Speaker Chamal Rajapaksa’s Ruling; Legislature Will Not Bow To The Dictates Of External Bodies

Filed under: Colombo Telegraph,Most Popular,News,STORIES |
 

By Dharisha Bastians -

Parliament Speaker Chamal Rajapaksa in a special address to parliament on Thursday evening (29) ruled that the Legislature will not bow to the dictates of external bodies and asserted that Members of the House were not bound by court orders.  

Chamal

Speaker Chamal Rajapaksa

He said that no outsiders had the authority to direct parliament or question committees set up by him.

The Speaker’s ruling triggers a major showdown between Sri Lanka’s legislature and the judiciary, as the House readies to probe charges of misconduct by the country’s top judge and rule on whether she should be removed.

Members of Parliament were summoned to the chamber at 6:30 p.m. to hear the Speaker provide his determination on a matter of special privilege raised by House Leader Nimal Siripala de Silva who asked for the Speaker’s verdict on whether notice issued by the courts on members of the Parliamentary Select Committee set up to probe the impeachment motion against Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake was a breach of parliamentary privilege.

The Speaker of Parliament and the 11 member legislative committee probing the impeachment of the Chief Justice have been cited as respondents in litigation filed before the Court of Appeal and referred to the Supreme Court and all concerned legislators have been issued notice by the courts.

Vasudeva Nanayakkara MP also charged during submissions on the privilege issue that the legislature was supreme. “The Courts are set up through legislative acts. Hypothetically if the constitution is for some reason destroyed, who comes together to make another? The Parliament. Then who sets up the Supreme Court? Parliament,” Nanayakkara charged.

In support of De Silva’s privilege question, UNP Leader Ranil Wickremesinghe charged that in probing the impeachment, the legislature had to abide by the 1978 constitution and the Standing Orders of Parliament. Wickremesinghe poo-poohed legal interpretations that the Sri Lankan constitution was framed on Montesque’s separation of powers doctrine and said it had been framed according to a political doctrine espoused by late President J.R. Jayewardene. “He must have had his reasons for framing it this way,” he said, while urging Speaker Chamal to follow in the footsteps of former Speaker Anura Bandaranayake who ruled during an impeachment motion in 2001 that Parliament was not bound to abide by the orders of the courts. At the time, the opposition was bringing the motion of impeachment against then CJ Sarath N. Silva. President Chandrika Kumaratunga left with no option due to the constitutional deadlock between the courts and parliament, prorogued the House allowing the motion of impeachment to lapse.

Print Friendly

76 Responses to Speaker Chamal Rajapaksa’s Ruling; Legislature Will Not Bow To The Dictates Of External Bodies

  1. 0
    0
    What a joke this uneducated so-called speaker is – brother of the Rajapassa dictator, who fancies himself above the law! The PSC is in CONTEMPT OF COURT and should be put behind bars and the shameless Ranil Wickramasinghe should pull the UNP members out from the Kangaroo Court that is the PSC! Sri Lanka’s legislature is full of uneducated and uncultured goons, criminals, fools and geriatrics who don’t know the first thing about democracy, good governance, and checks and balances! The uneducated jokers from the UPFA who sit in parliament and talk rubbish think that they are demigods who have “parliamentary immunity”, akin to Rajapassa’s impunity! These uneducated and uncultured Rajapakse jokers need to be taught a lesson and sent packing! Meanwhile Vasudeva the shameless dead leftist takes the bloody cake for venal STUPIDITY and should shut up!

    James Bond
    November 29, 2012 at 2:36 pm
    Reply

    • 0
      0
      The Kangaroos of the Diyawana Oya are running a Kangaroo Court. What a miracle in the Debacle of Asia!

