16 May, 2021

Blog

Pissu Poosa Commission Has Proceeded With Visible Glee Into Territories That Angels Fear To Tread

By C.V. Wigneswaran

C. V. Wigneswaran

From the time politics was allowed to enter the haloed precincts of our Public Service vindictiveness and favouritism by one set of politicians in power has been alleged by the opposition and when the opposition politicians came to power subsequently victimization of their supporters by the previous regime had been alleged. The opposition then in power thereafter went on to favour those in the Public Service who supported them. We have forgotten that this pernicious practice is the outcome of the politicization of our Public Service.

Neither Parliament nor politicians should interfere with the public service. That would violate the principle of separation of powers enshrined in Article 4 of the Constitution. The public service is part of the Executive. However, even the President and the Cabinet have only limited power in respect of the Public Service. The Constitution contains three chapters dealing with the Executive –viz.  VII, VIII and IX. Chapter IX deals with the Public Service. The only power that the Cabinet has over the Public Service is at a policy level. Article 55(4) of the Constitution states as follows-

Subject to the provisions of the Constitution, the Cabinet of Ministers shall provide for and determine all matters of policy relating to public officers”.

The Constitution in its wisdom does not permit even the President nor the Cabinet of Ministers to interfere with the workings of the public service. Cabinet can only give policy guidance.  In other words Cabinet cannot interfere with the decision of whom to prosecute. That decision is for the Attorney General, and the Attorney General alone. 

It is probably for this reason that H.E. the President has not sought to include the Attorney General within the ambit of this Commission of Inquiry, despite naming several other institutions.  However, it is shocking to note that the Commission has decided to embark upon its own voyage and decided to persecute even the prosecutors. 

The Cabinet is responsible to Parliament in the discharge of its functions. If Cabinet itself can only give policy direction to the Public Service, then what can Parliament do in its supervisory capacity?  It can only question Cabinet on its policy directives.  Parliament can also pass legislation ensuring that specific safeguards are built into the system to prevent political victimization.  But it certainly cannot be involved in giving any directions to the Public Service at the individual level. That would be a grave transgression of the Constitution and violative of Articles 4 and 55.

Hon’ Jayantha Weerasinghe, Attorney at Law, who had appeared before me in several cases when I was High Court Judge, Colombo, yesterday gave a detailed description of what happened to his clients including Mr.Basil Rajapakse during the Yahapalanaya Government. It was very dramatic and descriptive.

But if individuals or their Attorneys at Law felt that evidence had been manufactured against them or that they have been politically victimized they have numerous avenues open to them to vindicate their rights through the judiciary. First, a person can raise the objections in the criminal case itself. They can invoke the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in terms of Article 126 of the Constitution for the violation of their Fundamental Rights. They can invoke the Writ jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal in terms of Article 140. They can institute proceedings for malicious prosecution and seek damages. The powers of the judiciary are so wide that injustice can be prevented and damages awarded. The Executive and the Legislature simply have no role to play at the individual level.  Individuals MUST seek the assistance of the Judiciary. 

The idea that political victimization by a previous regime should be looked into by special commissions and committees is anathema to the rule of law. It has no place in the context of Article 126 of the Constitution. Article 126(1)of the Constitution states as follows-

The Supreme Court shall have sole and exclusive jurisdiction to hear and determine any question relating to the infringement or imminent infringement by executive of administrative action of any fundamental right or language right declared and recognized by Chapter iii or Chapter iv.”

Therefore it is my view that the entire idea of the appointment of a Presidential Commission of Inquiry to inquire into and obtain information pertaining to the alleged incidents of Political Victimization of Public Officers, Employees of State Corporations, Members of Armed Forces and the Police Service was misplaced. The Public Service must be allowed to do its duty objectively not to please those in power politically.

If the appointment of the said Commission was a folly, the Commission itself called by Hon’ Sarath Fonseka as Pissu Poosa Commission, has proceeded with visible glee into territories that angels fear to tread. It is clear that there are several cases that are presently pending in relation to the matters inquired into by the Commission. The Commission is not a body recognized by Article 105 of the Constitution as an institution for the administration of justice.  It simply has no business having anything to do with matters pending before the Judiciary.  All the actions by the Commission in respect of pending cases would constitute a clear interference with the judiciary and as such would be in violation of Article 111C which statesthat any interference with the Judiciary would be an offence recognized in the Constitution itself. If this Debate seeks in any manner to implement the so-called recommendations of the Commission this House too would be violating Article 111C. That is probably why, despite the ill-advised wording of the motion, no directions are being sought from the House.

It is probably for this reason that the penultimate preambular paragraph of Gazette 2157/44 of 9 January 2020, which established the Commission, states that the Commission’s mandate is without prejudice to any measures that have been taken or which may be taken. To do something “without prejudice” in relation to another thing is to ensure that whatever that has already been done cannot be affected. If so, how does the Commission recommend the “undoing” of several matters?  It is simply inconceivable that the Commission does not understand its basic mandate.

Of course there is an urgent necessity to revamp the Judiciary like how Chief Justice Neville Samarakoon set about doing. He set an example himself. Though personally selected and appointed by President JR Jayewardene himself, when he found the President  was trying to interfere with the independence of the Judiciary he crossed swords with the President. He was of the firm belief that Judges should be honest, hardworking, fearless and independent. Many of us who were recruited by him feel nostalgically proud of him.

