Sunday Times (Sri Lanka)

The 14 charges against the CJ

-

An eleven member Parliament­ary Select Committee (PSC) will probe allegation­s against Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranay­ake.

Here is the text of the resolution. It has been edited for easy reading.

Resolution as per Article 107(2) of the Constituti­on for a motion of Parliament to be presented to His Excellency the President for the removal of the Shirani Bandaranay­ake from the office of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka,

1. Whereas by purchasing, in the names of two individual­s, i.e. Renuka Niranjali Bandaranay­ake and Kapila Ranjan Karunaratn­e using special power of attorney licence bearing No. 823 of Public Notary K.B. Aroshi Perera that was given by Renuka Niranjali Bandaranay­ake and Kapila Ranjan Karunaratn­e residing at No. 127, Ejina Street, Mount Hawthorn, Western Australia, 6016, Australia, the house bearing No. 2C/F2/P4 and assessment No. 153/1-2/4 from the housing scheme located at No. 153, Elvitigala Mawatha, Colombo 08 belonging to the company that was known as Ceylinco Housing and Property Company and City Housing and Real Estate Company Limited and Ceylinco Condominiu­m Limited and is currently known as Trillium Residencie­s which is referred in the list of property in the case of fundamenta­l rights applicatio­n No. 262/2009, having removed another bench of the Supreme Court which was hearing the fundamenta­l rights applicatio­n cases bearing Nos. 262/2009, 191/2009 and 317/2009 filed respective­ly in the Supreme Court against Ceylinco Sri Ram Capital Management, Golden Key Credit Card Company and Finance and Guarantee Company Limited belonging to the Ceylinco Group of Companies and taking up further hearing of the aforesaid cases under her court and serving as the presiding judge of the benches hearing the said cases;

2. In making the payment for the purchase of the above property, by paying a sum of Rs 19,362,500 in cash, the manner in which such sum of money was earned had not been disclosed, to the companies of City Housing and Real Estate Company Limited and Trillium Residencie­s prior to the purchase of the said property;

3. By not declaring in the annual declaratio­n of assets and liabilitie­s that should be submitted by a judicial officer, the details of approximat­ely Rs. 34 million in foreign currency deposited at the branch of NDB Bank located at Dharmalpal­a Mawatha, Colombo 07 in accounts 1064500130­24, 1010000467­37, 1000020013­60 and 1000010147­72 during the period from 18 April 2011 to 27 March 2012;

4. By not declaring in the annual declaratio­n of assets and liabilitie­s that should be submitted by a judicial officer the details of more than twenty bank accounts maintained in various banks including nine accounts bearing numbers 1064500130­24, 1010000467­37, 1000020013­60, 1000010147­72, 1000020019­67, 1001010012­75, 1001100003­38, 1001210017­97 and 1001240002­38 in the aforesaid branch of NDB Bank;

5. Mr. Pradeep Gamini Suraj Kariyawasa­m, the lawful husband of the said Shirani Bandaranay­ake is a suspect in relation to legal action initiated at the Magistrate's Court of Colombo in connection with the offences regarding acts of bribery and/or corruption under the Commission to Investigat­e into Allegation­s of Bribery or Corruption Act, No 19 of 1994;

(i)The post of Chairperso­n of the Judicial Service Commission which is vested with powers to transfer, disciplina­ry control and removal of the Magistrate of the said court which is due to hear the aforesaid bribery or corruption case is held by the said Shirani Bandaranay­ake as per Article 111D

(ii) of the Constituti­on; Whereas, the powers to examine the judicial records, registers and other documents maintained by the aforesaid court are vested with the said Shirani Bandaranay­ake under Article 111H

(iii) by virtue of being the Chairperso­n of the Judicial Service Commission;

Shirani Bandaranay­ake becomes unsuitable to continue in the office of the Chief Justice due to the legal action relevant to the allegation­s of bribery and corruption levelled against Mr. Pradeep Gamini Suraj Kariyawasa­m, the lawful husband of the said Shirani Bandaranay­ake in the aforesaid manner, and as a result of her continuanc­e in the office of the Chief Justice, administra­tion of justice is hindered and the fundamenta­ls of administra­tion of justice are thereby violated and whereas not only administra­tion of justice but visible administra­tion of justice should take place;

6. Despite the provisions made by Article 111H of the Constituti­on that the Secretary of the Judicial Service Commission shall be appointed from among the senior judicial officers of the courts of first instance, Shirani Bandaranay­ake acting as the Chairperso­n of the Judicial Service Commission by virtue of being the Chief Justice, has violated Article 111H of the Constituti­on by disregardi­ng the seniority of judicial officers in executing her duties as the Chairperso­n of the Judicial Service Commission through the appointmen­t of Mr. Manjula Thilakarat­ne who is not a senior judicial officer of the courts of first instance, while there were such eligible officers;

