants in 2009.

Cops sell themselves at Aluthkade: as betrayals rage genuine Heroes emerge - Gota’s police dog barks : I can arrest CJ on a bogus B report
(Lanka-e-News -17.Jan.2013. 11.30PM)Only MaRa’s marauders and some SLFP black coated sharks and not those of the legal profession were present in the courts complex to cheer the newly unlawfully appointed Chief (Thief) Justice. Among those few in the cheering squad were also the three cuties who had become judges of MaRa.

MaRa and the new chief (thief) justice were also separately cheered by the UNP M .P. and Bar Association President Wijedasa Rajapakse who met MaRa yesterday, and who had castrated himself voluntarily to lose his maleness in order to descend to the most sordid levels of ‘ponnedasa’ (effeminate) behavior . It also became clear from this conduct of Wijedasa who had so far not protested against MaRa and the unlawful actions as to why Wijedasa betrayed his profession and Bar Association position . In other words Wijedasa Rajapakse alias Ponnedasa Rajapassa impliedly accepted the applause and the cheering.

While the Bar Association President and the Secretary were betraying the legal profession wholesale yesterday , the senior and recognized lawyers of the Lawyers collective in large numbers had flocked to the court premises 15th Jan. to demonstrate against MaRa’s disgraceful , unscrupulous and unlawful actions despite MaRa’s khaki uniformed police thugs obstructing them . The lawyers lit candles to mark the death of the independent judiciary today coinciding with the new CJ appointment .

While Wijedasa alias Ponnedasa and his like were unashamedly and treacherously betraying , the TV bulletin records confirmed how the new Lawyer ‘Sandun Yapa Karunarathne’ , who could not bear the sordid betrayals of the Bar Association high officials brought credit and recognition to the lawyers’ campaign in general. When the police thugs were obstructing the Lawyers and the media that came to cover the event , Sandun inquired , how can the police provide support to the MaRa groups at the same time and apply double standards? If the impeachment process had been carried out duly and lawfully , why are you so frightened ? If putting barriers and cordons around the courts blocking access is not military administration , then what is it ? he inquired. 

According to reports reaching Lanka e news , DIG Anura Senanayake , the MaRa stooge who was in charge of the Aluthkade police operations had been told , it is possible to make a police B report , and if necessary arrest the CJ, Shiranee Bandaranayake. The IGP had however warned ‘Anura , don’t take this matter that easy . This is now a political issue. Therefore we will abide by the laws. Otherwise some day , these will recoil on us.’

Based on instructions given by Anura Senanayake (Gotabaya’s ‘police dog’), who is vested with unofficial and illegal powers of the IGP by Gota, the Aluthkade police operations were entrusted to DIG Sumith Edirisinghe and SSP E R S Roshan Fernando. The police posse that came for the operation to Aluthkade were comprised of :

19 IPs and SI s, 150 constables, with two riot squad vehicles and a water hose vehicle . In addition , 240 STF soldiers under STF A S P Sylvester were also deployed . This was something special . Anura Senanayake had also supplied murderers and thugs in a police bus.

May we recall , Roshan Fernando the cop who came to control the lawyers , was a criminal caught red handed while transporting Kassippu in packets in his vehicle during the period when he was an ASP. Sumith Edirisinghe is the other infamous police cop with the putrid record of lawless conduct and murders . He was associated with the mass murder graves discovered at Hokandara. He is a licensed murderer . Even now there are four fundamental rights petition cases pending against him in courts. This lawless creature knows the more he does the sordid biddings today , so much are his chances of getting himself freed from all his crimes tomorrow under the new chief (thief ) justice Mohan Peiris who will dispense cheap justice ,because Kirigampamunuwe murder suspect Chandana Kathriarachi was released by Mohan Peiris fancifully when he was the Attorney general.

South Africa Law Society calls on government to take a stand on politically motivated impeachment in Sri Lanka

By Colombo Telegraph -January 18, 2013 

The Law Society of South Africa (LSSA) expresses grave concern at what appears to be the politically motivated impeachment of the Chief Justice of Sri Lanka, Madam Justice Shirani Bandaranayake.

LSSA Co-Chairpersons Krish Govender and Jan Stemmett

‘It is a matter of grave concern when a country – and particularly a member of the Commonwealth – claims to respect the rule of law, the separation of powers and the independence of the judiciary and legal profession on the one hand, but appears to violate these on the other,’ say LSSA Co-Chairpersons Krish Govender and Jan Stemmett.