      Sarinda
      November 29, 2012 at 5:06 pm
      Reply

      • 0
        0
        I herd he was a security officer before becomming speaker. Life is too short girl…that’s why I…..mooving on… ggggggggoooossssssssiiiiippppp

        Jayantha
        November 30, 2012 at 3:12 am
        Reply

        • 0
          0
          i like that song , Sheer Elegance !

          srilal
          November 30, 2012 at 9:12 am
          Reply

    • 0
      0
      HE IS AN “EX-KOSSA” AND BEHAVING LIKE ONE. CHAMAL, REMEMBER THAT YOU GOT TO PARLIAMENT,BY “BOWING TO STUPID IDIOTS LIKE US” AND REMEMBER IT IS NOT THE PARLIAMENT THAT IS SUPREME. THE PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTRY ARE SUPREME. HOW RAJAPAKSES GOT TO RULE IS BY “BREAKING ALL RULES” AND THANKS TO THE TREACHERY OF TIRAN AND THE ASSISTANCE OF PRABAKHARAN. DICTATORS DO NOT LAST FOR EVER.EVEN FAMILY DYNASTIES.WHERE ARE THE “TSARS”???????? HITLER CAME TO POWER BY BOWING TO THE PEOPLE AND ENDED COMMITTING SUICIDE IN A BUNKER.MUSSOLINI WAS HANGED WITH HIS HEAD DOWN. SADDAM,WAS FOUND IN A MANHOLE AND GADDAFI IN A CULVERT. THE RAJAPAKSES WILL HAVE TO COMMIT SUICIDE BY DROWNING IN THEIR OWN CESS PIT OF THEIR BLOODY SHIT. SUBHA ANAGATHEYAK

      AYMAN
      December 6, 2012 at 4:52 pm
      Reply

  2. 0
    0
    SC can proceed with ex-parte trial and issue its ruling. Parliment can continue to ignore the laws and rulings of the SC in interpreting the constitution. Where in the constitution is said that politicians are above the law or that they can inerpret the constitution.

    Safa
    November 29, 2012 at 2:36 pm
    Reply

  3. 0
    0
    “Parliamentary Privileges”- MY ASS! How can a bunch of morons who sit in the parliament and should be drowned in the Diyawana Oya, claim that they are above the law when they are in contempt of court?! The so-called speaker should be locked up for contempt of court as should the rest of the PSC!

    Dinuk
    November 29, 2012 at 2:39 pm
    Reply

    • 0
      0
      “Parliamentary privileges” claimed by the UNEDUCATED speaker should be showed up Chamal Rajapassa’s ass, and those of the morons who sit in the Sri Lanka parliament. Politicians are a venal and corrupt bunch who are ruining Lanka! All the good people avoid politics and the parliament like the plague since it is a den of thieves and fools in govt and opposition alike! The judiciary which has more educated people with law degrees is far superior to the corrupt FAT goons like Nimal Siripala the corrupt drugs and phamaseuticals man who sit in parliament and spout rubbish!

      Dodo
      November 29, 2012 at 5:05 pm
      Reply

  4. 0
    0
    Sovereignty of the people is supreme. Sometimes international intervention is also supreme.

    kamal nissanka
    November 29, 2012 at 3:31 pm
    Reply

    • 0
      0
      Yes a couple of F17s or B52s over the roof of Araliya gaha Mandiriya will do the job. Remember Jaffna Indian air drop dhal dane.

      Prasanna
      November 30, 2012 at 8:11 pm
      Reply

    • 0
      0
      ABSOLUTELY CORRECT!!!!!!!!!!

      AYMAN
      December 6, 2012 at 4:54 pm
      Reply

  5. 0
    0
    The Clans interpretation that the Parliamentarians are not bound by Court Orders will be happily acknowledge by the Jesters, Cronies and Bootlickers. All seems to be falling in place for these guys with limited knowledge, who definitely will not understand the word ‘Constitution’. They must be thinking it is ‘constipation’. Dumb Nitwits. To them the ‘rule of the jungle’ matters. So be it. Let the ‘rules and law of the jungle’ prevail and end up with each lunatic for himself.

