12 November, 2018

Blog

International Adjudicators – Why Not ?

By ANI Ekanayaka

Prof. A.N.I. Ekanayaka

Prof. A.N.I. Ekanayaka

There seems to be much unnecessary anxiety, muddled thinking and something fundamentally irrational about the prevailing revulsion in various quarters to foreign participation in any independent inquiry into allegations of war crimes in Sri Lanka. We must remember that at the 32nd sessions of the UNHRC last month its Commissioner Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussain seemed adamant about the need for such participation stating “I remain convinced that international participation in the accountability mechanisms, as stipulated in the Human Rights Council’s resolution, would be a necessary guarantee for the credibility, independence and impartiality of the process in the eyes of victims given the magnitude and complexity of the alleged international crimes, which the OHCHR investigation found could amount to war crimes and crimes against humanity”.

The OHCHR investigation to which the Commissioner referred was the 261 page report that was presented at the 30th sessions of the Commission which stated inter alia that “The patterns of commission of gross human rights violations and serious violations of international humanitarian law, the indications of their systematic nature, combined with the widespread character of the attacks all point to the possible perpetration of international crimes” (1267). The report also said that “for an accountability mechanism to succeed in Sri Lanka, it will require more than a domestic mechanism”(1278).

Accordingly in any dispassionate analysis of this issue the place to start is the joint resolution which Sri Lanka actively co-sponsored at the 30th sessions of the UNHRC in response to the OHCHR findings. The resolution agreed “to establish a Judicial Mechanism with a Special Counsel to investigate allegations of violations and abuses of human rights and violations of international humanitarian law, as applicable”. This joint resolution carried with it the inescapable implication that Sri Lanka was in agreement with the international community that the allegations did indeed merit inquiry. Therefore the bottom line is that Sri Lanka has concurred with the need for an independent inquiry into allegations of war crimes. It has effectively admitted that there is a case to answer.

That is the definitive Sri Lankan position and having conceded that an inquiry was justified it is logically committed to an investigation that will reveal “the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth”. Indeed as a general principle for anybody to agree to an inquiry about any kind of allegation while backing away from the kind of inquiry that will reveal the truth, would be a contradiction that is both disingenuous and immoral. Obviously Sri Lanka would not wish to court an international reputation for such duplicity. Accordingly by the inexorable logic of the situation where Sri Lanka has agreed to an inquiry, it is now bound to set up a mechanism of inquiry where the probability of discovering the truth will be maximised, where the nature of the tribunal and its composition would make it more rather than less likely that the truth will be revealed. It would be foolish and presumptuous to speculate on what that truth might be. Whether the allegations are baseless or have some substance is not our concern here. But there is no question that any genuine inquiry must give primacy to finding out.

This logically leads to the next question, namely whether the inclusion of a minority of distinguished foreign adjudicators in such a panel would or would not increase the chances of finding out the truth. One thing is clear. It certainly would not diminish the chances of finding out the truth. Indeed it cannot. There is no doubt that the inclusion of say two or three eminent and highly respected judges from abroad in a tribunal where Sri Lankan adjudicators were in a majority would if at all help rather than hinder the process of seeking out the truth. The emotive suggestion that they might be influenced by a biased Tamil diaspora is tendentious because in that case it could be equally alleged that the majority Sinhala judges might be influenced by local Sinhala Buddhist sentiment. Indeed by no stretch of imagination can it be argued that the inclusion of foreign judges would be inimical to the process of truth seeking in such an investigation. That is if the focus is on seeking the plain truth and not some other nationalist agenda. Accordingly approached negatively it has to be concluded that the inclusion of foreign judges can do no harm. Approached positively it might conceivably do some good for two reasons.

