Features

THE JUDICIAL SERVICE COMMISSION

Published

9 months ago

2026/01/18

Thilina Walpola

Dr Jagath Wickramaratne

A Review of the Speaker’s Ruling

It was reported that the Speaker has rejected a motion submitted to him by 31 Members of Parliament requesting the appointment of a Select Committee of Parliament to examine the exercise by the Judicial Service Commission of its powers relating to “the appointment, promotion, transfer, dismissal, and disciplinary control” of judicial officers. The reason for the rejection of the motion, as stated by him, is that compliance with the motion “would be a derogation of the independence of the judiciary and thereby a derogation of the judicial power of the People”. It is the view of Speaker Wickremaratne that the Judicial Service Commission “exercises the judicial power of the People”. That, I submit, is the fundamental flaw in the Speaker’s Ruling.

The Queen v. Liyanage

As far back as 1962, in the coup case of The Queen v. Liyanage, (Trial at Bar No.1 of 1962), the Supreme Court comprising Justice T.S. Fernando, Justice L.B. de Silva, and Justice Sri Skanda Rajah comprehensively examined the concept of “judicial power” and held as follows:

“Judicial power in the sense of the judicial power of the State is vested in the Judicature, i.e. the established civil courts of this country.

The Court proceeded to note that:

The Chief Justice and at least one other Judge of the Supreme Court are members of the Judicial Service Commission, a body performing executive functions.”

The Speaker’s Ruling does not state why it chose not to follow, or even refer to, that authoritative statement of the Supreme Court.

Speaker Anura Bandaranaike’s Ruling

The Speaker’s Ruling commences with a reference to what it describes as “a similar ruling” by Speaker Anura Bandaranaike in 2001. The issue in 2001 was fundamentally different. On that occasion, the Supreme Court attempted to prevent a motion for the impeachment of the then Chief Justice from being proceeded with in Parliament. Speaker Bandaranaike very correctly held that the Judiciary had no right to interfere with proceedings in the Legislature. On the other hand, these two institutions of government do, on occasion, interact. It is the Supreme Court that interprets the laws enacted by Parliament, and it is Parliament that has the power to remove from office a Judge of the Supreme Court or the Court of Appeal.

The 1947 and 1977 Constitutions

The Judicial Service Commission (JSC) which the Supreme Court recognized as an executive (and not a judicial) body was initially established by the 1947 Constitution and vested with the power of appointment, transfer, dismissal and disciplinary control of judicial officers and specified public officers employed in courts. The Speaker’s Ruling appears to be in error when it suggests that the JSC was “first introduced by the 17^th Amendment” to the present Constitution. In fact, it was established (or more accurately, “re-established”) by Article 112 of the Constitution of 1978. That Article restored the JSC consisting of “the Chief Justice who shall be the Chairman, and two Judges of the Supreme Court appointed by the President”, following the repeal of the 1972 Constitution. Article 55 of the 1978 Constitution stated that “The appointment, transfer, dismissal and disciplinary control of judicial officers is hereby vested in the Judicial Service Commission”.

The 1972 Constitution

The 1972 Constitution which created the Republic of Sri Lanka, in a significant departure from the 1947 Constitution, replaced the JSC with a Judicial Services Advisory Board (JSAB) and a Judicial Services Disciplinary Board (JSDB). The Cabinet was the designated appointing authority of District Judges and Magistrates, and while the JSDB shared the power of removal of a judicial officer with the National State Assembly, its exercise of that power was required to be reported immediately to the Cabinet of Ministers. While serving as Secretary to the Ministry of Justice, I was appointed a member of the JSAB and served on that body for five years. So did the Attorney-General. Neither of us belonged to the Judiciary; nor were either of us entitled to exercise “judicial power”.

The Committee Stage Debate

The motion submitted by 31 Members of Parliament requesting the appointment of a Select Committee to inquire into the exercise by the JSC of its powers conferred by the Constitution appears to have been the immediate consequence of the stormy committee stage debate on the finance allocation for the JSC in the 2026 Budget. The fact that the salaries of the Judges of the Supreme Court are charged on the Consolidated Fund (and therefore not subject to debate or parliamentary vote), but that when three of the Judges serve as members of the JSC, their conduct in that capacity can be impugned on the floor of the House, as did actually happen, is sufficient indication that the JSC is not exercising “judicial power”. Nor is the Council of Legal Education exercising “judicial power” merely because it is chaired by the Chief Justice and includes among its members the Judges of the Supreme Court.

