26 June, 2019

Blog

Nagananda Kodituwakku Barred From Practising Law – Nagananda’s Response To Supreme Court Charges Against Him

The Supreme Court has today issued an order preventing Nagananda Kodithuwakku from practicing as a lawyer for three years.

Nagananda Kodituwakku

“The three-member bench, Chief Justice Nalin Perera, Justices Sisira De Abrew and Prasanna Jayawardena issued the order against Kodituwakku over a defamation case filed in 2015. Kodituwakku was charged with contempt of court after he behaved in an unruly manner before former Appeals Court President Judge Vijith Malalgoda,” Daily Mirror reported.

Colombo Telegraph’s attempt to contact Kodituwakku for comment was unsuccessful.

We publish below the response Nagananda Submitted to the Supreme Court in 2017:

My Response To Supreme Court Charges Against Me

Hon’ Chief Justice Priyasath Dep

Supreme Court

Colombo 12

26th Sep 2017

Charge Sheet initiated to discipline lawyer Nagananda Kodituwakku

I have been served with a CHARGE SHEET (SC/Rule/1/2016) dated 11th Aug 2017 by the Registrar of the Supreme Court on the premise of a complaint made by Vijith Malalgoda J, the former President of the Court of Appeal and now a Judge in the Supreme Court.

In view of the said Charge Sheet which apparently has the objective of imposing sanctions on a lawyer who has done his utmost best to restore the rule of law, the independence of the judiciary, to stop intimidation of judges by the Executive I, with due respect submit the following that reveals deliberate suppression of relevant facts concerning a matter which occurred more than 2 ½ years ago and had been dealt with by the former Chief Justice in 2015.   

1. The charge sheet refers to a submission made by me before a Bench presided over by the then President of the Court of Appeal Justice V. Malalgoda on 21st of May 2015 requesting to appoint a different Bench, which would not comprise of Justice V Malalgoda to hear the Writ Application No 83/2014.

2. It was not the first time a similar application was made after losing my trust and confidence in Justice V Malalgoda.  On 09th Feb 2015, concerning the case CA/Writs/ 65/2015, a motion was submitted to Justice V Malalgoda with a request made to appoint  a different bench to hear the case. This motion was also accompanied by the copies of letters dispatched to the Bar Association on 22ndOct 2014, Commonwealth Secretariat   on 31st Oct 2014 and a copy of a press release by the Bar association dated 14th Sep 2014, criticizing the improper appointment of DSG V Malalgoda as the President of the Court of Appeal by the then President Mahinda Rajapakse. Further to this motion a different Bench sans Justice V Malalgoda was appointed to hear the said case.

(True copy of the said Motion dated 09th Feb 2015, letters addressed to the Bar Association (22nd Oct 2014), the Commonwealth Secretariat (31st Oct 2014) and the reply received from Commonwealth Secretariat (23rd Feb 2015) and the press release by the President of the Bar Association published in the Sunday Times of 14th Sep 2014 marked X1, X2, X3 and X4 are attached hereto)

3. Thereafter, when Writ Application No 83/2014 was called before a bench comprising of Justice V Malalgoda, I was compelled to make another written application  by way of a Motion dated 20th May 2015, requesting the appointment of a different Bench sans Justice V Malalgoda since it was the best way to avoid any inconvenience to the President of the Court of Appeal.

(True copy of the said Motion dated 20th May 2015 seeking the appointment of a different bench is attached hereto marked X5

4. Justice V Malalgoda declined the said request and called the matter before him and informed me that as the President of the Court of Appeal he would hear the matter by himself at which stage I was compelled to inform  that I had lost trust and confidence in him and therefore to appoint a different bench to hear the case. Then, Justice V Malalgoda informed me that he would report the matter to the then Chief Justice K Sripavan with the following remark made on the case record.

“… Matter be referred to the Chief Justice for making a serious allegation of contempt. Registrar is directed to send the record before the Hon’ Chief Justice… ”

5. Thereafter to protect my interests against the unfounded allegations made by Justice V Malalgoda, I kept the Chief Justice informed of the abuse of office by the Justice V Malalgoda with a request accompanied by an affidavit dated 25th May 2015 to transfer the matter (CA/Writ/83/2014) to be heard before a different bench.