Firstly, harmony between different ethnic and religious groups and the constitutional guarantee of minority rights notwithstanding, the reality is that Sri Lanka is historically, culturally, and emotionally a dominantly Sinhala Buddhist society. I say this as a simple matter of fact without making any value judgment about it. In the USA a black man was elected President 54 years after the end of racial segregation. But in Sri Lanka nearly 70 years after independence it is still inconceivable that anybody other than a Sinhala Buddhist could be elected president or prime-minister, and nobody even bothers to ask why. It shows the overarching power and influence of the Buddhist establishment and how deeply ingrained the Sinhala Buddhist ethos is in the nation’s psyche. It would appear that the stated policy of governments has been “to act according to the advice and guidance of the venerable Maha Sanga in its every activity related to national security and other matters”. Moreover subtle if not overt Sinhala Buddhist loyalties and sensitivities tend to permeate the professions, academe, and all the institutions of governance including the police and the courts. One gets the feeling that pretensions to logic and rationality, fidelity to scientific truth, objectivity and critical thinking even in the nation’s scholars and intellectuals – are sometimes subordinate to the uncritical veneration of the Sangha ( even reverential obeisance towards those monks who have brought Buddhism into disrepute ) and unquestioned submission to religious tradition rite and formality .

Given this background it is hard to see how local adjudicators however well intentioned, in any tribunal however constituted, could investigate allegations of war crimes against a patriotic Sinhala Buddhist military without fear or favour, especially when the security forces are widely appreciated as war heroes who rid the ‘Dhammadipa’ of its enemies. Even if local adjudicators were good and honourable individuals personally committed to an independent and impartial investigation, they would still come under unbearable psychological pressure to take a lenient view given the highly charged climate of social political and cultural expectation in which they would be operating. Consequently it has to be admitted that the inclusion of international adjudicators may if at all strengthen rather than weaken the independence and impartiality of any mechanism of inquiry.

Second, it is not as if the Sri Lankan judiciary has an unblemished reputation. In recent decades it has been at the centre of a tainted culture of law enforcement marked by political sycophancy, bias, corruption, abuse of power, scandal and incompetence. Sri Lankans themselves have lost faith in the ability of their law enforcement and judicial systems to dispense routine justice. The whole system has gone into disrepute. Incidents like a notorious former judge shamelessly confessing to a bad judgment and publicly apologising to the nation, another being sent away unceremoniously after a disgraceful record in high office he had usurped after the unprincipled eviction of his predecessor, and the indictment of a supreme court judge for allegedly molesting a female domestic servant, have seriously eroded the credibility of the judiciary. That the brutal slaughter of a leading newspaper editor and a famous sportsman ( amongst many other lesser known victims ) can remain covered up for many years is testimony to the sordid record of investigative justice in this country. It may take years to purify and reform so discredited and polluted a criminal justice system, but until then it is surely a pipe dream to imagine that a purely domestic body would be able to carry out a scrupulously fair and impartial investigation into so emotive and controversial an issue as allegations of war crimes. In the circumstances the inclusion of a small number of eminent international adjudicators of global standing may significantly increase the credibility of an inquiry and help establish the truth.Indeed it would be fair to say that in one way or the other the local investigative environment is so compromised that the inclusion of foreign judges would not only be desirable but actually essential if the goal is to fairly uncover the truth.

Clearly if the aim is to discover the pure unvarnished truth without fear or favour, then on any dispassionate assessment there is a logical and incontrovertible case for the inclusion of foreign judges. Then why is there so much resistance to the idea ? One answer is justifiable resentment over the double standards and self righteous hypocricy of many countries which are themselves guilty of the very violations they glibly accuse Sri Lanka of commiting. True, but while such indignation is understandable, from the noblest standpoint the questionable motives and character of those who point the finger at us do not absolve us of the highest duty to (as the ancient Greek aphorism states) come clean and “know thyself”. As Polonius adviced Laertes in Shakespeare’s Hamlet “This above all : to thine own self be true, and it must follow as the night the day,thou canst then be false to any man”.

The real issue is that for many people finding out the truth ( whatever that may be), is secondary to affirming our sovereignty as a nation and defending the good name of the country. Given a scale of societal values where national pride takes precedence over truth and patriotism over purity of purpose, where country takes precedence over conscience, and outward appearances over the inward reality – in such an environment it is inevitable that the participation of foreign judges in an inquiry would be perceived as an affront to the pride and dignity of the nation and accordingly opposed. We live in a fallen world of spiritually blind fatally flawed sinful humanity. In such a world notwithstanding shallow pretensions to religiosity everywhere, it is an indictment of the sanctimonious humbug of religious hypocrisy in society that in the final analysis the core teachings of true religion are seen to evaporate like a mist when national pride is at stake ! Sri Lankan aversion to foreign participation in a war crimes inquiry in our own day and age is one more example of a debased mindset that has bedeviled mankind throughout human history. Put plainly it is a mindset that turns its back on God and worships ‘King and Country’.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Latest comments