Having said this, I need to make my observations from a different stand point.Though the recent events and activities seem to point to the death knell to democracy, rule of law and the independence of the public service and judiciary, from the point of view of Tamils who have suffered at the hands of the successive Sri Lankan governments by being denied justice so far, this action of appointing a Commission and accepting a Report of this nature by this Government is welcome to us Tamils in a perverse way. It is welcome, because it highlights exactly what was recently said in Geneva. It gives a wonderful example of how the Government in Sri Lanka perverts the course of justice. It proves what is being said by Tamils – the Government of Sri Lanka cannot be trusted to allow justice to take its own course. This is why Tamils and Human Rights’Organisations and the UN are clamouring for the appointment of international tribunals. If those accused of corruption will not be allowed to face trial what hope is there of getting war criminals tried?! Those of you in the Government that blame the Diaspora and NGOs and the West for allegedly persecuting Sri Lanka – should look hard at what you are doing right now – It is you who is letting the country down by such dubious methods to save your vassals and bondsmen.

None of us have the right to say that we alone love this Country. If the majority in this Country acted humanely, prudently and with far sight, this Country would not be in the dire straits it is today. Our youth would not have taken up arms. I hope we change our ways and tread towards sanity, unity and prosperity.

*In the Parliament on 23rd April, 2021 during Parliamentary Sessions – Debate on the Report of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry to inquire into and obtain information pertaining to the alleged incidents of Political Victimization of Public Officers, Employees of State Corporations, Members of Armed Forces and the Police Service. Speech by Justice C.V. Wigneswaran, M.P.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Latest comments

  • 3
    14

    What is that language Wigs?

  • 13
    4

    While agreeing with what Vigna says, I am also confused. Vigna being a Judge in the past he knows the law better than most of us. If he is so sure that the Constitution has been violated as he states in this article, why is he not going in front of the law and challenge these actions of the Government? Point to ponder!

    • 15
      4

      ………..Why is he not going in front of the Law and challenge these actions of the Government? Point to Ponder.

      There is another Point to Ponder, Dear Buddhist1.
      Will it be worth the while when the Govt: breathes down the necks of our Judges?

  • 17
    3

    Nearly all Sri Lankan Commissions, both presidential and other commissions, have proved to be a big joke. Even on those rare occasions when the commissions made some sensible recommendations, the various governments have refused to implement them! Only bad recommendations are implemented usually.

  • 11
    2

    This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn’t abide by our Comment policy.

    For more detail see our Comment policy https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/comments-policy-2

  • 1
    15

    “To do something “without prejudice” in relation to another thing is to ensure that whatever that has already been done cannot be affected.”
    *
    Something makes me suspect that the retired judge is stretching a point too far or misinterpreting the purpose of the phrase “without prejudice”.
    It is only a hunch.
    I hope that a sharp legal mind could help.

    • 1
      5

      It seems that there is no legal mind of any sharpness is around!

  • 7
    2

    This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn’t abide by our Comment policy.

    For more detail see our Comment policy https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/comments-policy-2

  • 8
    1

    This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn’t abide by our Comment policy.

    For more detail see our Comment policy https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/comments-policy-2

  • 22
    1

    The difference is the Colombo middle classes thought Ranil was smart and supported him. Ranil appointed empty headed Dilrukshi Wickramasinghe to fight corruption. She ended up being cozy with crook Senadipathi and even flirted with this low life

    Ranil appointed the bogus know all rascal Mahendran as Governor Central bank. Mahendran finished off the integrity of the central bank and destroyed Ranils 50 years old career.

    Mahinda Rajapakse who has the support of uneducated masses on the other hand is street smart.

    He knew Pissu poosa who hails from a remote village, has all his life studied free ( from tax money and scholarships) and then lived off government salaries has no standards, no ethics, no pride and is not fit to be a judge. Having made a joke of the judiciary as a judge he retired . A guy like that now retired will do anything for his master. Pissu Poosa loves to be called Sir, and enjoys all the perks Mahinda has thrown at him. Unlike Ranil , Mahinda knows the psychology and the complexes of these pathetic guys.

    Who is smarter ?

  • 9
    9

    Thanks Deepthi for those wonderful facts. I am out of touch with such finer details. You seems to have lived in Lanka too long. ( no pun intended)

  • 6
    1

    This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn’t abide by our Comment policy.

    For more detail see our Comment policy https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/comments-policy-2

  • 4
    0

    It is a very good analysis about what has happened to a beautiful country particularly owing to endless politicization. Let me repeat with pleasure once again that it is definitely an outstanding analysis of abuse of power by politicians, public officers of the caliber of all concerned referred to in this article. LET US NOW DISCUSS ABOUT THE IMPACT OF ALL THAT THROUGHOUT TGE COUNTRY.

    WE NEED TO STRENGTHEN DEMOCRATIC GOVERNANCE AND CREATE INDEPENDENT JUDICIAL AND PUBLIC SERVICES COMMISSIONS.

    WE NEED TO ABOLISH ARTICLES 52 AND 55 IN THE CONSTITUTION WHERE PRESIDENT AND THE CABINET OF MINISTERS HAD BEEN GIVEN POWERS TO APPOINT AND DEAL WITH DISCIPLINARY MATTERS ETC.

    ALL THOSE TRULY PATRIOTIC PEOPLE NEED TO TAKE UP THOSE ISSUES IN THE INTEREST OF OUR FUTURE GENERATIONS..

Leave A Comment

Comments should not exceed 200 words. Embedding external links and writing in capital letters are discouraged. Commenting is automatically disabled after 7 days and approval may take up to 24 hours. Please read our Comments Policy for further details. Your email address will not be published.