    Selwyn
    November 29, 2012 at 3:51 pm
    Reply

  6. 0
    0
    According to Parlimentary Privileges Joint Committe report in UK House of Commons The Joint Committee considered this process and concluded that it was unlikely that Parliament would be able to provide the kind of safeguards associated with modern due process: Parliament is not a court of law … We do not think it practicable for Parliament to provide, and to be seen to provide, the procedural safeguards appropriate today when penalising persons who are not members of Parliament.115 To use the Joint Committee’s own example, a debate by the whole House, for instance, on whether to impose a fine on a non-member, and if so how much, is far removed from current perceptions of the proper way to administer justice. The Speaker is thus ruling on a PSC which has been wrongly constituted as a judicial court within the precints of Parliment. It does not fullfill the basic requirements required to administer justice anyone leave alone the CJ of the Supreme Court. Parlimentary Privilege is mainly for freedom of speech not to openly flout the laws of the land and disregard the constitution. In 1996 the House of Commons Select Committee on Procedure suggested that the onus lay with Members, individually and collectively, to maintain high standards of conduct, and stated: if there were strong evidence to suggest that breaches of court orders as a result of proceedings of the House represented a serious challenge to the due process of law, we would not hesitate to recommend a further limitation on the rights of free speech enjoyed by Members, whatever the practical difficulties… We do not, however, consider it necessary to take action as a result of one specific case, given the importance the House rightly attaches to protecting the right of Parliament to freedom of speech… We urge Members to exercise the greatest care in avoiding breaches of court orders. It would clearly be a matter of some concern if privilege were routinely used to flout court orders designed to protect the privacy or security of individuals. The Government takes very seriously the importance of respecting court orders.

    Safa
    November 29, 2012 at 3:54 pm
    Reply

  7. 0
    0
    How can the judiciary be an external body? He is manifesting his ignorance of basic fundamentals of democracy. What a sad state of affairs. Are they suited to be rulers of our country?

    Fr. Sarath Iddamalgoda
    November 29, 2012 at 3:54 pm
    Reply

  8. 0
    0
    Vasudeva is singing for his supper. Dashed good song – this one ! After his sterling preformance on the 18th Amendment.. “we are opposed to it in principle..but will support it in practice” – it’s best if we let the donkey bray as much as he wants – and pay no mind to him. The Dead Left is as dead as mutton !

    commando 695
    November 29, 2012 at 3:58 pm
    Reply

  9. 0
    0
    All that the speaker had done is read Article 4(C) of our constitution and give his verdict. Article 4(C) says; Article 4(c) says; “the judicial power of the People shall be exercised by Parliament through courts, tribunals and institutions created and established, or recognized, by the Constitution, or created and established by law, except in regard to matters relating to the privileges, immunities and powers of Parliament and of its Members, wherein the judicial power of the People may be exercised directly by Parliament according to law”. Now in addition to courts and tribunals the Parliament can create “institutions” mean; Parliament can establish institutions like ‘PSC’ to exercise the judicial power of the People. That is what even the opposition leader, RanilW had supported speaker rejecting court interference on the PSC. All the above commentators cannot understand it for they have nothig but muck up in their brains. Leela

    Leela
    November 29, 2012 at 4:06 pm
    Reply

    • 0
      0
      You seem to be the only one with muck in the correct place. However you dont seem to understand English. the judicial power of the People shall be exercised by Parliament through courts, tribunals and institutions CREATED AND ESTABLISHED, OR RECOGNISED, BY THE CONSTITUTION, OR CREATED AND ESTABLISHED BY LAW, except in regard to matters relating to the privileges, immunities and powers of Parliament and of its Members, wherein the judicial power of the People may be exercised directly by Parliament according to law PSC is not created by the constitution nor created or established by law.

      Safa
      November 29, 2012 at 4:44 pm
      Reply

      • 0
        0
        As a reply I like to offer you a part of The Opposition Leader Ranil Wickremesinghe’s assertion in Parliament yesterday. “The Judicial power of the Legislature is vested in the courts except the power of Parliament and the privileges of the Parliament. We have to decide what the powers of the Parliament are. It is clearly shown in the order issued by the then Speaker Anura Bandaranaike.” he said. He further said; “It is your responsibility to sort out this matter without causing any conflict between the Legislature and judicature, he told the Speaker.” He also said; “The removal of the justices comes under the ambit of the Legislature.” And the speaker gave his final verdict; ” … the purported notices constitute an unwarranted interference with the powers and procedures of Parliament, and are invalid.” End of the matter. Now, what did you say … my brain, eh? Leela

        Leela
        November 30, 2012 at 7:27 am
        Reply

        • 0
          0
          I am not a fan of Ranil. Ranil and Anura were both similiar unmarried types as well. What about you?