  • 1
    12

    [Edited out] The point is if we give in to international participation they will find us guilty. The international community had already judged us. There is no need for any inquiry. If an inquiry is needed it should be for the entire duration of the war , not just the last stage. All Tamil diaspora should also be held guilty for material support to a terrorist group. [Edited out]

    • 9
      0

      So instead of international have it local, like the ones the investigated the cases of Lasantha, Jajvir, and Thajudeen pick a jury from A’Pura or some racist enclave in the south and repeat what just happened to the six military personnel that slaughtered women and children in cold blood.

      “The jury`s decision was that the defendants cannot be sentenced to death based solely on the fact that they were identified several witnesses in the case.

      101 indictments were filed against each ex-officer accused over the incident, also known as 1996 Trincomalee massacre, which claimed the lives of 24 Tamil civilians including 13 women and 9 children below the age of 12 and critically wounded several others.”

      • 5
        0

        Burt,

        Same has happened in the Kumarapuram case of murder of civilians.

        http://www.tamilguardian.com/article.asp?articleid=22369

        No Sinhala speaking jury will ever find Sinhala Buddhist military
        personnel guilty.

        International jurists must be at least observers in any war crimes trial.

        • 4
          0

          I just could not make sense of the A’pura jury’s reasoning for finding them not guilty.

          Even if you had witnesses that witnessed this crime they would say that they were only witnesses who saw the crime and not the jury so they cannot find them guilty.

          Sri Lanka has gone down a deep rat hole.

          • 0
            0

            A jury does not give reasons for their verdict. I do not know how Mr. “Burt” can say the jury arrived at their decision for this particular reason.

            Prosecution had 101 charges. The defence said the proof was inadequete. But the direction or the address of the judge to the jury is not much publicised and I wonder why?

            Before coming to conclusions it is worth going in to the records of the case.

            • 1
              0

              True the jury does not give the reasoning in court but nothing stops them from speaking to the media after the case.

              Below direct quote from the paper:
              “The jury`s decision was that the defendants cannot be sentenced to death based solely on the fact that they were identified several witnesses in the case.”

              • 0
                0

                Precisely! It is a newspaper report. The statement “The defendants cannot be sentenced to death based solely on the fact that they were identified several witnesses in the case.” was the contention of the defence.

                I have my doubts as to whether the jury ever spoke to the press. The press does not explicitly say that the some of the jury subsequently expressed that opinion say confidentially.

                Further more, in a case of this sort, which is pretty serious, why did not the Attorney General request from the CJ a Trial-at-Bar?

                I am still curious to know what address did the judge make to the Jury. That is crucial.

    • 0
      1

      Prof Ekanayake means well. But he is naive. International judges from western countries will not be impartial but be forced to follow instructions from their governments. Western countries will not allow foreign judges in their countries whilst there is ample evidence beyond doubt that their leaders have committed war crimes, crimes against humanity and violated international humanitarian laws.They have also said that Tamil war criminals who live in the west will not be subjected to trials (by international judges) in Sri Lanka. Also, why only the limited period and not the entire duration of the conflict? The western countries have decided to prosecute and punish the war winning establishment for they spoiled the show for the west by defeating the LTTE. I doubt if the west care for the Tamils, after all it was the English who subjected the Tamil estate workers to inhumane work and living conditions, rape and murder. The English certainly don’t care for the Sinhalese – Uva, Welisara mass murder of men, women and children prove that. Dear Prof. Ekanayake, you need to be realistic. There are other solutions. A panel of local judges consisting of Sinhala, Tamil and Muslims of Sri Lankan descent is an option, with western countries cooperating to handing terror suspects domiciled in their countries to stand trial. Will they consider that option Prof.Ekanayake? If Sri Lankan judicial system is broken, fix it first. Then we can have these trials by local judges.

      • 7
        0

        Lal you say ” But he is naive. International judges from western countries will not be impartial but be forced to follow instructions from their governments.”Prof Ekanayake cannot be naive he is one of the most respected intellectuals of our time. When you say “International Judges” the first thing that crosses your mind is that “International” means the West this is what you are brainwashed to believe and this makes you naive and not Prof Ekanayake.
        The International Judges could be from Nigeria,Malaysia,Brazil,Fiji,New Zealand,Pakistan countries that are fairly indpendent and will not be biased.These countries too are International arent they not?