The impeachment of the Chief Justice comes after the Secretary of the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) of Sri Lanka,Manjula Tilakarante, was attacked in October last year at a time of heightened tension between the JSC and the Government of Sri Lanka. ‘These incidents are indicative of the erosion of the Rule of Law and the fact that the Sri Lankan government appears to be intimidating the judiciary and the legal profession,’ say Mr Govender and Mr Stemmett.

They add that the UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers noted with concern at the end of last year that attacks and threats against members of the judiciary and lawyers, as well as interference in their work, have dramatically increased in Sri Lanka over the past few months.

The LSSA calls on the South African Government to condemn these developments in Sri Lanka and to urge the Sri Lankan Government to reinstate Judge Bandaranayake as Chief Justice. The South African Government must not be seen to remain silent in the face of these violations of the Rule of Law, while at the same time increasing its bilateral and trade relations with Sri Lanka.

The LSSA plans to take this matter up at the 18^th Commonwealth Law Conference being hosted by the Commonwealth Lawyers Association and the LSSA in Cape Town from 14 to 18 April 2013.

.

17 January 2013: LSSA expresses grave concern at impeachment of Chief Justice of Sri Lanka; calls on SA Government to take a stand. Read press release.

Sri Lanka's Emerging Strongman

January 16, 2013,

While Pakistan's judges try to oust their elected leaders, elsewhere in South Asia an elected leader is busy ousting judges. We're talking about Sri Lanka, where President Mahinda Rajapaksa sacked the country's Chief Justice over the weekend. This week, Mr. Rajapaksa installed one of his advisers in that post, and the fear is South Asia's newest strongman is now unstoppable.

Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake's main crime seems to have been to lock horns with the government. In October, the Supreme Court blocked legislation that would have awarded Basil Rajapaksa—the minister for economic development and the President's brother—sweeping powers to control development funds, on the grounds that some of these powers belonged to the provinces. Though Sri Lanka's parliament eventually passed an amended version of the bill, in November it also began impeachment proceedings against Mrs. Bandaranayake on 14 charges, mainly of financial misconduct. She says the charges are trumped up.

Enlarge Image

AFP/Getty Images

Sri Lanka's ousted Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake, center, in November

The impeachment proceedings also didn't pass the smell test for due process. Parliament is dominated by the President's party and Mrs. Bandaranayake's defenders say the select committee appointed by the Speaker—another Rajapaksa brother—to investigate her neither gave her time to respond to charges nor the ability to cross-examine witnesses. The committee found her guilty on three charges in December.

A government spokesman tells us the letter of the law was followed, but an appeals court ruled against the parliamentary committee's verdict, while the Supreme Court decided the committee had no authority to conduct the investigation. None of this stopped lawmakers, who trumpeted parliament's supremacy and proceeded to expel Mrs. Bandaranayake.

The Chief Justice's dismissal could well prove the decisive battle in the government's long-running war against judicial independence. Last year, thugs assaulted an official in Colombo who spoke up about threats to the judiciary. Now that President Rajapaksa has shown he can remove the country's top legal authority, chances are few judges will oppose his will.

The other checks and balances of a constitutional democracy are also under attack as Mr. Rajapaksa has sought to consolidate power since the country's civil war with the Tamil Tigers ended in 2009. In 2010, he pushed through a constitutional amendment that did away with term limits on the presidency. Most of the press is state-controlled. Officials accuse civil society groups critical of the government of working for Western intelligence agencies. Sri Lankans are right to wonder if 26 years of war will now be followed by another long nightmare of strongman rule.

There's still a possibility that outside pressure can rein in the Rajapaksa brothers. The President is keen to boost Sri Lanka's image abroad, attract investment and undo the controversy surrounding alleged war crimes. Colombo is investing in preparations to host a Commonwealth summit later this year. This gives the U.K. and other members of the Commonwealth a modicum of leverage to require that Mr. Rajapaksa uphold the rule of law if he wants to sit among polite company.

Impeachment of former CJ will deter investors – US Ambassador

By M.C. Dushantha – Matara-2013-01-18

The American Ambassador in Sri Lanka Michele J. Sison said that due to the impeachment of the former chief justice, the whole judicial system in Sri Lanka is in peril, and would lead to the country finding it difficult to woo foreign investors.

