Connect with us

News

CLA questions non-inclusion of senior judges on five-member SC bench hearing 22A petitions

Published

on

CLA Chief denied opportunity to meet Justice Minister

Concern raised about rejection of request for full bench

Exercise of authority must conform to constitutional principles

CLA takes exception to refusal of request to make oral submissions

The Commonwealth Lawyers Association (CLA) has questioned procedural fairness and other matters of concern in a report that deals with the Supreme Court hearing petitions against the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution. Among the issues raised by CLA President Steven Thiru, is the composition of the five-member bench.

Mentioning the order of seniority of the judges of the Supreme Court as follows: (1) Chief Justice Preethi Padman Surasena (2) Justice Yasantha Kodagoda (3) Justice A. H. M. D. Nawaz (4) Justice Shiran Gooneratne (5) Justice Janak de Silva (6) Justice Achala Wengappuli (7) Justice Mahinda Samayawardhena (8) Justice Arjuna Obeyesekere (9) Justice Dr. Sobhitha Rajakaruna (10) Justice Menaka Wijesundera (11) Justice Sampath B. Abeykoon (12) Justice M. Sampath K.B. Wijeratne and (13) Justice K. M. G. H. Kulatunga, CLA President has said: “It is therefore notable that the five-member bench hearing the petitions did not include the four judges immediately senior to Justice Achala Wengappuli, namely Justice Yasantha Kodagoda, Justice A. H. M. D. Nawaz, Justice Shiran Gooneratne, and Justice Janak de Silva.”

The CLA has stated that the first issue of concern relates to the application for the recusal of the Chief Justice. The Petitioners have raised a potential conflict of interest, pointing out that the Chief Justice would be the first Supreme Court judge to benefit from the proposed amendment. Against that background, they submitted that the petitions should be heard by a bench comprising the other judges of the Supreme Court. The application was denied.

The second issue of concern is the refusal of the request that the petitions be heard by a full bench comprising all the sitting judges of the Supreme Court. It is accepted that the Chief Justice is vested with authority in relation to the constitution of benches. The exercise of that authority, however, must be consistent with the applicable constitutional and legal principles, and must not give the appearance of being arbitrary or irrational. It is not unusual in matters of critical constitutional importance, such as these petitions, for a larger or full bench to be empanelled. There are examples of this in other common law jurisdictions, including the seminal Supreme Court of India case of Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, AIR 1973 SC 1461.

The CLA has categorised the composition of the SC bench as the third issue of concern.

Steven Thiru has stated: “The fourth issue of concern is the refusal by the Chief Justice to permit oral submissions in reply following the oral submission of the Interveners and the Respondent. The Petitioners were, however, permitted to make written submissions in reply within the stipulated time frame.”

The top CLA representative has disclose that he was not given an opportunity to meet Justice and National Integration Minister Harshana Nanayakkara and the Ministry Secretary Ayesha Jinasena.

Report on the visit of the President of the Commonwealth Lawyers Association to Sri Lanka to observe proceedings challenging the constitutionality of the Proposed 22nd Amendment to the Constitution of Sri Lanka



News

Published

on

GL / Harshana

Opp. lashes out at Justice Minister for disparaging remarks about CLA

By Shamindra Ferdinando

The Joint Opposition yesterday (09) tore into Justice and National Integration Minister Harsha Nanayakkara over some disparaging remarks about the Commonwealth Lawyers Association (CLA) in Parliament on Tuesday (08).

The Convenor of the Opposition grouping, former Law Professor Peiris questioned Minister Nanayakkara’s declaration that the CLA was a private club that granted membership on payments received. Emphasising that the CLA consisted of those in the legal profession in Commonwealth countries, Prof. Peiris told the weekly media briefing at the Flower Road Office of former President Ranil Wickremesinghe that the views expressed by the organisation couldn’t be discarded under any circumstances.

Prof. Peiris dealt with Nanayakkara’s response to the CLA’S concerns about several issues, including the composition of the five-member panel of judges. “How could Minister Nanayakkara dismiss concerns raised by CLA on the basis of the paid-membership of the organisation?” Prof. Peiris asked. If membership became an issue, the government would have to reconsider Sri Lanka’s UN membership, the ex-External Affairs Minister said, pointing out that the country had to make regular payments to retain membership of other UN agencies, as well.

Prof. Peiris said that indefensible attacks on international organisations could cause irreparable damage to the country. Appreciating the CLA’s report on the Supreme Court proceedings on the 01 and 02 September, Prof. Peiris stressed the importance of what he called total transparency in the judicial process. He said that whatever the outcome of a particular legal process, it couldn’t be done behind the backs of the public.

Referring to legal processes regarding the 6th Amendment and 13th Amendment, in 1983 and 1987, respectively, Prof. Peiris said, on both occasions the then Chief Justices Neville Samarakoon and S. Sharvananda constituted benches consisting of all Supreme Court judges.

But, the incumbent CJ Preethi Padman Surasena, in spite of the majority of petitioners demanding all available 13 justices to hear the case, decided to leave out those on the seniority list from second position to fourth position.