      • 2
        0

        lal:

        I think you got a point. We cannot trust local judges and we cannot trust foreign judges. So, now I want you to summon god to be the arbiter. You should immediately petition him (or is it her) so that we can get on with it. Buddha cannot be one because he has become so corrupted by the sinhala mahawamsa crooks.

        Mahinda made pacts with the same devils you are now accusing of complicity. Does it cut both ways or only your way? Of course the English “subjected the Tamil estate workers to inhumane work and living conditions, rape and murder.” At least we now know from the learned lal who taught the sinhala regime to commit all these dastardly crimes.

        Yes, yes, Prof Ekanayake must be realistic. Our good friend lal says there are other solutions except that this donkey is still beating around the bush. He is not saying that the many attempt at “solutions” with the umpteen commissions and reports are still gathering dust. What a donkey.

        It is not about judges stupid. It is about people who appoint these judges. There is a general consensus that there are good men/women all around but the fate of a banana republic with half-wit donkeys like lal choose rascals and scoundrels to rule. Isn’t it plain clear that such people will never allow the fair and honest judges to helm the judiciary. The fault lies with the people. Most of them are simply stupid donkeys who will run with the devil. What will be the fate of such a country? How can you fix a system when the people continue to elect idiots.

        There was already the statute in place that an Executive President can only hold office for two terms but when Mahinda changed that law, people still supported it. Did they take their elected reps to task for supporting a President who conveniently went against the constitution riding on the back of the stupidity and ignorance of people?

        Sri Lanka is a broken country and there is no need to deny it. It is there for everyone to see. Today, the overthrown emperor is re-clothing himself as a saint. Mind you, he even went on to say he will reopen Thajudeen’s murder case. Such is the naivety of Sri Lankans.

        • 0
          1

          Jenesse

          The majority can REJECT any biased judgment at the ground level.

          Soma

          • 2
            0

            soma:

            The perspective of bias depends. What may appear as biased to the Sinhalese could in fact be disputed or denied by the Tamils or vice versa. What will be more important is the victims perception – that it is credible and independent. It will be a loud no if it is the Sri Lankan system that may be the basis. This is a country where even a former chief justice could pronounce publicly that he helped someone and that he was sorry that he had helped.

            • 0
              0

              Jenesse

              See my comment below:

              “There is another side to this logic. This totally debased society will most certainly REJECT the judgment delivered by foreign judges based on totally new mode of witness presentation and cross examination. Only a society on a higher plane of morality will accommodate the result delivered by foreigners. According to the author we are not ( I wish to remain non committal) . Therefore to me the author’s own line of reasoning leads to the conclusion that the whole foreign involvement process will fall flat on its face.”

              Soma

              • 1
                0

                soma”

                Your perverse argument should be derided. I mean, who doesn’t know from day one that the Sinhalese are stupid for want of reason and listen to their leaders and reject outright any, I mean any, proposal seeking to conduct a credible, independent investigation to establish the truth. You argument looks like a famed politician being accused of murder should not be investigated because his ardent supporters are vehemently against it.

                If justice is to be delayed until “a higher plane of morality will accommodate the result delivered by foreigners.” then we can close all the courts and the justice system in SL as what is good for the geese is good for the gander. The SL justice is riddled with dark holes with a bottomless pit insofar as it concerns the Tamils seeking justice within. In essence, it has become a laughing stock. Let us get on with the question of the “credible and independent investigation” for now. Don’t simply put the cart before the horse.

          • 2
            0

            Soma,

            Please outline as to what will constitute the term Bias so we know what to expect! SL will be bound by whatever the outcome of the adjudications; she has signed up for it. It will be incumbent on the government to explain to the grassroots come what may that SL needs to accept the outcome. This is the reality and you know it too!

            • 0
              0

              BI See my comment below:

              “There is another side to this logic. This totally debased society will most certainly REJECT the judgment delivered by foreign judges based on totally new mode of witness presentation and cross examination. Only a society on a higher plane of morality will accommodate the result delivered by foreigners. According to the author we are not ( I wish to remain non committal) . Therefore to me the author’s own line of reasoning leads to the conclusion that the whole foreign involvement process will fall flat on its face.”