The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct

The proposed Select Committee, which the Speaker declined to appoint, intended to examine, inter alia, the exercise by the JSC of its power of disciplinary control, including the dismissal, of judicial officers, and make recommendations for improvement. In that connection, I wish to make two observations. The first is that Sri Lanka is today one of the very few countries in the world that has failed or neglected to adopt or apply the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct, the gold standard mandated by the United Nations General Assembly over twenty years ago. That document, which was examined and approved by Chief Justices of both common law and civil law jurisdictions, as well as by the Judges of the International Court of Justice, identifies and defines the six fundamental judicial values, namely, Independence, Impartiality, Integrity, Propriety, Equality, and Competence and Diligence, and proceeds, in a 175-page Commentary, to set out and explain in detail the manner in which Judges are expected to conform to them. In the absence of this standard-setting instrument, what is the criteria adopted in Sri Lanka to determine whether a judge or judicial officer is keeping faith with the judicial oath?

Measures for the Effective Implementation of the Bangalore Principles, also endorsed by the United Nations, contains procedures for the disciplining of judges, as well as for the removal of judges from office. Are these procedures being followed by the JSC? These are questions which the proposed Select Committee alone could have explored.

The Istanbul Declaration on Transparency in the Judicial Process

Another relevant instrument is the Istanbul Declaration on Transparency in the Judicial Process. It was initially examined at a conference of Chief Justices of the Asian-Pacific region, then at a conference of Chief Justices of the Balkan region, before being finally adopted in 2017 at a conference of Chief Justices from North and South America, the Caribbean, Europe, Asia and the Pacific, It too was endorsed by the United Nations General Assembly. That instrument describes, inter alia, how the relevant authority should respond to complaints of unethical conduct of judges, as well as the disciplinary process of judges. The proposed Select Committee could have inquired into and reported on whether the JSC acts in conformity with these international standards?

Conclusion

It is unfortunate that the Speaker’s Ruling, which cites with approval a 1748 statement of Montesquieu and Erskine May’s 1815 thesis on British parliamentary procedure, failed to explain why it rejected our own Supreme Court’s recognition of the Judicial Service Commission as an Executive and not a Judicial body. It is also unfortunate that the Ruling has denied Parliament the opportunity to inquire into and report on practices and procedures relating to appointments, promotions, transfers, dismissals and disciplinary control of judicial officers currently followed by the Judicial Service Commission, and to recommend how, and the urgency with which, such practices and procedures should be updated to conform to contemporary international standards.

Dr Nihal Jayawickrama ✍️

All News Advertisement

Features

New US sanctions on ICC, a fillip to worldwide political repression

Published

18 hours ago

2026/10/15

Thilina Walpola

The International Criminal Court in session. UN Photo/Eskinder Debebe

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s warning to the International Criminal Court (ICC) was stark: ‘Either the ICC will end its threats, or we will end the ICC.’ It followed US central administration accusations that the court was unfairly targeting Americans on the basis of trumped-up war crimes charges.

However, a new plethora of sanctions has been clamped on the ICC by the US, which in turn has spurred accusations by sections of the world that the latter has unleashed an ‘assault’ on the international legal order.

What some of the sanctions would mean for the ICC was outlined by Rubio: ‘We will ban transactions with this rogue court, cutting off their resources and crippling their ability to operate against us.’

The ICC has shown consistency of purpose over the years. Despite some operational constraints it has indicted a large number of political strongmen from around the world, accused of war crimes and other governance excesses that come under its purview. Two such recent figures are: Russian President Vladimir Putin and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Rather than enjoy a mere nominal presence in the world community, the ICC has proved its effectiveness by detaining and bringing to justice scores of VIP politicians and others of their ilk who have been found guilty of human rights abuses and kindred excesses that come within the terms of reference of the ICC.

Accordingly, the international justice system would be stymied considerably as a result of the ICC being dis-empowered, particularly financially. Needless to say, potential and real perpetrators of the species of crime coming under the jurisdiction of the ICC would stand to gain most from such anarchic tendencies. That is, political repression globally would be enabled to enjoy a new lease of life.