Ambassador Sison made this statement when she addressed the Federation of Industries and Commerce, Matara, yesterday (17).

She went on to say that normally investors assess the situation in a country before they start investing, and the passing of the resolution to impeach the former chief justice shows the problems that have emerged between the legislature, the executive and the judiciary.

“There should be an effective legal system that safeguards the people and the government,” she added.

WikiLeaks: According To Observers Gota’s And Mohan Pieris’s Private Security Firm Case Links Grenade Attacks To Weliamuna

By Colombo Telegraph -January 18, 2013

“On Saturday September 27, 2008 at approximately 11:30 p.m., two grenades were thrown at the residence of Mr. J.C. Weliamuna in Kohuwela, a Colombo suburb. Weliamuna is a well-known human rights lawyer and also Director of Transparency International (Sri Lanka). One of the two grenades detonated, causing damage to the residence. The other failed to explode and was recovered by police.” The US Embassy Colombo informed Washington.

Weliamuna and CJ Shirani

A Leaked ‘Confidential’ US diplomatic cable, dated September 28, 2008, updated the Secretary of State regarding throwing two grenades at the residence of a well-known human rights lawyer and the Director of Transparency International (Sri Lanka) J.C. Weliamuna. The Colombo Telegraph found the related leaked cable from the WikiLeaks database. The cable is signed by the US Ambassador to Colombo Robert Blake.

The ambassador Blake wrote “Media reports, however, called attention to Weliamuna’s role in a fundamental rights case filed by Siyaguna Kosgodage Anton Sugath Nishantha Fernando alleging torture by several police officers who had him in custody at the Negombo police station. Subsequently, on September 20, 2008, two persons on a motorcycle shot him dead while he was driving his van, accompanied by his 11 year old son. At the most recent hearing of this case on September 26, the Supreme Court directed the Attorney-General to instruct the police Special Investigation Unit to inquire into the incident. Another lawyer who appeared against the same police officers in a related trial in the High Court in Negombo had earlier received threats.”

“Other observers pointed to a fundamental rights case Weliamuna was involved in questioning the setting-up of a private security firm to provide protection for government offices. The officers of the new company were listed as Defense Secretary Gothabaya Rajapaksa, former Treasury Secretary P. B. Jayasundera, and attorney Mohan Peiris (an attorney who serves as an advisor to the Defense Secretary). Others thought that the recent ranking of Sri Lanka as 92nd in the world in government transparency could have angered important people.” Blake further wrote.

Placing a comment Blake wrote; “Several organizations, including Transparency International itself, the Sri Lanka Bar Association, and the National Peace Council condemned the attack on Weliamuna’s residence. Embassy also received a message from the Hong Kong-based Asian Human Rights Commission deploring the attack and requesting an intervention with the authorities. It is probable that elements of the security forces, most likely rogue police, were involved in the attack. Although the Asian Human Rights Commission hinted darkly that “the Ministry of Defense in recent times have acquired notoriety for engaging in all kinds of abuses of human rights,” we have no direct evidence that more senior officials were involved. Still, this sort of incident is all too common in Sri Lanka, where nearly all attempts to hold law enforcement or military personnel accountable for human rights abuses have been frustrated over the last several decades. The Committee to Protect Journalists has just ranked Sri Lanka fifth worst in the world in terms of official impunity. Weliamuna and other attorneys courageous enough to take on these sorts of cases know well the risks they run, but the authors of the attack may also have intended to send a message to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court or other judges about the potential consequences of ordering investigations into the conduct of the security forces. There are a considerable number of similar cases of intimidation or elimination of witnesses in sensitive human rights or corruption cases.”

Related posts;

Romesh de Silva, Jayampathi Wickramaratne, MA Sumanthiran And JC Weliamuna Receive Threatening Letters

Read the cable below for further details;

OP-ED: Save the Commonwealth Brand: Tell Sri Lanka 'Enough'

Sir Ronald Sanders

BY SIR RONALD SANDERS-Thursday, January 17, 2013

It is time for the Commonwealth of Nations to suspend Sri Lanka from its councils.