              Soma

    • 3
      0

      I totally agree with you Sir, in fact, this investigation should be even before the war, during the invasion of Dutchess. Firstly look at the way scores of Tamil population wiped out within a couple of days at a place declared by the government as a safe place. Why was the population bombed?
      The second one is the post-war rehabilitation, what progress has been made so far. Has the local population been considered to take part in the construction works, whether the local consultancy firms for the design works?
      Devolution of power, the army is keen in settling the Sinhalese people in the Nothern province using their power to change the proportion of voters, make the people from the majority to enjoy the foreign aids in the Tamil homeland. Farming, fishing, restaurants and hotels are run by the Sinhalese army, why?

      Who do you think the best panel to investigate? You know your answer well. All we need is a fair judgement and an amicable solution to cure the wound and the pain some years ago.

  • 18
    1

    The anxiety of the opponents of international judges, Mr Ekanayaka, is that the truth will be exposed. That is the one and only reason. There is ample evidence out in the public domain to irrevocably prove that both parties committed war crimes.

    The Rajapaksa brothers are involved in the commission of war crimes by the orders they gave to the SL military to commit these crimes and the SL military are guilty of committing them. The opponents of foreign involvement are only interested in protecting the Rajapaksa brothers and not the SL military. Their claims of protecting the SL military are lies and deception.

    • 6
      0

      International judges are necessary because of the CORRUPTION of ALL institutions and the entire MORAL and SOCIAL FABRIC in Sri Lanka under the corrupt and criminal Mahinda Jarapassa regime.

      Under Good Gota Jarapassa Buddhism was destroyed and distorted and MILITARISED so that today Buddhist monks and ex soldiers rape 13 year old school girls with impunity.

      Buddhists indulged in hate speech while their monks raped morality and ethics. This deterioration of the moral and social fabric of Sri Lanka has not yet been reversed and for justice it is imperative that foreign judges are brought in to investigate Jarapassa and cronies…

      • 1
        8

        HOW do you say that foreigners will not be politically influenced to draw conclusions ?

        then first sart replacing the chief Justice because he is Tamil he will be partial.

        • 5
          0

          Dont worry Jimmy the Softie (inside the pants).

          Sripavan has been bought and fully paid for by the Siripalanaya.

  • 15
    0

    This is a bold essay and a sign of the Sinhala intelligentsia coming out of
    the cacoon?

    It is a far cry for a Grama Sevaka mentality in Governance.

  • 3
    2

    Powerful writing, no doubt.

    There is another side to this logic. This totally debased society will most certainly REJECT the judgment delivered by foreign judges based on totally new mode of witness presentation and cross examination. Only a society on a higher plane of morality will accommodate the result delivered by foreigners. According to the author we are not ( I wish to remain non committal) . Therefore to me the author’s own line of reasoning leads to the conclusion that the whole foreign involvement process will fall flat on its face.

    Soma

    • 4
      0

      soma,

      How will it fall flat on its face? The judgement/s will be binding and the state of Sri Lanka will be accountable! No matter who will be in power, SL must come to terms with the realities. The public will also come to terms with it as with other nations around the world. It is about time you eschew your objections hiding behind the so-called ignorant public!

      • 1
        0

        BI

        No my dear you didn’t get my point. What I mean is IF our society is debased and immoral to the extent the author graphically describes they will most likely not abide by moral or legal obligations of accommodating the result.

        Soma

  • 9
    1

    This is obviously one of the best articles written on the subject in recent times. Let us hope the views expressed by this writer would be taken into consideration by the decision makers in our country and they would take the inevitable step of honouring the promises the Government has made at the UN HRC when it co-sponsored the Resolution concerned. If not, this matter will go down in history as the crowning act of folly committed by a Government that came to power on a promise of good governance. Its sincerity to the statements it makes towards reconciliation and other related matters would loose credibility. Besides, protecting the miscreants in the army by preventing a just and fair investigation into the allegations made against them, would continue to remain for ever as an indelible scar on the army and mar the good name of our forces among whom are very honourable men.