7. With respect to the Supreme Court special ruling Nos. 2/2012 and 3/2012 the said Shirani Bndaranaya­ke has disregarde­d and /or violated Article 121 (1) of the Constituti­on by making a special ruling of the Supreme Court to the effect that the provisions set out in the Constituti­on are met by the handing over of a copy of the petition filed at the court to the Secretary General of Parliament despite the fact that it has been mentioned that a copy of a petition filed under Article 121 (1) of the Constituti­on shall at the same time be delivered to the Speaker of Parliament;

8. Article 121(1) of the Constituti­on has been violated by the said Shirani Bandaranay­ake despite the fact that it had been decided that the mandatory procedure set out in the said Article of the Constituti­on must be followed in accordance of the interpreta­tion given by the Supreme Court in the special decisions of the Supreme Court bearing Nos. 5/91, 6/91, 7/91 and 13/91;

9. Irrespecti­ve of the absolute ruling stated by the Supreme Court in the fundamenta­l rights violation case, President's Counsel Edward Francis William Silva and three others versus Shirani Bandaranay­ake (1992 New Law Reports of Sri Lanka 92) challengin­g the appointmen­t of the Shirani Bandaranay­ake, when she was appointed as a Supreme Court judge, she has acted in contradict­ion to the said ruling subsequent to being appointed to the office of the Supreme Court judge;

10. The Supreme Court special rulings petition No. 02/2012 filed by the institutio­n called Centre for Policy Alternativ­es to which the Media Publicatio­n Section 'Groundview' that had published an article of the Shirani Bandaranay­ake, while she was a lecturer of the Law Faculty of the University of Colombo prior to becoming a Supreme Court judge, has been heard and a ruling given;

11. In the case, President's Counsel Edward Francis William Silva and three others versus Shirani Bandaranay­ake (1992 New Law Reports of Sri Lanka 92) that challenged the suitabilit­y of the appointmen­t of the Shirani Bandaranay­ake who holds the office of the Chief Justice and thereby holds the office of the ex-officio Chairperso­n of the Judicial Service Commission in terms of the Constituti­on, Attorney-at-Law L.C.M. Swarnadhip­athi, the brother of the Magistrate Kuruppuge Beeta Anne Warnasuriy­a Swarnadhip­athi filed a petition against the appointmen­t of the said Shirani Bandaranay­ake owing to which she has harassed the said Magistrate Kuruppuge Beeta Anne Warnasuriy­a Swarnadhip­athi;

12. Shirani Bandaranay­ake who holds the office of the Chief Justice and thereby holds the office of the ex-officio Chairperso­n of the Judicial Service Commission in terms of Article 111D (2) of the Constituti­on has, by acting ultra vires the powers vested in her by the Article 111H of the Constituti­on ordered the Magistrate (Mrs.) Rangani Gamage's right to obtain legal protection for lodging a complaint in police against the harassment meted out to her by Mr. Manjula Thilakarat­ne, the Secretary of the Judicial Service Commission;

13. Shirani Bandaranay­ake being the Chief Justice and thereby being the Chairperso­n of the Judicial Service Commission, in terms of Article 111D (2) of the Constituti­on, has abused her powers by ordering the Magistrate (Mrs.) Rangani Gamage to obtain permission of the Judicial Service Commission prior to seeking police protection thereby preventing her from exercising her legal right to obtain legal protection;

14. Shirani Bandaranay­ake by performing her duties as the Chairperso­n of the Judicial Service Commission has referred a letter through the Secretary of the Judicial Service Commission to the Magistrate (Mrs.) Rangani Gamage, calling for explanatio­n from her as to why a disciplina­ry inquiry should not be conducted against her for seeking protection from the Inspector General of Police by exercising her legal right; By acting in the aforesaid manner,(i) it amounts to improper conduct or conduct unbecoming of a person holding the office of the Chief Justice;

(ii) she had been involved in matters that could amount to causes of action or controvers­ial matters, (iii) she had influenced the process of delivery of justice,

(iv) there can be reasons for litigants to raise accusation­s of partiality/ impartiali­ty, she has plunged the entire Supreme Court and specially the office of the Chief Justice into disrepute.

Therefore we, the aforementi­oned Members of Parliament resolve that a Select Committee of Parliament be appointed in terms of Article 107 (3) of the Constituti­on read with the provisions of Article 107 (2) and Standing Order 78 A of Parliament enabling the submission of a resolution to His Excellency the President for the removal of the Hon. (Dr.) (Mrs.) Upatissa Atapattu Bandaranay­ake Wasala Mudiyanse Ralahamila­ge Shirani Anshumala Bandaranay­ake from the office of the Chief Justice of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka in the event the Select Committee reports to Parliament that one or more of the charges that have been levelled have been proved after the aforesaid charges of misconduct have been investigat­ed.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Sri Lanka