          Safa
          November 30, 2012 at 11:24 am
          Reply

      • 0
        0
        For her, what is being said and done by the rulers – no objections even if any right thinking can feel they are bias and just evasive reactions of the so called – unqualified speakers. I dont see any wrong of what RW has asked him to do- follow the same manner that AB had then carried out in this regard. He has not gone to details, but refering AB as then Speaker had gone through it following the respective paragraphs.

        Sen
        November 30, 2012 at 3:57 pm
        Reply

    • 0
      0
      Is the speaker educated enough to tead the constitution correctly, let alone understand it correctly?

      PB
      November 29, 2012 at 5:14 pm
      Reply

      • 0
        0
        HIS RULINGS ARE “BULLSHIT OUT OF A COW’S ARSE”

        AYMAN
        December 6, 2012 at 4:55 pm
        Reply

    • 0
      0
      Leela, Parliament is not supreme, it is the people that is supreme. It is not only the commentators for this blog who are against this impeachment, almost every educated men and women, the lawyers, academics in this country are against this. Even the internationl community who are democracis are advising against this impeachment. Your masters are drunk with power that they cannot go back on what they have alredy planned to get absolute power.

      Keerthi
      November 29, 2012 at 5:24 pm
      Reply

      • 0
        0
        Dear Leela, what is wrong with you?

        Namalie Rajapaksa
        December 2, 2012 at 2:42 am
        Reply

    • 0
      0
      Leela I do not know which country you live in. But in Sri Lanka, we are governed by a written constitution unlike UK where there is no written constitution and parliament is considered supreme. Please educate us as to which Article of the Sri Lankan Constitution says that parliament is supreme in the sense that the British parliament is supreme. Also, under Article 125 it is the Supreme Court that has the sole power to interpret the Constitution. Please educate us as to where it is said otherwise. You refer to Article 4 but misread it. Institutions for the exercise of judicial power can only be established by “law”. Under Article 170, “law” means legislation of parliament. Standing orders are not “law” but rules of procedure. In any event, a Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) is not an institution. It is a mere committee of parliament which becomes functus once it reports to parliament.The only restraint on courts is by Article 80(3): “Where a Bill becomes law upon the certificate of the President or the Speaker, as the case may be, being endorsed thereon, no court or tribunal shall inquire into, pronounce upon or in any manner call in question the validity of such Act on any ground whatsoever.”

      narangoda
      November 29, 2012 at 7:05 pm
      Reply

      • 0
        0
        Instead of arguing on clauses of the constitution let me quote the speaker. He said; “I wish to explain to the House the basis of my ruling. In appointing this Committee, I have acted as Speaker in pursuance of the powers vested by me by Article 107 of the Constitution. The Members of the Committee appointed by me are responsible solely and exclusively to me as the Speaker. No person, or institution outside Parliament has any authority whatsoever to issue any directive either to me as Speaker or to Members of the Committee appointed by me. This is a mater which falls exclusively within the purview of Parliament’s authority. The established law in this regard was exhaustively surveyed by my distuingished predecessor, the late Honourable Anura Bandaranaike, in his historic ruling delivered in this august House on 20th June,2001. It is clear from this ruling that the matters concerned fall within the exclusive domain of Parliament, and that no intervention in any form by any external agency is consistent with the established principles of law, and is therefore to be rejected unreservedly as an unacceptable erosion of the powers and responsibilities of Parliament.” And the speaker continued finally to overrule the notice by SC. Needless to say that silly action by SC to serve notice on the speaker and members of the PSC has made everyone know that parliament is supreme one again. Please read my reply to Douglas as a reply to you as well. Leela