  • 0
    9

    A charge of genocide cannot be tolerated. This will destabilize the south Asian region. It can be tried by local judges. Foreign judges appointed should be neutral from a country like Australia. They should be dual citizens. The supreme Court will forward them to the president for approval. Preferably their should be a consensus by Sinhalese and tamils. This court would be only for criminal acts and murders omitted by the LTTE and government forces.

  • 6
    1

    This is obviously one of the best articles written on the subject in recent times. Let us hope the views expressed by this writer would be taken into consideration by the decision makers in our country and they would take the inevitable step of honouring the promises the Government has made at the UN HRC when it co-sponsored the Resolution concerned. If not, this matter will go down in history as the crowning act of folly committed by a Government that came to power on a promise of good governance. Its sincerity to the statements it makes towards reconciliation and other related matters would lose credibility. Besides, protecting the miscreants in the army by preventing a just and fair investigation into the allegations made against them, would continue to remain for ever as an indelible scar on the army and mar the good name of our forces among whom are very honourable men.

  • 4
    2

    Prof. A.N.I. Ekanayaka

    RE: International Adjudicators – Why Not ?

    //”There seems to be much unnecessary anxiety, muddled thinking and something fundamentally irrational about the prevailing revulsion in various quarters to foreign participation in any independent inquiry into allegations of war crimes in Sri Lanka. We must remember that at the 32nd sessions of the UNHRC last month its Commissioner Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussain seemed adamant about the need for such participation stating “I remain convinced that international participation in the accountability mechanisms, as stipulated in the Human Rights Council’s resolution, would be a necessary guarantee for the credibility, independence and impartiality of the process in the eyes of victims given the magnitude and complexity of the alleged international crimes, which the OHCHR investigation found could amount to war crimes and crimes against humanity”.”//

    Prof., thank you for the write up.

    Yes, International Adjudicators are absolutely necessary. It is about transparency, and getting civilized.

    The message must be sent that the criminals can commit crimes, can run, but cannot hide and will be exposed.

    Yes, this is the time to put a stake in the ground, and tell, all the criminals are expendable.For this International Adjudicators are absolutely necessary.

  • 11
    0

    Dear Prof. Ekanayaka. You had virtually taken words out of my mouth.
    It is indeed a travesty of justice.
    As you have pointed out, if the authorities have nothing to hide why on earth are they doing this tactic of hide and seek. This is not for statesmen , its for kids. People are not fooled by the contracting views and statement issued by the powers be. They are only fooling themselves.
    Getting the GST lifted is all they are interested in, they will be in for shock in due course
    There is no question in my mind there is either race, religion nor ethnicity to be debated on this issue. Both sides have committed crimes, war or otherwise. This is beyond doubt. Let us sit round the table as responsible citizens and see what could be done to unite the country.
    The country is a big financial mess. No one knows how we will be bailed out. Loans , loans and yet more loans. How are we going to service these debts leave alone repayment of the capital!!

    I refer to how South Africa handled the Truth and Reconciliation probe.
    It is piece of work that could very well be applied in Sri-Lanka
    ( I will write more in the evening)

    • 1
      0

      Please correct- Contracting to contradicting
      Thanks

  • 11
    0

    7 years to erase the evidence and the witnesses to disappear and the memories to fade. How the justice system would find the truth.
    Professor you bold enough to write this. Under justice each and everyone should be equal.

  • 0
    9

    All these happenings are completely political. They want foreign judges in order to pick more for the next step. That is why they don’t like local judges.

    So, the best thing is to not to give their way.

    Instead, help the foreign countries and foreign politicians to achieve what they want.

    What works here are international geopoltiics and govts’ political needs

  • 8
    0

    Thank you Prof Ekanayake,

    Why did not Sri Lanka produce more people like this Prof ?

  • 2
    0

    The investigation that has to be completed should cover the Government, Armed Forces, Police and LTTE. Today most of the seniors of LTTE who did not surrender or get caught are living abroad. Why not appoint jurists in those countries to investigate the atrocities committed by these LTTE members and supporters who collected money in foreign countries. This would satisfy UN as foreign jurors are involved in the process and also should satisfy majority Sinhalese as those investigations by foreign jurors are not held in Sri Lanka. Win win solution.

