News
‘Corruption has many faces, bribery only one of them – AG
The courts had quite justly come to be regarded as the sentinel over the powers of the legislature and the executive in Sri Lanka in order to safeguard the rights of the citizen under the law and the Constitution, Attorney General Dappula de Livera, PC has said on March 23 at the ceremonial sitting of the Court of Appeal
“The credibility of a judicial system in a country is dependent on the Judges who man it. Judges must be persons of impeccable integrity and unimpeachable independence. A Judge must discharge his judicial functions with high integrity, impartially and intellectual honesty. Speaking of Intellectual honesty; I have said this earlier that the law would be like a ball of clay in the hands of an erudite Judge. Therefore, Judges should be ruthlessly honest, independent, and impartial and possess a judicial conscience to ensure that the ball of clay is moulded according to law”, the AG declared, adding: “It is said that public institutions should command public confidence – so is the Judiciary of a country.”
The ceremonial sitting was held to welcome, His Lordship Justice Arjuna Obeysekere as the President of the Court of Appeal, Her Ladyship Justice Menaka Wijesundera, their Lordships Justice Nihal Samarakoon, Justice Prasantha de Silva, Justice Mohamed Laffar, Justice Pradeep Kirtisinghe, Justice Sampath Abayakoon and Justice Sampath Wijeratne as Judges of the Court of Appeal.
The AG said: “The backlog of cases in this Court is alarming. It has to be addressed urgently and quickly, methodically and efficiently and to deliver speedy justice and prevent Laws delays without compromising the quality of justice thereby, winning the confidence of the people.
This issue has to be addressed by Lordship’s Court holistically. The Bench and the Bar have to get together to solve this problem. The increase in the number of Judges to the Superior Courts by the 20th Amendment to the Constitution and thereby the appointment of Your Lordships and Ladyship is no doubt seen as a very positive step in this regard.
For over 2000 years of the Island’s long history, the Courts of Law have occupied a unique place in the system of government. Public acceptance of the judiciary and public confidence in the judiciary is necessary for the rule of law to prevail in the country. Public confidence in the judiciary is dependent on the independence and integrity of the judiciary.
Public confidence in the judiciary cannot be built unless Judges display a high level of integrity, impartiality and independence in their judgments, pronouncements and orders and through their conduct.
The Honourable Diego Garcia-Sayán who acts as the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers who was a judge of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and was elected Vice-President of the Court from 2008 to 2009 and President of the Court for two consecutive terms and who previously served as Peru’s Minister of Justice and Minister of Foreign Affairs, recently shared his views on judicial corruption and judicial independence with UNODC as part of the Organization’s on-going work on promoting judicial integrity.
He opined “that by seeking impunity, corruption has a devastating effect on the judicial system as a whole. One of the goals of human rights is to fight corruption and its implications on the administration of justice, as is to act against corruption through an independent and strong administration of justice”. For this, the United Nations Convention against Corruption is a fundamental instrument for the protection of human rights.
“Corruption has many faces, bribery being only one of them, another being political corruption, much more unattainable and imprecise. Its broad range of action enables it not only to influence the Judicial system but all sectors of State Administration as well”.
Corruption undermines the core of the administration of justice, generating a substantial obstacle to the right to an impartial trial, and severely undermining the population’s trust in the judiciary.
Article 11 of the United Nations Convention against Corruption – a fundamental international treaty – emphasizes the decisive role of the judicial branch in the fight against corruption, and establishes that in order to carry out this role effectively, the judicial branch itself must be free of corruption, and that its members must act with integrity. Substantive guidelines on matters of internal organization, which are fundamental to prevent and confront corruption, have been included in the Convention.
In 2016, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime launched a global programme to promote a culture of lawfulness. It includes the creation of a Global Judicial Integrity Network to share best practices and lessons learned on the fundamental challenges and new questions relating to judicial integrity and the prevention of corruption.
The sovereignty is in the people and is alienable and that sovereignty of the people is exercised by the judiciary in the public trust. The independence and the integrity of the judiciary ought to be preserved for justice and the rule of law to prevail in a society. A judiciary should not only be independent but appear to be independent in order to gain the confidence of the people.
An independent judiciary is the corner of stone of the prevalence of the rule of law in a democratic society.
Judicial independence requires not just independence in the constitutional sense, that is, the separation of powers between the three branches of government (executive, legislature and judiciary), but also the personal independence of judges so that they are free to decide cases based on the application of the rule of law. The essence of rule of law has been said to be that the Administration is bound by the law and that in it cannot interfere with the rights of the individual except in accordance with the law.
The International Congress of Jurists meeting in New Delhi in January 1959 concluded “that an independent judiciary is an indispensable requisite for a free society and for the Rule of Law to prevail in a society.
The independence and impartially of the judiciary is essential for a democratic system of government to function under the Rule of Law.
The maintenance of the independence of Judges and of the quality of the administration of justice would largely depend on the Judges themselves and the state of public opinion of the country, which demands their independence and impartially.
Within the limits of their power and jurisdiction the courts are required to perform a dynamic role, as the fearless upholders of the principle of equal justice under the rule of law.
The Courts must necessarily occupy a high position of power, privilege and independence in the life of a nation.
The Judges in the exercise of judicial functions should be immune from outside control and influence and intimidation.
That independence is also necessary from the other branches of government and from private and partisan interest. Judges cannot use the judicial platform to satisfy 3rd party and personal interest and have agendas and should at all times avoid possible conflicts of interest.