(A true copy of the communication delivered to the then Chief Justice, K Sripavan dated 25th May 2015 together with an affidavit dated 25th May 2015 explaining the circumstances fully that compel me to request for an appointment of a different bench marked X6 and X7 is attached hereto)

6. Further to my submission and the reference made by Justice V Malalgoda to the Chief Justice, the matter was referred to a different bench and the case record was returned to the Court of Appeal Registry with the following minute dated 28th June 2016 made by the Registrar of the Supreme Court addressed to the Registrar of the Court of Appeal.

“… I have been directed by the His Lordship, the Hon’ Chief Justice to return the above case record (CA/83/2014). Please acknowledge the same…”

Issuance of the Charge Sheet

7. Then after a lapse of more than a year, and also after the appointment of Justice V Malalgoda to the Supreme Court, I was served with this Charge Sheet dated 11th Aug 2017. 

8. It is apparent that my uncompromising stance against any person holding any public office including the Judiciary, particularly after steps have been taken to charge several judges, including Justice V Malalgoda and former Chief Justice K Sripavan for judicial corruption has resulted in framing this unfounded allegation against me.   

Corruption charge against Justice V Malalgoda

9. On 15th Feb 2016 I was compelled to charge Justice V Malalgoda for judicial corruption   before the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption (CIABOC) for abuse of the office of the President of the Court of Appeal to confer favours to the former Executive President Mahinda Rajapaksa. It was apparent by the way the Writ Application CA/Writ/434/2014, challenging the then President Rajapaksa’s nomination for a third term was handled by Justice V Malalgoda. This Writ Application went missing after it was duly filed at the Registry of the Court of Appeal on 15th Dec 2014. However, when the President Rajapaksa was facing a formidable challenge from the opposition Presidential Candidate Maithripala Sirisena the matter was suddenly taken up and listed for support on 2nd Jan 2015 during the Court Vacation. By this time there were numerous requests made by many concerned citizens to withdraw the case since the proceedings with it would have prevented the Presidential Election from being held and ensured the continuation of the Mahinda Rajapaksa regime for a further period of time. This Motion dated 02nd Jan 2015 filed in Court, fully explained the circumstances under which the said Writ Application was withdrawn.  Meanwhile the CIABOC has initiated a formal inquiry into my complaint dated 15th Feb 2016 and the recording of my evidence has now been completed.

(A true copy of the Motion dated 02nd Jan 2015 marked X8, the affidavit dated 15th Feb 2016 furnished to the CIABOC and the covering letter accompanied it marked X9 and X10 are attached hereto)

Corruption charge against the Chief Justice K Sripavan

10. As recognized by the media, intellectuals and the pubic at large the Writ Application (SC/Writs/05/2015) initiated by me in the public interest against the appointment of MPs through the National List has a great National Importance. There is a constitutional fraud collectively committed by all three organs of the government, including 5 judges in the Supreme Court deliberately violating the Article 82 (6) of the Constitution in the year 1988. This serious crime committed against the citizens remained undiscovered for over 28 years until after a voluntary investigation I was able to bring it before the Supreme Court on 13th Oct 2015 seeking justice for the people who have been cheated of their sovereign right of franchise. Therefore, a request was made under Article 132 (3) (iii) of the Constitution to the Chief Justice to appoint a Full Bench of the Court to hear and determine the case within a stipulated period of 2 months as per Article 104 (H) of the Constitution.   

11. However, the Chief Justice K Sripavan rejected my request and appointed a normal bench of 3 judges to hear the case with no reasons given for his refusal, whereas he was under duty to exercise the office fairly and reasonably and only for the public good according to the public trust doctrine.

12. As the said matter was initiated purely in the public interest with no pecuniary interests whatsoever, I was compelled to make a further written submission on 26th Nov 2015, requesting the Chief Justice to revoke his decision and to appoint a Full Bench to hear the case which was well within the rights guaranteed under the Constitution.