A detailing of the types of crime coming under the purview of the ICC provides an idea of what it would cost the international community if the ICC’s operations are gravely hampered. They are mainly: genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and the crime of aggression.

That is, the part of the world to be worst affected would be the global South, since the latter is awash with the mentioned crimes. Needless to say, a chronically-disaffected South will sooner rather than later undermine the well being of the world dangerously. The world is already being put through these paces.

At the time of writing, ‘illegal migrants’ from the South, for example, are aggravating many a Western economy’s woes, besides creating for them acute law and order issues. The fact that these migrants’ presence goes on to become a virtual test of the migrant receiving states’ ability to forge domestic social inclusion in the face of jingoistic protests by mainly white supremacist groups is evidence of the latter. As is known, the US, to take just one example, has been up against this crisis for quite a while.

Accordingly, it will be in the best interests of the West if ‘illegal’ migrant arrivals on their shores are stemmed. If the socio-political and economic problems assailing the South are effectively managed through North-South collaborative, ‘trouble-shooting’ efforts the causes leading to ‘illegal’ migration and connected issues could be resolved at source as it were. For, it is the aggravation of the South’s material questions that lays the basis for the emergence of repressive and anti-democratic regimes in the hemisphere.

Until such time that the aforementioned issues in North-South relations are visited afresh and addressed urgently, a vibrantly functioning ICC would be needed. For, the latter would prove a deterrent to Southern political and military strongmen, highly prone to power abuse and like excesses, from coming into being in the wake of the South’s chronic material woes and the wars and conflicts that result from them.

It stands to reason then that the US would be acting in its own interests by enabling the ICC to perpetuate its mandate without hindrance. For a crop of issues that impinges negatively on internal law and order would be defused.

Meanwhile, there needs to be a meeting of minds among the rest of the West to put back in place a North-South dialogue process aimed at reducing some of the economic pressures that are weighing on the South.

Since economics usually drives politics it will be in the interests of the world community to scrutinizingly re-visit North-South issues of the past and put in place economic relief packages for Southern publics that would enable them to tide over their material hardships rather than permit the latter to aggravate into social disaffection and eventually armed militancy. It is the latter juncture that paves the way for the emergence of authoritarian rulers in the South who then go on to be a blight on their publics.

Accordingly, the Southern-based global development thinking of the past that envisaged a more equitable world economic order needs to be seen as an urgent need. That is, NAM’s international development paradigms need to be resuscitated to the extent possible.

It is unlikely that rightist governments of the West, such as the current Republican administration in the US, would find these projects feasible, but democratic states of Europe, led by perhaps the UK, are likely to think otherwise. For it would not be beneficial for the democratic world to be having on their hands repressive governments in the South who would be gravitating towards the major military and economic actors of the South, such as Iran and North Korea, who tend to be in constant power struggles with the West.

However, until such time that the mentioned, pro-people initiatives are given serious thought the ICC would need to be enabled by the international community to be in place comfortably and carry on with its mandate of bringing repressive rulers to book. Besides the ICC should pave the way for the peoples of the developing world to enjoy some substantial respite from the political repression and even terror which tend to be their lot.

Meanwhile, the wars of West Asia are relentlessly aggravating the economic hardships of people everywhere, driving the point home to enlightened sections that there is no alternative to peacemaking. A challenge is to convert the US under President Trump to this line of thinking.

Features

Clear, soft and shine-free skin

Published

18 hours ago

2026/10/15

Thilina Walpola

This week, I give you five simple, time-tested homemade remedies that help reduce the appearance of blemishes, control excess shine and leave your skin feeling softer and smoother.

The Honey and Lemon Brightening Dab:

For stubborn blemish marks, this is a classic. Mix one teaspoon of pure bee honey with three to four drops of fresh lemon juice. Apply gently, only on the affected spots, and leave for 10 minutes before rinsing with lukewarm water. While honey soothes and softens, lemon helps to brighten naturally. Use twice a week in the evening.

Besan and Rose Water Oil-Control Pack:

An ideal remedy to combat shine, especially on the T-zone. Take two teaspoons of besan (gram flour) and mix with sufficient rose water to form a smooth paste. Add a pinch of turmeric for its antiseptic goodness. Apply evenly, keep for 15 minutes and wash off. It absorbs excess oil without over-drying, leaving a beautiful matte finish.