In doing so, the Commonwealth would restore confidence in its 2.1 billion people that it is not a hypocritical association that claims to stand for values, including democracy, human rights and the rule of law but fails to act to discipline governments that violate these values.

The Sri Lanka government has now seriously and persistently violated the principles to which every Commonwealth country has declared itself to be committed, and, according to the Commonwealth’s rules this is ground for suspension from its councils as a first step.

Well-thinking people across the Commonwealth, and those who are concerned about the credibility of the 54-nation grouping, expect the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) to be convened swiftly to suspend Sri Lanka from the Council of the Commonwealth and to set an agenda and time table for the government to implement measures to restore respect for the rule of law. CMAG is a rotating group of foreign ministers from nine Commonwealth countries that is charged with overseeing that Commonwealth values, as set out in many declarations, are respected.

The urgency for CMAG action on Sri Lanka has been triggered by the decision of Sri Lanka President, Mahinda Rajapaksa to dismiss the country’s Chief Justice, Shirani Bandaranayake, after a widely condemned impeachment process.

Rajapaska ignored warnings from Amnesty International, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), theCommonwealth Lawyers Association, the Commonwealth Judges and Magistrates Associationand the Commonwealth Secretary-General, Kamalesh Sharma, not to proceed with impeachment that followed a decision by the Chief Justice that found a controversial Bill tabled in the Parliament unconstitutional. The Bill had sought to grant disproportionate powers to the Minister of Economic Development, one of the President’s brothers.

Slapping the Commonwealth Secretary-General and other Commonwealth legal bodies in the face, President Rajapaska proceeded to dismiss the Chief Justice and to appoint his former Attorney-General to the post. Worse yet, he did so after the Supreme Court ruled that the impeachment proceedings conducted by the Rajapaksa-dominated parliament were illegal. The Rajapaksa family holds other senior government positions, including head of the defence ministry and the Speaker of Parliament. One of Mr Rajapaksa’s sons also sits as a member of parliament.

This latest violation flagrantly scorns Commonwealth values as set out in the Latimer House Principles which state: "Judiciaries and parliaments should fulfill their respective but critical roles in the promotion of the rule of law in a complementary and constructive manner; Interaction, if any, between the executive and the judiciary should not compromise judicial independence; and Judges should be subject to suspension or removal only for reasons of incapacity or misbehaviour that clearly renders them unfit to discharge their duties."

Sri Lanka is an even bigger problem for the Commonwealth because it is scheduled to host the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) in November.No time can now be wasted in deciding to shift the venue to another Commonwealth country.

If Commonwealth Heads of Government turn-up in Sri Lanka, they would be sending an unacceptable signal to the world community that governments that violate human rights and the rule of law can do so without fear of censure.  If Heads go to Sri Lanka, the Commonwealth can discard its brand as a ‘values based association” and start looking for something else to justify its existence.  But, whoever remains in it, it would cease to be respected by the people of its own countries and the international community.

That would be a sad loss for the 32 small states that are a significant number of the 54-nation Commonwealth.  They need a vibrant, respected Commonwealth as an advocate and interlocutor on their behalf in the international community.  A straw organisation existing on the margins of global regard can do absolutely nothing for them.

In this connection, the government of Canada should be complemented for trying for over a year to restrain the government of Sri Lanka from its excesses and to hold it to account for human rights abuses arising from a war with the Tamil Tigers that ended in 2009.  The Sri Lanka government has refused to allow an independent inquiry into the deaths of hundreds of thousands of civilians during the conflict between government forces and the Tamil Tigers as well as a worsening human rights situation.

Canadian Prime Minister  Stephen Harper has now indicated that his government wants Sri Lanka to be discussed at the next meeting of CMAG.  Both opposition parties in Canada have gone further calling on Harper to declare that he would boycott the CHOGM if it is held in Sri Lanka. 

A debate in both the Houses of Parliament in Britain and a subsequent statement by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office also indicate “deep concern” and called on the Sri Lanka government to “respect democratic principles”.

However, while Canada and Britain have spoken-up, many developing Commonwealth countries have so far remained silent.  Their voices also need to be heard, particularly as many of them place great store in democracy and the rule of law both as a system of governance and as an imperative for attracting investment.Judicial independence is fundamental to the rule of law and essential for any democratic and accountable government.

