by Shamindra Ferdinando

Denying growing accusations that the Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) has been deeply politicised, its President Saliya Pieris, PC, has strongly defended the role played by the outfit in the developing political-economic-social crisis.

Pieris succeeded Kalinga N. Indatissa, PC, in Feb 2021, as the BASL’s 26th President.

Appearing on a special segment on the ‘Hiru’ main news bulletin, on Monday (01), Pieris maintained that there was no basis for such accusations.

Interviewer Dilan Mayadunne pressed the BASL President on the vexed question why his outfit refrained from censuring the protest movement over the seizure of the President’s House, the Presidential Secretariat (old Parliament) and the Prime Minister’s Office.

Pointing out that those nationally important public properties had been illegally occupied, Mayadunne sought the President’s Counsel’s stand on the protest movement’s actions. Pieris said: “We have asserted that public property should be handed over to the government.

The interviewer reiterated he wanted to know whether the protest movement’s actions were legitimate. Peiris responded: “That shouldn’t be decided here. That should be decided in a court of law.”

The interviewer stressed that there couldn’t be any doubt as regards the buildings in question being public property. Peiris replied: “As the issue at hand is before a court of law, it wouldn’t be wise to comment on it at the moment.”

Pieris dismissed accusations that the BASL hadn’t take a clear stand on the occupation of those buildings. The BASL chief stressed that the statements issued by them in this regard quiet clearly explained their stand.

Hiru conducted the interview in the wake of Attorney-at-Law Manoli Jinadasa tearing into the BASL in a brief exclusive appearance, also on the same channel, over the last weekend.

Lawyer Jinadasa didn’t mince her words when she questioned the failure on the part of the BASL to take a stand on the occupation of the President’s House, the Prime Minister’s Office and the Presidential Secretariat. Lawyer Jinadasa challenged the assertion that the BASL represented the entire community of lawyers.

Responding to interviewer Dilan Mayadunne, the lady lawyer declared that the membership had been sharply divided over the BASL’s response to the crisis situation. At the onset of the discussion, she explained how a ‘third party’ intervene in the protest movement in the absence of a clear leadership.

The quite prominent BASL member, who had been involved in high profile cases, such as 2006 de-merger of the Eastern Province from the North and P-TOMS (Post-Tsunami Operational Management Structure) during Kumaratunga presidency, questioned the process followed in issuing statements.

The bone of contention is why the BASL refrained from taking a stand on serious breaches of law.

Responding to The Island queries, lawyer Jinadasa emphasized that ‘trespassing is wrong and against the law’ and there cannot be justification of forcibly occupying the President’s House, under any circumstances. She described such actions as nothing but a criminal act.

Answering Hiru interviewer, lawyer Jinadasa compared the BASL statement, issued in the immediate aftermath of the May 09 incidents, triggered by the Temple Trees and the one that dealt with the seizure of the President’s House. The lawyer added that she and several of her contemporaries made recommendations pertaining to actions of some, contrary to their oaths and ethics. Jinadasa declared that she was not alone in questioning the BASL statement on disruption of fuel supplies and other such issues.

Both Jinadasa and Pieris expressed opposing views when answering questions pertaining to a group of lawyers clapping to welcome those arrested in connection with violent protests at the private residence of the then President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s private residence at Pangiriwatta, Mirihana, on March 31 by police, when they were brought to court. Pieris described the lawyers’ action as an immediate response to a particular situation whereas Jinadasa asserted such conduct was not acceptable at all.

Asked whether lawyers could react in such a way in violation of their oaths and ethics, Pieris said in case of violations there was a procedure to adopt. The Supreme Court and the BASL’s Disciplinary Committee could deal with such violations. When the interviewer inquired whether the BASL has taken action against those who clapped their hands, Pieris asserted that the outfit could act only if a complaint was received.

Hiru also sought explanation as regards the issuance of statements in the wake of lawyer Jinadasa challenging the whole setup. She went to the extent of asserting that Pieris could manipulate the process as some of those involved were close to him. Pieris stressed the statements were issued with the approval of the executive committee and the Bar Council as well. Commenting on allegations that the BASL had been in a mighty hurry to issue statements, Pieris explained how zoom technology helped them to address issues swiftly.

Alleging that those who accused him of having friends and associates at the decisionmaking bodies, Pieris asserted that they weren’t familiar with the BASL Constitution. Pieris said that the Bar Council comprised of lawyers in the public sector and representatives of the countrywide branches were entrusted with the task of naming the Executive Committee. Therefore, the BASL President didn’t get involved in the appointment of Executive Committee, Pieris stressed.

There had been instances of the Bar Council taking a stand, contrary to that of the BASL President, Pieris said.

Asked whether the BASL would represent those who occupied government buildings in the future, the PC pointed out that the outfit never appeared for suspects though individual members appeared without discrimination. One-time head of the Office of Missing Persons (OMP) said lawyers appeared for those taken in for attacks on the Galle Face protesters.

Pieris denied allegations that he was a recipient of NGO funds. Responding to National Freedom Front (NFF) leader Wimal Weerawansa’s allegations that BASL had received overseas funding, Pieris said that the BASL received USAID financial backing during 2015-2019. In addition to that the Attorney General’s Department and the Justice Ministry, too, had received USAID backing, Pieris said.

Pieris also denied accusations directed at the BASL by lawmakers, particularly those who suffered huge losses due to arson attacks carried out by the protest movement on May 09 and 10. Pieris insisted the BASL always condemned violence whoever perpetrated it.

Pieris strongly defended the BASL’s right to intervene in the economic crisis both in court and outside as it affected the entire population. Jinadasa expressed the view as a professional body the BASL couldn’t issue statements on the economy and the fuel supply.

The BASL President denied having political ambitions whatsoever.

The Island

asked Pieris whether the BASL would initiate disciplinary action against lawyer Jinadasa, Pieris said that having repeatedly urged the State to respect and accept dissent and right to free speech, the BASL wouldn’t seek to take that path. Lawyer Jinadasa told The Island that she didn’t expect disciplinary measures as she hadn’t breached any ethics.