(A true copy of the Motion dated 26th Nov 2015 marked X11 is attached hereto)

13. Unfortunately, Chief Justice, in response to my request went on to call for observations from the other judges to suspend me from practice.  It came as a complete surprise to me as I had committed no wrong but only acted to protect the interests of the fellow citizens who I represented in the case.

(A copy of the relevant journal entry dated 14th March 2016 with the minute made by the Chief Justice marked X12 is attached hereto)

14. It was then became obvious that the Chief Justice K Sripavan was abusing the office of the Chief Justice to confer a favour to the Executive President Sirisena’s Administration, (which has appointed him to the office of the Chief Justice), by not allowing the due process that should have been followed to hear and determine the National List case within the stipulated 2-month period.   Therefore, on 15thFeb 2016 Chief Justice K Sripavan was charged by me for Judicial Corruption before the CIABOC 

Abating a case of great National Importance due to sustained persecution 

15. As stated above the case against the National List abuse was initiated by me purely in the public interest but owing to the tremendous pressure brought upon me by the Judiciary, 31st July 2017 I was forced to make a request to abate the proceedings, with reasons set out in the Motion field in Court. And I was also compelled to make a request to the Registrar of the Supreme Court to take appropriate steps ensuring that no judge charged for judicial corruption is appointed to hear the cases that I had initiated to protect the interests of the fellow citizens from the criminal elements occupying public offices in the Legislature and the Executive.

(True copy of the Motion filed in Court on 31st July 2017 with a request made to abate the proceedings marked X13 and the communication delivered to the Registrar of the Supreme Court dated 15th Sep 2017 marked X14 are attached hereto)

Charge Sheet issued primarily violates the Principles of Natural Justice 

16. I submit with due respect that the process adopted to issue a charge sheet on a matter already dealt with (refer to paragraph 6 above) violates the fundamental norms of Administrative Law and the Rule of Law. These are governed by entrenched principles of administrative law, which prohibits, inter alia, decisions that violate the principles of Wednesbury Reasonableness Doctrine, fairness, proportionality, due process, the legitimate expectations, and right to freedom from arbitrary and capricious decision making.

17. It is submitted that the process adopted in framing the charge sheet sans any form of investigation/inquiry whatsoever carried out on the impugned allegations made by Justice V Malalgoda without adhering to the due process is ultra vires and an illegality, as there has been an excess of jurisdiction which also amounts to violation of the multiple principles of the administrative law.

18. Your Lordship will no doubt agree that the conduct of certain judges in the recent past has brought the judiciary into disrepute resulting in the loss of confidence and trust in the justice system by the people. A fitting example is the statement made by the Prime Minister in the Parliament on 30th Jan 2017 about the despicable conduct of the Chief Justice Mohan Pieris who had sought favours to remain in office with promises to make judgments to please the Executive and also to appoint the judges as per the directions of the Executive, the details of which were fully reported in the Parliamentary Hansard dated 30th Jan 2015. Subsequently the Executive President himself reaffirmed this statement referring to the favours sought by the Chief Justice Mohan Peiris. The media gave maximum publicity to this improper, insulting, intolerable and unbecoming behavior of the Chief Justice that patently violated the public trust doctrine. Yet, so far no disciplinary proceedings have been instituted against the lawyer Mohan Pieris.

(A true copy of the relevant page of the Parliamentary Hansard dated 30th Jan 2017 and the Statement of the Executive President about the inappropriate conduct of the Chief Justice reported in the Daily Mirror dated 17th Feb 2017 marked X15 and X16 are attached hereto)

Charge sheet violates UN and Commonwealth Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers

19. Drawing Your Lordship’s attention with due respect to the Commonwealth Latimer House Principles which have been ratified by the Government of Sri Lanka which is a member in the Commonwealth, I submit to your Lordship that the unfounded allegations and initiation of contemptuous proceedings for legitimate criticism of the performance of the judicial function is not permitted and such proceedings shall not be used under the Clause B of paragraph VII of the Commonwealth Latimer House Principles.