Commonwealth Secretary-General Kamalesh Sharma has announced that he will be visiting Sri Lanka in February.  It is his job to try to resolve the impasse with an obdurate Sri Lanka government that has so far ignored his advice and warnings of others.  It is also his job to tell the Sri Lanka President that he has violated Commonwealth rules and that, unless the action on the Chief Justice is reversed and a credible, enforceable plan is presented, Sri Lanka will be placed immediately on the agenda for CMAG with a view to suspending it from the Councils of the Commonwealth.

In any event, the Sri Lanka government has now done enough to warrant moving the venue for November’s CHOGM to another country.  The Government cannot spurn the advice of the Secretary-General, Commonwealth legal organisation and other international groupings and yet demand to be privileged to host CHOGM.  After all, the location for hosting a Heads of Government meeting must be in the interest of the Commonwealth as a whole.

The foreign ministers of two Caribbean countries – Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago – are members of CMAG.  In this connection, they have an important role to play in upholding the values that their own countries honour and respect – those values are what differentiates the Commonwealth in the world and makes it special.

Sanders was a member of the Commonwealth Eminent Persons Group 2010-2011. He is a former Caribbean diplomat and currently is a consultant and writer. Responses and previous commentaries:www.sirronaldsanders.com

Canadian law society expresses concern over the recent dismissal of CJ

Canadian law society expresses concern over the recent dismissal of CJ

(January 18, 2013, Toronto, Sri Lanka Guardian) The Law Society of Upper Canada publicly expresses concern that the recent dismissal of Chief Justice  Shirani Bandaranayake is politically motivated and may have a negative effect on judicial independence  in Sri Lanka. 

Reliable reports indicate that on November 1, 2012, the ruling party of Sri Lanka, the United People’s

Freedom Alliance (UPFA) announced that they had started the process to impeach the Hon. Dr. Shirani Bandaranayake, the country’s chief justice. Chief Justice Bandaranayake is the 43rd Chief Justice of Sri  Lanka and the country’s first woman chief justice. The Chief Justice has denied any wrongdoing.

It is believed that the complaint against the Chief Justice was politically motivated and is part of a pattern  of attacks and threats against members of the judiciary and lawyers and interference in their work. The  steps that were taken towards impeaching the Chief Justice appear to be the culminating point of a  series of attacks against the judiciary for asserting its independence.

In December 2012, a Parliamentary Select Committee found Chief Justice Bandaranayake guilty of professional misconduct, unexplained wealth and misuse of power. 

In January 2013, the Court of Appeal quashed the findings of the Parliamentary Select Committee that probed the impeachment charges against the Chief Justice. The Court of Appeal said the recent Select Committee was void in law. The Supreme Court also ruled the impeachment process was  unconstitutional.

On January 11, 2013, despite the decisions of the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court, the Sri  Lankan parliament voted overwhelmingly to impeach the Chief Justice. On January 13, 2013, Sri Lankan  President Rajapaksa ratified Parliament’s vote and dismissed the Chief Justice.

The Law Society of Upper Canada believes strongly in the importance of protecting judicial  independence. Judges frequently have to rule on controversial matters and interpret the law in areas  where there is legal uncertainty. Judges must be able to make controversial, and even unpopular, rulings  without fear of politically motivated sanctions.

Therefore, the Law Society of Upper Canada calls on the government of Sri Lanka to, 

a. take steps to ensure that judges are not subject to politically motivated sanctions as a  result of issuing decisions;

b. publicly recognize the importance, legitimacy and independence of the work of judges and their contributions to the strengthening of democracy and the rule of law;

c. ensure that all judges can carry out their peaceful and legitimate duties and activities  without fear of removal from office; and

d. ensure in all circumstances respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms in  accordance with international human rights standards.

The Law Society of Upper Canada is the governing body for some 44,700 lawyers and 4,900 paralegals  in the Province of Ontario, Canada, and the Treasurer is the head of the Law Society. The mandate of  the Law Society is to govern the legal profession in the public interest by upholding the independence,  integrity and honour of the legal profession for the purpose of advancing the cause of justice and the rule  of law. 

The Law Society urges the legal community to intervene in support of members of the legal profession in  Sri Lanka in their effort to advance the respect for human rights and to promote the rule of law.

For more information, please contact Lisa Hall at 416-947-7625 or lhall@lsuc.on.ca

For Immediate Release