The government got offended because the CLA pointed that out for the whole world to take notice, Prof. Peiris said. The former parliamentarian noted that the CJ hadn’t even give a reason for declining the widespread call to involve all available 13 judges. According to him, there had been instances where CJ’s appointed seven justices to hear a particular case. Prof. Peiris cited the 2018 bench of seven judges that heard the petitions against President Maithripala Sirisena over the dissolution of Parliament and a panel constituted in 2023 to hear the 2019 Easter Sunday carnage that claimed the lives of 270 people.

The issue at hand is that the five-member panel of judges hadn’t been selected on the basis of seniority, Prof. Peiris said, once the SC determination was sent and released through the Speaker, they would meticulously examine that to make their position known to the people. Prof. Peiris said that what they really wanted to know was that if seniority hadn’t been the basis for selection what the criterion was.

Continue Reading

News

Sri Lanka reiterates its territory won’t be used against India

Published

on

Indian Defence Minister Rajnath Singh listening attentively to President Dissanayake (pic courtesy PMD)

The Indian Defence Ministry in a statement issued yesterday (09) quoted President Anura Kumara Dissanayake as having assured visiting Defence Minister Rajnath Singh that Sri Lanka would never allow its territory to be used for activities inimical to India’s security interests.

The text of the Indian press release: “Visiting Indian Defence Minister Rajnath Singh called on President Anura Kumara Dissanayake in Colombo on September 09, 2026. The two leaders held substantive discussions on issues covering the entire spectrum of the multi-faceted partnership between the two nations, characterised by traditionally warm relations and mutual trust.

The two sides reaffirmed that as civilisational twins, close neighbours and maritime partners, India and Sri Lanka would continue to work together for their development and welfare of the people while working jointly to ensure the safety, security, peace and prosperity of the region. The senior Indian Minister conveyed greetings on behalf of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and underlined that the citizens of the two countries share deep friendship based on strong historical & civilisational links and people-to-people exchanges.

Extending a warm welcome to Mr. Singh, President Dissanayake recalled his interactions with PM Modi and reiterated that Sri Lanka would never allow its territory to be used for any activities inimical to India’s security interests.

President Dissanayake expressed his gratitude for the relief assistance provided by India as part of Operation Sagar Bandhu during Cyclone Ditwah and the comprehensive rehabilitation package extended by New Delhi to facilitate reconstruction and rehabilitation work across different parts of the island. The powerful Indian Defence Minister emphasised that as a closest friend and neighbour of Sri Lanka, India considered it not a favour, but a responsibility to provide assistance as the first responder and would continue to do so in the future as well.

Both leaders virtually inaugurated three Bailey Bridges constructed by the Indian Defence Forces. The two sides also exchanged MoUs on upgradation of L70 Guns for the Sri Lankan Air Force, and cooperation between National Cadet Corps (NCC) & National Defence Colleges (NDC) of both the countries. The MoU on Upgradation of six L70 guns for the Sri Lankan Air Force falls under a Government of India grant. The upgradation of these air defence guns will significantly strengthen the air defence architecture of critical assets in Sri Lanka. These air defence guns were earlier provided to the Sri Lanka Air Force by India.

The MoU on academic cooperation between NDC, India and NDC, Sri Lanka will facilitate knowledge sharing which will be a significant step in further strengthening the academic bonds between both the sister institutes. The MoU on NCC cooperation will formalise the NCC youth exchange programme between India and Sri Lanka. This exchange programme provides a valuable opportunity for NCC cadets from multiple countries across the world to come to New Delhi every year and participate in NCC events.”

Continue Reading

News

UK-led Core Group calls Jaffna mass graves a ‘stark reminder’ but stops short of calling for international accountability

Published

on

Eleanor Sanders

Mass grave excavations in Sri Lanka are a stark reminder that thousands of cases of enforced disappearance remain unresolved, the Sri Lanka Core Group has told the UN Human Rights Council, urging Colombo to translate its stated commitment to reform into concrete progress, while again stopping short of calling for the international accountability that Tamils have long demanded.

The statement, delivered in Geneva, on Tuesday (08), during the Council’s 63rd session by the United Kingdom’s Human Rights Ambassador Eleanor Sanders on behalf of Canada, Malawi, Montenegro, North Macedonia and the UK, welcomed, what it called, the High Commissioner’s balanced assessment of the human rights situation on the island.

The group acknowledged that Sri Lanka had faced considerable challenges recently, including severe weather events and global energy shocks, and welcomed positive developments, including the ratification of the ILO Convention 190 and engagement on the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

“However, much further action is needed to build confidence in accountability and reconciliation efforts,” Sanders said. “Progress in several emblematic cases has not yet been accompanied by a comprehensive,

victim-centred accountability process to address past violations. Mass grave excavations are a stark reminder that thousands of cases of enforced disappearances remain unresolved. And reports of intimidation, harassment, and restrictions affecting civil society, journalists and victims’ groups, including in the North and East, still raise concerns.”

The group urged progress on democratic governance, including advancing legal and institutional reforms, resolving land-related issues, ensuring respect for human rights in detention institutions and strengthening independent institutions.

The statement follows a familiar pattern. In June, the group acknowledged “developments in certain mass grave investigations” and urged that excavations meet international standards, and in March it called for the repeal of the Prevention of Terrorism Act. At the 58th session it welcomed a series of measures Tamils regarded as superficial. Neither this statement, nor its predecessors, names Chemmani, calls for international oversight of the excavation, or addresses the demand for a referral to the International Criminal Court.

Continue Reading

Trending