        Leela
        November 30, 2012 at 4:57 am
        Reply

    • 0
      0
      Leela, “..Now in addition to courts and tribunals the Parliament can create “institutions” mean; Parliament can establish institutions like ‘PSC’ to exercise the judicial power of the People. That is what even the opposition leader, RanilW had supported speaker rejecting court interference on the PSC. All the above commentators cannot understand it for they have nothig but muck up in their brains…” Throughout all these internet forums and discussions we have witnessed what a brain dead lunatic mentally retard you are! Coupled with that proof this time you have proclaimed your moronically poor knowledge of English language! A brat who does not know how to read between the lines interpreting the Constitution!!! OMG! You must ideally sit in the MARA parliament! What a shameless and pathetic creature you are!! Article 4(C) clearly states that except in the case of parliamentary privileges etc. the judicial power of the people shall be exercised through courts of law….established constitutionally! It is only the internal parliamentary privileges etc. that are handled by the parliament itself within the parliament itself on a judicial capacity. The total comments expressed by Ranil have not been quoted in the above article and I saw him say that PSC had no mandate to act in a judicial capacity in the case of this impeachment! He seemed to say that due process of justice must follow in the case of Shirani and that she must be given every rightful and constitutional opportunity to come clean out of the alleged allegations! Ranil’s comments that he stands on the former speaker’s decision Parliament was not bound to abide by the orders of the courts I think based on a fundamental problematic issue in the Constitution where he had to take a yes or no decision because it sets and already has set a precedent on safeguarding the sovereign power of people and any future issues like this would have definite bearings on his present decision! RW has clearly and unequivocally stated that Shirani has been denied due process of justice and which is why this whole issue has become this much conflicting and contradictory! Filthy commentators like Leela must first see the muck in their putrid brains before they find faults with others!

      Silva
      November 29, 2012 at 9:14 pm
      Reply

      • 0
        0
        The speaker said: “I would like to make particular mention of the view, clearly expressed by the Honourable Leader of the Opposition in the course of his intervention, that the purported Notices constitute an unwarranted interference with the powers and procedures of Parliament, and are invalid. This was stated with great clarity by the Honourable Joseph Michael Perera as well.” Needless to say it’s the beginning of the end of another ‘Arab spring’ here period

        Leela
        November 30, 2012 at 4:42 am
        Reply

  10. 0
    0
    I was expecting this sort of outcome from the clowns , but our(dis ) honorable opposition leader has gone extra mile and recommended speaker to follow Anura Bandaranayake’s ruling ,isn’t this a tragic comedy ?

    srilal
    November 29, 2012 at 4:35 pm
    Reply

    • 0
      0
      Anura was his class mate and good chum. Normally he waves Erskine May in his hand but this time he is quoting from his uncle JR’s constitution. Never mind that his uncle messed up the constitution. As usual hes trying to be Mr Clean and cleaning up the shit for the Govt.

      Safa
      November 29, 2012 at 4:48 pm
      Reply

    • 0
      0
      Where is gamini? does not the opposition leader spoke the truth. Leela

      Leela
      November 29, 2012 at 6:38 pm
      Reply

  11. 0
    0
    Unnecessary problem crated by the govt for the govt

    D.G.Dayaratne
    November 29, 2012 at 5:03 pm
    Reply

  12. 0
    0
    I wonder what the pudding faced liberal doctor, the yarn spinning embassy duh from France, the boot licking Blackguard military anal list and other assorted apologists have to say on the speakers decision to pervert the law?

    Namalie Rajapaksa
    November 29, 2012 at 5:04 pm
    Reply

  13. 0
    0
    Mervin Silva is going to like this??

    AMT
    November 29, 2012 at 6:05 pm
    Reply

  14. 0
    0
    Gamini, where are you? what do you think of Ranil supporting MR? what is your excuse now?

    narangoda
    November 29, 2012 at 6:14 pm
    Reply

    • 0
      0
      Narangoda either your level of comprehension is not upto mark or simply displaying your ignorance. It is not a case of RW supporting MR. RW is being Law abiding and diisplaying his calibre safeguarding the Office he holds.

      gamini
      December 1, 2012 at 8:23 am
      Reply

  15. 0
    0
    The Parliament is full of crooks, thieves, robbers and killers. It can be opposition or ruling party. They fight each other for their flesh of meat. When there is a common threat, they stop fighting themselves and oppose the common enemy. That is what happening now. Ranil’s speech shows that. He may be correct in terms of what is written in constitution. But the motive of his speech is that he is scared that same thing can happen to him too in the future when he is in power. So he is opposing to Court Orders. In Sri Lanka, there is no democracy. There is only two things RULERS (PA & UNP) and SLAVES (the People). In any difficult situation, the rulers (PA & UNP) never get affected but only the people.

