When the case against the Corruption Commission for its failure to initiate investigation on the complaint made against Mohan Pieris by the Lawyer Nagananda Kodituwakku, Attorney at Law & Solicitor was called in for support before a specially constituted bench chaired by the Chief Justice, K Sripawan yesterday, two judges (Eva Wanasundara J and Priyasad Dep J) declined to take part in the hearing, citing personal reasons.
Mohan Pieris
Writ of Mandamus against the Corruption Commission to inquire into the serious corruption charge leveled against AG Mohan Pieris for in connivance in defrauding over 600 million rupees of public funds alleged to have been misappropriated by Colombo Dockyard Company.
Counsel and the Petitioner in person Nagananda Kodituwakku, Attorney at Law, submitted to Court that he had originally filed the case before the Court of Appeal on 02nd March 2015 and supporting of it was opposed by three Deputy Solicitor Generals (Shavindra Fernando, Farsana Jameel and Milinda Gunathilake). The counsel further submitted that the reasons for such strong opposition was that the fear of corruption at the highest level in the AG’s Department being exposed. In the original application made to the Court of Appeal the Counsel had asked for an interim relief to have the passport of Mohan Pieris impounded. The Counsel informed the Court that the said prayer for relief had been withdrawn in this application due to the reliable information received that Mohan Mohan Pieris had already fled the Country and that very purpose of the writ application has now been lost.
Counsel Kodituwakku further submitted that in the absence of a request for an interim relief the Court may grant him permission to support the application. It was submitted that there is a public interest involved in the case, where the integrity of the judiciary has been destroyed by Mohan Pieris, the Respondent who had unlawfully held the high office of the Chief Justice.
However, the Court declined to hear the merits of the application until another Bench is constituted (without Eva Wanasundara J Priyasath Dep) and three other judges (Priyantha Jayawardena J, Buwaneka Aluwihare J and Sarath de Abrew J) on whom the Counsel had informed the Court he had no trust and confidence.
The supporting of the case was then put off for 30th April 2015 with notice served on the Respondents through the Registry of the Supreme Court.
mano / March 24, 2015
Why should the Petitioner serve notice to Respondents. This direction by the Court is clear violation of the Rule book as Counsel correctly stated.
There is no requirement of service Notice to the Respondent unless there is an application for Interim Relief (Rule 2 of the Court Rule Book)
And all cases filed under Section 140 of the Constitution there is requirement for serving Notice to the Respondents (Rule 3 of the Court Rule Book).
In my view Clearly, this is another attempt to deny Justice to the Petitioners and save the Attorney General’s Department gross abuses being exposed in the open Court.
/
Nihal / March 24, 2015
I followed this case from the year 2010 with a keen interest.
I salute Petitioners for their unwavering commitment to bring the cheat Mohan Peiris to Justice. It is hard to believe the Counsel who fought the FR case has cited himself as one of the Petitioners in the case, understandably he cannot get the other Petitioner to give evidence about the action he has taken against Corruption Commission.
Both judges (Wanasundara and Dep) who have refused to hear the case appointed to the Court from the AG’s Department. Apparently they want to see that lawlessness in the AG’s Department being exposed.
It is grossly unreadable to delay justice in this manner. These Judges, particularly the CJ should know about the Rule of Necessity and that no Judge can take cover citing ‘personal reasons’.
This is sad state of affairs, I don’s see any difference in the Judiciary under MR and MS.
/
kosala / March 24, 2015
What if some one challenged the credibility of all the Judges in the Supreme Court including the CJ Siripavan who had betrayed the People’s judicial power by simply signing Mohan Peiris’s so-called opinion sent to MR with a statement “
/
Praveen / March 24, 2015
What if someone challenge the credibility and honestly of all the judges in the Supreme Court, including Sripavan, who betrayed the peoples judicial power by signing on Mohan Peiris’s so-called opinion sent to President Rajapakse with a wording ‘the law does not bar Your Excellancy from contesting for a third term’ by way of a Petition filed in Court, challenging the 19th Amendment Bill just gazette.
Who, in the Supreme Court, will hear such an application.
/
JULAMPITIYE AMARAYA / March 24, 2015
We are Proud Sri Lankans,
precept obeying Buddhist Sinhalese,
God Fearing Christian Sinhalese, Hindu Tamils, Islamic Muslimeen. and each and Every body says,
I AM HONEST TO MY HEART.
We are safe guarding our new culture, that is to loot, pilfer, rape the national wealth.
Some higher ups with their Heritage.
It starting from President to, Attorny general to CHEAP judge to, Minister, M P to the bottom up to Punchi Singho.