    • 0
      0

      Park
      This is already happening. Recently in switzerland some former supporters of LTTE were arrested and tried.
      What about the SL government forces who committed atrocities do you want them tried by SL judiciary. We have enough experience as to what sort of judgement would be for example the acquittal of six army personel in the case of murder tried in Anuradhapura.

  • 3
    0

    All very true, but Prof Ekanayaka would do well to fortify himself against canon fire from the Gnanasaras at the CT forum. Ballah where are you?

    About the participation of ‘foreign judges’: the reputation of Sri Lanka’s Judiciary, at all levels, stinks so bad, I wonder whether any respectable foreign judge will even want to sit in the same court as our own……

  • 3
    0

    Reference the impeachment of CJ Sriani Bandaranayake two eminent Judges from the Commonwealth was appointed just before the CHOGAM. Com Sec Kamalesh Sharma craftily hid the Report and allowed Justice to be denied. Prior to ’72 we had the Privy Council to appeal if one felt that there was no Justice dispensed in the country. Warped Justice prevalent in the country was displayed by Sarath N De Silva former CJ admitting publicly, that he used his discretion instead of the Rule of Law in acquitting MR from the Hambanthota scam and sought forgiveness of the people for his lapse. CJs after that did not fare any better and all had blemished their character. Considering all this, it is no surprise that the guilty clamour not to allow Foreign Judges as the truth will be out. The fact that Foreign Judges are opposed is because those who are guilty looks for an acquittal like that of Sarath N Silva’s Judgement.

    • 3
      0

      The one who pays the judges to sit in judgement will necessarily twist the arm.

      on her last visit to my surprise the meek woman Desai showed surprise and insisted in having the foreign judges.

      Do the incompetent outgoing Obama hussain administration want to keep a stupid legacy because Trump is pulling out of all small nations.

      The Indians won’t let down Lanka in their national security and the Chinese would prefer a regime change.

      Trump will be playing golf and smiling…kill yourself now from beginning of next year

  • 0
    1

    LTTE Rump’s objective is to make bargains for a sri lankan homeland. If Sri lanka gives them the homeland, they forget all these war cimres, reconciliations and 146,000 missing.

    So, people have to understand the Tamil goals and objectives.

    They are taking the Sri lankan govt in that firection until that point.

  • 1
    0

    What many do not seem to note is that the UN Resolution calls for inquiries and investigations into allegations of human rights violations committed by both the Sri Lankan Army and the LTTE. That gives a fine opportunity to place all the evidence of alleged atrocities committed by the LTTE before the tribunal to be established with foreign judges and get them to charge the remaining stalwarts of the LTTE in the country and abroad while inquiring into charges against the members of the Sri Lankan forces concerned. Let us hope this fact is taken note of by those opposing the participation of foreign judges and not oppose the implementation of the UN Resolution in full.

  • 0
    1

    Anpu

    “Why did not Sri Lanka produce more people like this Prof ?”

    For her own survival.

    Soma

    • 1
      0

      Soma,

      “For her own survival. “

      If we had more more ANI, she would have prospered.

  • 0
    1

    Why all this waste of time?
    Our HE the President Maithripala Sirisena has categorically assured us that there will NOT be any foreign judges. Full stop.

    Soma

    • 1
      0

      Soma
      Why did the SL govt co sponsor the resolution and what is in it?

  • 0
    0

    Sri Lankans are not true to one another based on facts, and we do not see each other as we really are.

    We are only true to our misconceived ideas of one another.

    Most of the pain, injury and sufferings are caused to others by our misconceived ideas or illusions.

    Good, unbiased and truthful education or learning by a person, removes to a greater extent, the illusions of life.

    The uneducated or the unlearned or rather the stupid, demand total submission and perfection, on their terms, from persons, for their misconceived ideas or wrong illusions. When they do not get that submission and perfection, they become cruel and vindictive.

    Presently in SL, MR and his “Joint opposition”, deliberately spread illusions against the genuine, realistic and pragmatic approach by GSL to bring peace, stability and prosperity to all the citizens.

    In this “war”, it is the responsibility of the learned persons to publicly and openly expose illusions, so that the country can have a good future.

Leave A Comment

Comments should not exceed 300 words. Embedding external links and writing in capital letters are discouraged. Commenting is automatically shut off on articles after 10 days and approval may take up to 24 hours. Please read our Comments Policy for further details. Your email address will not be published.