    Kabi
    November 29, 2012 at 7:23 pm
    Reply

    • 0
      0
      Kabi et al, Ranil represents not the judiciary but the people and their sovereignty. He cannot represent another arm of democracy except Legislature out of the three arms of democracy which are the Executive, Legislature and Judiciary. Whether he or anybody likes it or not he has to interpret the existing constitution as it is and he has done just that! Even I don’t like what is being said by him but he can’t do anything else because he can’t forego his inalienable rights conferred upon him by the Constitution itself. But it has to be appreciated that he has represented Judiciary and justice by saying that Shirani must be given every rightful opportunity to be heard and judged impartially by a qualified and due process of law. Therefore anyone who levels unfounded criticisms and allegations against Ranil must first understand his/her poor grasp of the deeper implications of the problem. Can anyone of those who challenged Gamini or criticizes Ranil on this issue answer the problem what would happen if Sarath N Silva type lunatic CJ would come to occupy the CJ post and do all kinds of mischiefs, perversions, whims and fancies taking the Sovereign power of people into his own hand!? Then what is the guarantee the sovereignty of people has that their sovereignty would be safeguarded by the Judiciary? What is the guarantee that the independence of the Legislature would be safeguarded (the present Legislature is a putrid is a different matter, but again it is the stupid people who have elected them)? And do we, the opposition, not have enough evidence of the biased judiciary giving sovereignty threatening and destroying courts decisions on the opposition as a result of which a large number of opposition parliamentarians have now crossed over to the government side baited and abetted by bribery, corruption and threats etc. perpetrated by the Executive and part of the Legislature thereby creating a deformed, mutilated and corrupt democratic process of governance and the country is now at the verge of a dictatorship?

      Silva
      November 29, 2012 at 9:54 pm
      Reply

  16. 0
    0
    Now that RW and the UNP too have concurred with the Govt.’s position in the Parliament openly it is not difficult to assume what happened in the first PSC sitting. The voting would have been nine (seven Govt. appointees and two UNPers) for and only two (TNA and JVP) against. This position is now going continue and there is no doubt that the Impeachment Motion, although a flawed one, will be carried through. It has to be seen what the Supreme Court will do in the circumstances. But one matter is clear as crystal, that is that both the Govt. and the UNP are the same when it comes to ruling the country; coming to power on the votes of the people and riding on their backs.

    Lanka Muslim, UK
    November 29, 2012 at 8:55 pm
    Reply

  17. 0
    0
    Leela – You have quoted Article 4(c). Please read the “exception” provision and read with the beginning of the clause. I am of opinion that the PSC type “Institution” can ONLY be established as and when the matters relating to the privileges, immunities and powers of the PARLIAMENT and its MEMBERS are to be decided upon. It is in regard to these matters that the PEOPLES judiciary is excercised through a PSC. As regards to all others, I believe, the best that should have been done was to appoint an “Independent Commission of Inquiry” comprising of,perhaps retired Judges/Civil Servants by the President and name it a “Presidential Commission”. I suppose the Constitution provides for it and we have seen many such Commissions appointed in the past. The “petition” signed by the 117 Mmebers of Parliament does not contain any imfrigement on the “privileges”, “immunities” and “powers” of the signatories and Parliament. As such the Speaker should have presented it to the President, who is the “Appointing Authority” of the CJ with a request to look into the matters contained therein and take appropriate measures. In my personal opinion this whole drama called “Impeachment” was a “misguided and miscalculated” action on the part of “goons and vultures” who have infiltrated into the entire administration from Presient’s to Parliament arena. Please do not vituperate me on this submission. Instead I would invite to have a very healthy and constructive discussion. Thank you.

    douglas
    November 29, 2012 at 9:40 pm
    Reply

  18. 0
    0
    This is seriously dangerous. What will happen in a day when a PSC comprising of Ministers Mervin, Wimal, Rajitha, Basil, MP Namal, etc start hearing appeals against the judgement given the the Supreme Court? Can honourable Ranil W stop it? I feel those supporting speaker’s verdict hitting the last nail of the democracy and freedom of the country. Very sorry guys.

