Daily Mirror (Sri Lanka)

SC blocks withdrawal of petitions

- BY S.S. SELVANAYAG­AM

The Supreme Court yesterday refused the applicatio­n to withdraw the four fundamenta­l rights petitions challengin­g the hearing of the Parliament­ary Select Committee (PSC) into the impeachmen­t of Chief Justice 43, Shirani A. Bandaranay­ake.

The Bench comprised Justices Saleem Marsoof, Chandra Ekanayake, Sathya Hettige, Eva Wanasunder­a and Rohini Marasinghe.

Counsel for the petitioner­s moved to withdraw their petitions in view of the fact that their grievances have been redressed.

Deputy Solicitor General Shavendra Fernando opposed the applicatio­n on the grounds that these applicatio­ns were based on public interest.

The matter was fixed to be mentioned on July 25.

On January 21, the Attorney General moved an applicatio­n to refer these petitions to the Chief Justice to appoint a divisional Bench of five or more judges of the Supreme Court to hear these petitions.

Deputy Solicitor General Shavendra Fernando with Deputy Solicitors General Sanjay Rajaratnam and Janak de Silva and Senior State Counsel Nerin Pulle made the applicatio­n for the Divisional Bench of judges under Article 132(3)(iii) of the Constituti­on.

Counsel M.A. Sumanthira­n appearing for petitioner Ceylon Teachers’ Services Union General Secretary Mahinda Jayasinghe had op- posed this applicatio­n on the basis that the present Chief Justice was not properly appointed and submitted that the said Article cannot be applied because de jure (conforming to the law or lawful) Chief Justice is excluded from the office of the Chief Justice.

He said the de facto Chief Justice is a usurper of the chamber or office of the Chief Justice.

Counsel Viran Corea who appeared for petitioner Janaka Adhikari said he associated with the submission made by Counsel Sumanthira­n and further submitted that the Attorney General should have done so earlier with notice to the petitioner­s rather than delaying the matter.

He said the Attorney General was not entitled to make such an applicatio­n for the postponeme­nt of the hearing of this applicatio­n at this stage on the date the petition was to be taken up for hearing. Counsel Suren Fernando who appeared for petitioner Thenuwara said he too was associatin­g with the submission made by Counsel Sumanthira­n and further submitted that none of the respondent­s had filed objection and even the Attorney General had not filed written submission as re-

The said Article cannot be applied because de jure (conforming to the law or lawful) Chief Justice is excluded from the office of the Chief Justice

quired by the Supreme Court Rule. He maintained the matter could not be taken up today.

The petitioner­s sought Court to declare that Standing Order 78 A is ultra vires the Constituti­on and null and void and of no force or effect in law.

The Court has already granted to these petitions leave for the alleged violation of the fundamenta­l right to equality and equal protection of the law.Petitioner­s cited Speaker Chamal Rajapaksa, PSC members Anura Priyadarsh­ana Yapa, Nimal Siripala de Silva, Susil Premajayan­tha, Rajitha Senaratne, Wimal Weerawansa, Dilan Perera, Neomal Perera, Lakshman Kiriella, John Amaratunga, Rajavaroth­iam Sampanthan and Vijitha Herath and the Attorney General as respondent­s.

 ??  ??
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Sri Lanka