(True copy of the Commonwealth Latimer House Principles, November – 2003 marked X17 is attached hereto)

20. Your Lordship’s attention is also drawn to the paragraph 16 and paragraph 23 of the United Nations Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers adopted in September 1990, where it is specified that Governments shall ensure that lawyers are able to perform all of their professional functions without intimidation, hindrance, harassment or improper interference and shall not suffer, or be threatened with prosecution or sanctions for any actions taken in accordance with recognized professional duties standards and ethics without suffering professional restrictions.

(True copy of the United Nations Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers adopted in September 1990 marked X18 is attached hereto)

21. Finally, with due respect I request Your Lordship to review the charge leveled against me by taking the content of this submission to consideration in its entirety, before proceeding with the same. 

*Nagananda Kodituwakku – Public Interest Litigation Activist (Attorney-at-Law (Sri Lanka) Solicitor (England & wales)

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Latest comments

  • 38
    0

    The Supreme Court,

    You have got the wrong target.

    You should suspend The current President, who illegally and unconstitutionally carried out the coup, for three years, until he becomes sane, if ever.

    • 18
      14

      SC should first set about conviction and impeachment Bondscam Ranil for the biggest financial fraud in Sri Lankan history for looting the Central Bank.

    • 12
      0

      The apex Judiciary seems to be the MOST CORRUPT institution. SHAME… SHAME…. SHAME….!!!!

      The controversial political judge is again in this bench. The master schemer behind all conspiracies.

      We hope his immediate family member had a good stint at an important Ministry under a shameless VVVIP politico….!!!

    • 13
      0

      Disgraceful how our lawyers and the legal system is dragging its feet and delaying all the Rajapaksas Criminal cases but are going after a lawyer like Nagananda Kodithuwakku!!!

      Go after the Rajapaksas Criminal Network instead of punishing lawyers like Nagananda Kodithuwakku who are exposing and filing legal cases against the corrupt…

      Hypocrisy of the Sri Lankan legal system for the world to see…

    • 0
      0

      This development should be considered the most terrific shot in the arm for Nagananda’s presidential aspirations coming to him free of charge.

      Nagananda should consider it a great favour done, for he is now the eye of the vortex of what could well be a political tornado.

  • 19
    0

    Kitchen justice.

    • 6
      0

      The question is,did the SC make it’s order preventing Mr.N.Kodituwakku from practising as a lawyer for three years without giving any reasons?
      If the said court had provided reasons, will CT reveal that?
      That would help readers to have an insight into the matter to make their comments.

  • 24
    0

    Now that he need not go to courts which does nothing but postponing serious cases, he can focus on exposing the dirty tricks of Mahinda and Maithripala.

  • 16
    0

    It looks like that Ranjan’s accusations are in action. Organized criminals have been spreaded all over the country… 😠😠😠😠

  • 18
    0

    Paragraph 10 under the caption corruption charge against the CJ…….is important.

    This relates to the appointment of MPs through the National List. This is a matter of serious public importance, which was exposed by Attorney Nagananda after a lapse of 28 years.
    Apart from this there is also the issue of Duty -Free car permits for MPs which was highlighted by Nagananda.
    Damn shame ! For all his initiatives Nagananda has paid the supreme price.But all is not lost; The People are supreme; Sovereignty is in the hands of the people!

    • 10
      0

      plato

      all that may be okay,but how are the people able to help him.His livelihood has been deprived for 3 years.he has to exist just like you and me.See what happens when you go against powerful people.They are like the mafia and come together to from all walks of life to smash people like naga.National list MP’s who lost the elections are a disgrace.Fraud by MP”s on duty free cars are another disgrace,but what happens to a guy who fights against this.The only thing i can think of is the people must organise a fund for him called the nagananda kodituwakku fund.I will definitely contribute as much as possible from my income every month.It will be worth every cent for the country.i wonder can CT organise such a fund for him.I know he will use the money to fight more and more for the people of srilankan and also have some for his own living expenses.Rarely will you get such men in this world.No wonder he has lost all his hair.All for what.For us.You can’t go on fighting without money.

