Sri Lankan lawyers decide to reject new chief justice
Colombo, Dec 15 (IANS) Sri Lankan lawyers Saturday decided not to accept a new chief justice if the current one is removed without a fair trial.
A government sponsored motion to impeach current Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake was recently presented to parliament and then investigated by a parliament panel which found her guilty of most of the allegations.
The Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL), the main body representing lawyers in Sri Lanka, held a special meeting on Saturday to discuss the fallout of the impeachment attempt and adopted three resolutions at the special meeting which ended with a heated exchange of words between pro-government and opposition lawyers, reported Xinhua.
BASL president Wijeydasa Rajapaksa said that one resolution adopted at the meeting was that the BASL will not accept a new chief justice.
The other resolutions were to urge Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa to reconsider the impeachment motion on the chief justice and if the government is to proceed with the motion, then to enact proper laws to proceed with an impeachment.
The BASl president said that just over 3,000 lawyers attended the special meeting of the BASL which was a closed door meeting and not open to the media.
A tense situation arose following the BASL meeting but Wijeydasa Rajapaksa insisted that during the meeting, there were no objections to the three resolutions.
The Commonwealth, human rights groups and some foreign governments have raised concerns over moves to remove the chief justice.
Source: IANS
Latest Headlines in Sri Lanka
- Sri Lanka confident of meeting conditions for IMF funding soon – report March 28, 2024
- Fire erupts at tyre shop in Colombo March 28, 2024
- Sri Lankan soldier Nipuna Silva among latest victims in Ukraine-Russia conflict – Report says March 28, 2024
- Gnanasara thero sentenced to 4 years in prison for defamatory remarks against Islam March 28, 2024
- Emergency preparedness is imperative – State Defence Minister March 28, 2024
Well, what is being followed is a process embedded in the Constitution. It is not a trial but more like a “departmental process” where charges are brought against an officer and a “Board” reviews the charges. The officer is given opportunity to reply to the charges.
The BASL’s resolution not to accept a new CJ is confusing as the appointment of a new CJ is within the President. The President is not obliged to appoint a new CJ who is “acceptable” to BASL. This is neither criteria for selection of a new CJ nor a a requirement that is to be satisfied.
BASL members are threatening to derail a constitutional process of appointing a new CJ. Isn’t that illegal? It is similar to a “trade union” opposing the appointment of a head of department. The act is indeed illegal and suggest the Labour Ministry look into it.