Aloe Vera and Cucumber Ice Soother:

Blend fresh aloe vera gel with the juice of a grated cucumber and freeze the mixture in an ice tray. Each morning, wrap one cube in a soft muslin cloth and gently rub over a cleansed face for 30 seconds. It calms, tightens pores and imparts a baby-soft smoothness.

Oatmeal and Curd Gentle Polish:

Roughness and old blemish marks need gentle exfoliation. Combine one tablespoon of finely powdered oatmeal with one tablespoon of fresh curd (yoghurt). Massage very gently, in circular motions, for one minute, leave for five minutes and rinse. It removes dead cells and unveils softer, clearer skin.

Multani Mitti and Green Tea Magic Mask:

Brew some green tea and allow it to cool completely. Mix one and a half teaspoons of Multani Mitti (Fuller’s Earth) with the tea water to make a fine paste. Apply for 10 to 12 minutes – do not let it dry and crack completely – and wash off. It draws out impurities, fades blemishes and bestows a fresh, shine-free glow.

A Gentle Reminder:

As with any natural remedy, always do a patch test on your inner arm first. For those with oily or combination skin, avoid heavy coconut oil application and harsh scrubbing, as they tend to aggravate shine and blemishes.

Features

Compete, shine and be discovered at WCOPA 2027

Published

18 hours ago

2026/10/15

Thilina Walpola

Dream of performing on a world stage? Well, here is your unique, golden opportunity!

The World Championships of Performing Arts (WCOPA) — the one and only official “Talent Olympics” — is the world’s premier global platform for aspiring singers, dancers, actors, models, instrumentalists, etc., to compete, shine and be discovered!

And, yes, this world stage is open to YOU, Sri Lankans living in Sri Lanka and overseas!

Held annually in glittering Las Vegas, WCOPA brings together over 70 countries, all competing for Gold, Silver and Bronze Medals, just like the traditional Olympics.

Lakisha Bernard: Will represent Team Sri Lanka at WCOPA 2027

Outstanding performers vie for the coveted titles of Junior and Senior Grand Champion Performer of the World, with winners and standout participants awarded over $500,000 in scholarships, cash awards and prizes to catapult their education and careers!

Sri Lanka is already making waves! At WCOPA 2026, Natharie Wickramasinghe, representing Team Sri Lanka, made the nation proud by winning a Bronze Medal in the Ethnic/Folklore Dance category!

Lakisha: Accomplished freelance Model and Fashion Design graduate

Recruitment for this prestigious competition is handled through a system of scouts and licensed National Directors — and this is where our very own Chris Rajendra, now based in Las Vegas, and National Director for Team Sri Lanka, comes into the scene.

If you are a singer, dancer, actor, model, instrumentalist — if you have talent burning inside you — contact Chris Rajendra today for registration and, who knows, you may find yourself in Las Vegas, and proudly draped in the Sri Lankan flag, at WCOPA 2027!

The contact address is: Chris Rajendra, wcopa.nationaldirector.sl@gmail.com

or chris.rajendra@gmail.com

Meanwhile, a star is born for 2027, in the form of Lakisha Bernard who is all set to represent Team Sri Lanka at WCOPA 2027.

Originally hailing from the sun-drenched coastal city of Colombo and now carving out her creative career in Canada, 22-year-old Lakisha is stepping into the international spotlight.

This accomplished freelance Model and Fashion Design graduate has officially been appointed as the Team Sri Lanka Promoter for Canada as she prepares to represent Team Sri Lanka at WCOPA in Las Vegas.

Lakisha brings a unique blend of high-fashion sensibility, captivating camera presence and expert garment design to the Team.

Having built her career, from local college shoots to high-glamour concepts, Lakisha’s inspiring journey embodies the true spirit of cultural bridge-building and creative resilience, bringing immense pride and recognition to Sri Lanka on the global stage.

WCOPA 2027 will be held at the legendary Westgate Hotel & Casino, Las Vegas, from 12th to 20th July – the very same iconic arena where the late, great Elvis Presley himself performed!

Your moment is now. Your stage is Las Vegas, so hurry and contact Chris Rajendra.