    • 1
      0

      Plato
      “Paragraph 10 under the caption Corruption Charge against the CJ….is important.”
      True,I agree fully, the said CJ Sripavan when giving the judgement on the matter simply said “ that the nomination of defeated candidates as an MP’s by the government is not of national importance”.
      If this monumental unreasoned convoluted judgement on a matter that involves the sovereign right of franchise of the people of the county without stating any reasons cannot be described as “judicial corruption” then what is corruption other than to describe it as such?
      The other issue is the matter about the recent three judge bench involving the present CJ on the suspension question of Mr.N.Kodituwakku as an Attorney-at-Law with reference to his objections that involves Justice Malalgoda who was appointed by former President Mahinda Rajapakse.

  • 13
    0

    What can we, Sri Lankan public, do to let the Supreme Court and the CJ know that public is really dissapointed to see this judgment.

  • 10
    0

    Gentlemen sahodaraya of the caliber of Nagananda Kodituwakku MUST BE our next president. Don’t worry Naga. These judges in our kangaroo courts will be served a “treat” by compliments of the JVP. Their end is near. We are weaving a pan to send these Outlaws to a judicial grave for this injustice.

  • 7
    0

    Appalling…..the cloak of justice cannot cover the nakedness of human weakness.

  • 8
    2

    Naga can be a man of his conviction to fight for the right. BUT could he do that when he left to UK for doing his job right and it is said that his own boss gave him a letter of recommendation for UK asylum. In my assessment Sri Lanka has not changed. Naga should have assessed the strength of the mafia. Now, Naga is minus one of his limbs. I really thought he would be barred for life. IN ANY DICTATORSHIP the judiciary is a puppet of the powers that may be and that power need not be the official executive but a mafia boss incognito. Any management course teaches us the SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats). Naga should have done that. Now can Naga make appearances for others who badly need his services? (He still can fight his own case.) A lot will miss him.

  • 8
    0

    This decision of the SC to suspend Mr. Nagananda Kodithuwakku for three years is very DISCOMFORTING. The Writ Application referred to in item (2) of the reply to charge sheet (Ref. motion filed on 09 Feb. 2015) requesting a different Bench sans Justice V Malalgoda was accepted and carried. The second motion filed on “20th May 2015” concerned the same inappropriateness of Justice V Malalgoda hearing another case. and I am of opinion that Mr. Nagananda is entitled to express his “opinion” and “reasons” for his writ application, because it has been “accepted” already that “Loss of faith and confidence”. The questions are many for this complaint of Justice Malalgoda. (1) Why he decides to proceed with the “second” case, by himself? Did he ( J Malalgoda) get “Offended” with the first rejection of hearing the case of Mr. Nagananda? (2) Did he ( J Malalgoda) “decide” not to refer or just “throw away” the objections of Mr. Nagananda, knowing the “outcome”. (3) Was J Malalgoda “aware” of the complaint lying against him at the Bribery & Corruption Commission and his “ill-considered” decision to go ahead with the second case by himself was a “threat” shown towards Mr. Nagananda. (4) Why SC did not consider the “circumstances” that prompted J Malalgoda to make this “complaint? Many more the SC should have considered; but unfortunately the “AXE” had fallen on Mr. Nagananda. That is discomforting !

  • 10
    0

    We hope that the fight he had here against corruption inspires people in Sri Lanka to stand up and say, ‘ enough ‘ and move forward to bring this country under Rule of Law.

  • 8
    0

    I am sure Nagananda will take this in his stride and carry on with the good work . The public should rally round this fearless man who is fighting on behalf of all Sri Lankans.

  • 5
    0

    OMG !

    It looks all are trying to molest the blindfolded Lady Justice wantonly. Who can come to her Rescue and protect her and true Democracy?

  • 8
    0

    You can suspend that person but you can not stop his voice.
    Every and each institution in SRI LANKA are corrupted and individuals are completely corrupted.
    This was started by Mahinda Rajapaksha.
    Dutiful and very responsible FORMER CJ Shirani Bandaranayake was illegally impeached by Rajapaksha.
    Despicable inquiry was conducted by UNEDUCATED AND UNWISE wimal weerawansa.
    When you study all these even a child can understand what happened and what is happening in our country.
    This country and our future generation is in dark.