We all will cry and say;
[ Deyiyan palla, Amma palla, Daruwan Palla, I am Honest , and I do not do that, I did not Do that………].
BUT cheer up;
We Are bound to Cheat and rob as a nation.
From ANYBODY, ANY PLACE, ANY THING.
Just SMILE AND AGAIN SMILE.
WE ARE A PROUD, and FROUD Nation.
/
thrishu / March 24, 2015
Bloody rogue judges of the Sri Lanakan courts. Hell with them. Who ever could get justice in this corrupt world of MoRon. Even Nagananda is crazy to waste his time and effort taking his case to a bunch of monkeys dancing to the tune of MoRon’s flute. We will never find a Daniel in Sri Lanka; corruption is endemic and is part of Sri Lankan blood.
/
Pasel / March 24, 2015
May be they also involved with Mohan Pieris
two judges (Eva Wanasundara J and Priyasad Dep J) declined to take part in the hearing, citing personal reasons.
/
Pygmalion / March 24, 2015
The judges of the SC cannot be relied upon to mete out justice in the case against Mohan Pieris.Already two of them have declined to take part in the hearing,citing personal reasons.A very convenient excuse!
Mohan Pieris is an absolute disgrace. Has he fled the country to save his wretched life or dubious reputation?
/
kumar de silva / March 24, 2015
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/
/
Jagath Fernando / March 24, 2015
Interestingly Mohan was in India recently attending a function. He received the invitation whilst he was CJ and not sure the capacity in which he represented the bar or judiciary at this function.
What a disgrace!!!
/
Snowden Edward Asange / March 24, 2015
Justice delayed is Justice DENIED ! The petitioner was denied Justice when Mohan Peiris was AG, now two Judges are citing personal reasons to hear this case which has merit. If the petitioner CANNOT get justice, he should consider presenting his case to the World court and seek justice, also void the licence of the two judges, for denying justice on flimsy reasons…Are the Judges above the law?
/
Mahen / March 25, 2015
When will we get a high court populated by honorable judges of whom we can be proud of?
/
Jagath Fernando / March 25, 2015
Under the present political system you cannot expect judges to act independently.
Most of them are looking at life after retirement and hence will tag along with government in power.
This is reality.
It is the case with service commanders as well.
/
Orpheus / March 25, 2015
Finally all these cases come to personal grudges and who is powerful now. Lawyers always who were always the winners had a bad name )even among the poorest men). They liked conflicts. Only few would help even husbands and wives conflicts without going to courts or charging any money.Unpopular(those who can’t argue well) become magistrates and judges. In any case lots of revenging goes on now, like in the Caucasian Chalk circle and like in 1989 when neighbours dubbed the next door kid as JVP and police(and UNP private army) took them, torture them to interrogate and some times just kill them(in places such as Batalanda).
/
Dayananda / March 25, 2015
Constitution requires the CJ to dispose any FR Petition filed in Court within 2 months (Article 126 (5). But in this country very Supreme Court violates the Constitution, the Supreme Law.
The Court Vacation system was originally introduced by the British, which they have completely done away with long time ago. But in this country case records are piling in Courts for years and judges enjoy three vacations of three weeks each for a year, forcing the litigants to suffer, like this case that drags on in the Court system since the year 2010.
In the morning at 10.00 am trolley loads of case records are brought to the Court rooms and once the sessions are resumed then start postponing of cases at the request of AG and the Lawyers representing litigants, giving various flimsy reasons mostly ‘personal reasons’ only known to them. Finally the so-called people’s Judges and the lawyers happily leave the courtrooms around 12.00 – 12.30 abandoning their clients.
This is the fabulous justice system the people of Sri Lanka are bestowed with.
CJ Siripavan knows that Justice delayed is Justice denied but like his predecessors he too is not bothered. He too takes the easy path and prefers to spend the remainder period in office comfortably and finally would go home with retirement benefits – possibly with another appointment to a key public office.
CJ Siripavan knows how the citizens in this country suffer in the hands of the failed justice system and he cannot sleep on the Bench he should address these issues.
/
munamalpe / March 25, 2015
All three Judges who refused to hear this case (Siripavan, Dep and Wanasundara) are former employees in the AG’s Department. They will do their utmost best to protect their colleague Mohan Peiris from being sent to Jail on corruption charges.
Best thing to do in the public interest is to stop public officers from AG’s Department from being appointed as judges in the justice system.
Till then the justice in the country only be a illusion and citizens will always be at the receiving end.
/
Plato. / March 25, 2015
Most Lawyers are like the Arabs.
They live on Dates.
/