United States Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito said on his elevation in 2006;
“Good Judges don’t have agendas. They don’t look for partisan outcomes and always do what the law requires and demands. A Judge cannot have any agendas and a Judge cannot have a preferred outcome in a particular case”.
Judges should be above suspicion and should not leave even a glimpse for that suspicion to occur.
The people will be judging you while you judge them. Therefore, that accountability and transparency ought to be seen and perceived from the judgments, pronouncements and orders that are delivered by the Courts.
News
PSTA worse than PTA: FSP
The Frontline Socialist Party (FSP) yesterday accused the government of seeking to use the proposed Protection of the State from Terrorism Act (PSTA) to suppress popular political activity, claiming that some of its provisions were more repressive than those of the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA).
FSP Education Secretary Pubudu Jayagoda told a media briefing, in Nugegoda, that the definition of terrorism in the Bill was so broad that it could be used to label almost any form of popular political activity as terrorism.
He said the Bill’s approach to defining terrorism was based largely on attempts to compel a government, or an international organisation, to do, or refrain from doing something, rather than on internationally recognised criteria, such as killings, causing serious bodily harm, kidnapping or acts intended to spread terror among the public.
Jayagoda also alleged that the Bill transferred substantial powers from the judiciary to the executive, while extending powers of arrest, investigation and detention to the armed forces, in addition to the police.
He claimed that the government had sought to portray the Bill as a replacement for the PTA while retaining or introducing provisions that could facilitate political victimisation and repression.
The FSP also questioned the government’s decision to proceed with the Bill, despite having previously sought public views on an earlier draft.
Jayagoda said a draft had been published earlier this year, with the period for public submissions ending on February 28, but the Bill subsequently gazetted was essentially the same draft with some provisions rearranged.
Jayagoda also referred to a letter reportedly sent by Attorney-at-Law Saliya Peiris, a member of a Committee, chaired by President’s Counsel Rienzie Arsecularatne, that had been appointed to draft the legislation. He said Peiris had stated, in the October 06 letter, that changes had been made to the draft prepared by the Committee.
“This means that even the Committee, appointed to prepare the Bill, was a deception,” Jayagoda alleged.
He said that the PSTA was fundamentally similar to the Anti-Terrorism Bill introduced by the previous government, in 2023, which the National People’s Power (NPP) opposed and challenged in court.
“If the NPP opposed that Bill then and is now bringing the same legislation before Parliament, the government must explain its position,” he said.
Jayagoda called on NPP MPs to oppose the PSTA in Parliament and urged trade unions and other groups to build a broad public movement against the legislation.
He challenged the government to an open debate on the Bill.
News
Shiranthi R remanded until 13 Oct.
Former First Lady Shiranthi Rajapaksa was yesterday remanded until 13 October after being produced before the Colombo Magistrate’s Court following her arrest by the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption (CIABOC).
Shiranthi, wife of former President Mahinda Rajapaksa, was arrested at her residence on Poorwarama Road, Kirulapone, after CIABOC officers recorded a statement from her for nearly two hours.
According to the CIABOC, the arrest was made over allegations that Rs. 10 million obtained from the National Savings Bank through the Siriliya Saviya organisation was misappropriated.
The money was allegedly obtained to provide a Computed Tomography (CT) scanner to the children’s hospital. Investigators allege that the scanner was not provided and that the funds were instead unlawfully used.
CIABOC is investigating alleged offences under the Public Property Act and corruption-related provisions in connection with the transaction and other financial activities involving Siriliya Saviya, which was headed by Rajapaksa.
Rajapaksa returned to Sri Lanka on Monday night on a flight from Malaysia after travelling overseas for medical treatment. She left for Singapore on 16 September after being admitted to a private hospital in Colombo on 15 September following an illness.
She had been due to appear before the Financial Crimes Investigation Division (FCID) on 13 October in connection with its investigation into the financial affairs of Siriliya Saviya.
Meanwhile, her lawyers filed an anticipatory bail application before the Maligakanda Magistrate’s Court on Monday, seeking an order preventing her arrest in connection with the FCID investigation.
News
Former NSB Chairman Kariyawasam granted bail
Former National Savings Bank (NSB) Chairman Pradeep Kariyawasam was yesterday granted bail by the Colombo Magistrate’s Court following his arrest by the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption (CIABOC).
Kariyawasam, husband of former Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake, was arrested in connection with the Bribery Commission’s investigation into the ‘Siriliya Saviya’ account linked to former First Lady Shiranthi Rajapaksa.
The investigation concerns financial activities involving the Siriliya Saviya initiative, which was headed by Rajapaksa, wife of former President Mahinda Rajapaksa.
CIABOC is continuing investigations into the alleged financial irregularities relating to the account.
-
Editorial7 days agoColombo Port drug bust: The plot thickens
-
Features5 days agoThe first woman in the foreign service or Ceylon Overseas Service it was then called
-
Editorial6 days agoFuelling discontent and protest
-
News4 days agoGeneva takes up Sallay’s case and govt. ignores opportunity to answer accusations
-
Foreign News5 days agoTen injured after car crashes into rugby supporters in Australia
-
Latest News6 days agoTharindu Rathnayake, bowlers secure Asian Games Bronze for Sri Lanka
-
News5 days agoNearly 20 Iranian tankers stranded off Lanka amid US sanctions
-
Features4 days agoSri Lanka Cricket Bill: Governance reform is not yet a cricket strategy