    • 3
      0

      Saman@
      .
      The educational background of WIML WEERAWANSA aka Wimalasiris Gamalath/Thunmulle Wimale is SCHOOL DROP OUT.
      .
      The painful reality in this country, even if you would have PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE to prove that the alleged criminals and their brutal acts, nothing seems to be working them getting CONVICTED.
      .
      Just imagine, not even 3 days passed since KIWILAND’s CHRISTCHUCH MOSQUE MASSAQUE, they the highly reliable NZ court investigated the murder and convicted him to be the murderer.
      :
      SRILANKA is an open hell regarding its implementation of law and order: Just 4 weeks ago, a traffic POLICE OFFICER was deadly injured by a rhythless driver (drunk) wihtin the citiy limits of Colombo in a midnight. And hit-and-run accident was reported in the media but the criminals that perpetrated the brutal crime are still scot free on bail. The next court hearing is put off to April 2 months later. All because the crime doers father is a MP. This kind of impunity perpetraitors are becoming a common thing in srilanka today.
      :
      PEOPLE have only DIVINE forces to protect them from SUCH killers and rapist of PUSHPA KUMARA nature who is reported to have raped a teeny girl in his witchery practice. He had been red handed but he is released on bail just because former PRESIDENT has involved in the IMPUNITY process of the BRUTAL incident:
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uA37NUU1jkY&lc=z224i5nrmwucyr1l0acdp434wuxksqf5bckxiitpfi5w03c010c

    • 1
      0

      Saman, While I agree with all said, I do not agree that the corruption was started by MR.It was by JRJ re Neville Samarakoone and Vivien Gunawardena and the stones that were pelted.

  • 6
    0

    The Decision by the three judge bench to bar Mr. Nagananda Kodituwakku the only voice of the Srilankans to be heard loudly against widespread high level corruption is abominable and disgusting. He is speaking not for himself but for all of us. There are so many tainted judges among themselves. It is like the they say, the pot is calling the kettle black. It is high time for the people to let themselves be heard loudly and clearly to express their disgust the way the Blindfolded Lady holding out a Scale is abused.

  • 4
    1

    This story has, by now, been superseded by this report:
    .
    https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/defiant-nagananda-to-represent-himself/
    .
    I had taken a quick look at what I see here, before submitting a comment there. What this case effectively personifies is the battle that must be fought by this entire country against injustice.
    .
    I have not met Nagananda, and I know little of legalities. However, I have tried, in my own limited way, to follow what he has been doing. If you ask the man in the street about all this, he knows little. Try asking them to cast their “FIRST Preference” for Nagananda at a possible Presidential Election later this year, and they will not know that, if they are determined not to have a Rajapaksa elected, they can still vote for Ranil. They will not know that THREE Preferences can be expressed on the ballot paper. Cast then, the Second (or Third Preference) for Ranil.
    .
    On the other hand, if it is Ranil that they are more fed up with, let that later Preference be for the Rajapaksa candidate.
    .
    Many will tell you that “all are corrupt, I won’t vote, or I will spoil my vote”. Look at the election results. High turn outs, and not all that many “spoilt votes”. People just don’t know how to register a protest. That is because that knowledge has not been rubbed in by having a second round of voting.
    .
    Deny a first-count victory to the winner by giving First Preference to Nagananda or a fringe leftist party that opposed both corruption and racism, or the JVP. If the leader is still short of 50%, they will count the other preferences; the final winner may not have reached 50% of the total polled. That’s away of saying all professional politicians are corrupt and hated by us. The country is in such a mess, that we may see the result only in 2025 Elections. And let those who talk of being “patriotic” remain in Sri Lanka while ensuring that they survive by not being as bold as Nagananda.

    • 4
      0

      Do not vote for anybody representuing the UNP, SLFP or even the Podujana. They all brought us to this economic brink.

  • 3
    1

    There are many systems for allowing the people to express their will at a “democratic election”. None of them is perfect, and all of them are susceptible to “sabotage” by confusing people about the choices that they can make. I have already posted a comment in which I have said what we can do to ensure relative fair-play at least some years down the line, so that our descendants at least may inherit from us a better country.
    .
    In our own county, there currently are different systems for electing Local government Bodies, Provincial Councils, MPs (almost all loathed by us all!) for Parliament, and an Executive President. Some of those systems have also been changed. Those of us who read blogs like this one are a minuscule minority of voters. Even we can’t understand all this; just think of five or six “ordinary people”, including even the “English educated” and even those with tertiary qualifications. How many of them are going to understand how a given election at which they are going to vote, is going to reflect their wishes?
    .
    Few are going to explore all the possibilities. I haven’t. I have found this blog that explains all systems, with examples of how they work, and their drawbacks. This has nothing to do with phobias we have about “Western neo-colonialism” or with “Tamil Diaspora Politics” or what have you. This is objective common sense, but none of us will have the time to study all systems.
    .
    This blog has it all, but if you decide to look at it, just click and go to the only section that has been expanded:
    .
    http://aceproject.org/ace-en/topics/es/ese/ese01/ese01c
    .
    That explains how our system is similar to that used in only one other election: that used now to elect The Mayor of London. Even that London Election is slightly different.

    • 1
      1

      I also inserted the figures for the Sri Lankan Presidential Elections for 2005 (the closest – had Rajapaksa got around 30K votes fewer they would have had to look at the Second Preferences – at the very least).
      .
      Also, relatively good showings by Rohana Wijeweera in 1988, and Nandana Gunatillaka in 1999. Neither candidate’s votes would have changed the results that time, and in 2019 I don’t think that the JVP will want its relative weakness to be exposed, although if it puts forward a “good candidate” – either Anura Kumara Dissanayake or Sunil Handunetti – I’d expect them to get at least 500K votes. All speculation, of course.
      .
      If there is a count of the Preferences, then many in the country will at least understand the system. By 2020, or 2030, when many of us will be gone, there may be more intelligent voting, leading to the public being represented by better leaders.
      .
      We should not under-estimate the mess that we are in.
      .
      I’ll expand this argument on the more recent article on this story.

  • 4
    0

    Look at the positive side of this verdict. Publicity locally and Internationally for you ‘Nagi’. Keep going. We, the peace loving, ‘Samyak Drushtika’, helpless middle class citizens of this ‘land like no other’ are mindful of the evil (Yakko), corrupted system and it’s conspirators. MR family & ‘Gamarala’ family have booked their one-way tickets to ‘Aveechiya’ but ‘Shangri La’ over there is not as comfy as the Galle Face.
    “Dammo Hawe Rakkhathi Dammachaaree”. Blessings.

  • 5
    0

    It would be great if we can see some other lawyers also coming forward and joining with Naga to appear for this case and support Naga against the corrupt act of Judiciary of banning him taking a cleared case back.

    Shame on the Judges and hats off to Naga for speaking on behalf of all citizens.

  • 2
    0

    There is no doubt that the judiciary of Sri Lanka favour those who are politically powerful by postponing cases, giving long dates after preliminary trial, allowing accused long periods of bail, and allowing them to leave the country during trial – all of which are allowed only when “powerful” lawyers appear, but not afforded to the common man.
    Thus, justice is not equally made available to all citizens.
    The judiciary also postpone cases unnecessarily to enrich/favour ‘powerful’ lawyers/litigants.

    Kodituwakku has ‘called this bluff’ of making/allowing/aiding injustice seem as though justice is being meted out.

    His calling such ‘bluff’ in the ‘Malalgoda matter’ has resulted in his unjust disbarment for three years.

    The ‘National list’ being made a political tool for unjustly enabling unelected persons – or those who are unfit to be MPs – to become parliamentarians is an insult to the nation. But, the judiciary blindly allows it so as not to offend politicians.
    Saleable Duty-free vehicle permits are same.

    The 850,000 pending cases are an insult to justice in Sri Lanka.

  • 4
    0

    Despite being debarred from appearing as a lawyer, I believe he can present his case in person without adhering to the usual formalities as a lawyer.

    • 2
      0

      K A
      People know that NK is an honorable man. People are also aware that the SC and the Justices are political and a joke. Justice in the Banana Republic is political and a joke. Case closed!

  • 2
    0

    As Shakespeare said “You take my life when you take the means by which I live “. Did NG deserve this ?

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.