    Anuradha Pieris
    November 29, 2012 at 10:00 pm
    Reply

  19. 0
    0
    Those who demonstrated a protest at the court complex against the SC verdict on Golden Key depositors’rights (http://www.bbc.co.uk/sinhala/sri_lanka/2012/11/121128_shranipol.shtml)now can appeal to the PSC.

    Anuradha Pieris
    November 29, 2012 at 10:10 pm
    Reply

  20. 0
    0
    From the time of Jennings there was always the fear of conflict between the 3 separate limbs of the State. Whenever they occured – and this did happen rarely – it was resolved without endangering the country. Those were the days when the Speaker was usually one well versed with the laws and ably assisted by lawyers in his staff. But here the CJ (Judiciary) herself is in direct conflict and is at loggerheads with the President (Executive) And the Referee – Speaker (Legislature) is also an interested party from the family compounding an already complicated matter. This is now stuff for senior and established lawyers specialising in Constitutional Law to resolve the issue. Senguttuvan

    Senguttuvan
    November 29, 2012 at 11:19 pm
    Reply

  21. 0
    0
    I felt heart broken to see specially the behaviour of the opposition leader knowing for his own conscious that this impeachment was brought completely on fraudulent grounds to punish CJ for not dancing tango to the tune of evil MARA. The whole act is premedidated and the verdict already given. After all you can’t beat any other job receiving 86 million rupees tax payer money per year by the opp. leader from parliament alone. Getting defeatet in 20 some elections and still boasting of winning election without any strategy is like day dreaming. In USA or any other democratic country you are given ONLY ONE TRY TO SHOW YOUR CAPABILITY. Failing SO THEY KICK YOU OUT FURTHER CONESTING FROM PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDACY. In Sri Lanka….parliament is a joker’s club and crooks paradise. They talk some bull shit against the opponent, where the ruling party never listens or make notice,or adjust mistakes and in the evening having a drink among that same buddies. So I think RW being on Govt. side on this impeachment is purely to safeguard his CLUB BUDDIES AND THE CLUB…NOT THE JUSTICE….nothing else. Now RW is talking OF resuming the struggle in Jan.2013 is another JOKE….THE STRUGGLE TO TOPPLE THE GOVT. HAS ALREADY STARTED BY REAL PATRIOTS OF SRI LANKA. The difference between the Judiciary and the Legislature is…when the judiciary is occupied by highly educated, respectable people with moral, ethics and integrity…the legislature is occupied by mostly uneducated school dropouts, mostly low end traders, tavern, race bookie owners who meet and exposed to the lower class general public (like mervin silva), without any moral who could win the general public during the election. As a result none of the academics or well educated people do not come to contest elections. That’s why the parliament has gone to dogs. We have to change this culture and install more educated, cultured and respectable MP’s to parliament. Just imagine when the THREE (3) MARA siblings take in charge, utilese and disburse 50% of the budget…well we could disburse the rest of the 50% among say SIX…or TEN other ministeries…..If so why the hell we have a 225 MEMBER PARLIAMENT…..WHAT ARE THEY DOING…..ISN’T THIS THE BIGGEST CORRUPTION AND WHITE ELEPHANT TAX PAYER BLOOD MONEY CRIME DEN…. People have suffered a lot as a result of these crooks…and it’s time for change, and I hope and pray that the real change people are dreaming will come with this CJ impeachment. We have to give the country to govern by Educated, respectable, motivated, innovative professionals with ethics….not the party thug leeches.

    Jayantha
    November 30, 2012 at 3:37 am
    Reply

  22. 0
    0
    Douglas, I never wrote angry accusations, filth or personal attacks on anyone here or elsewhere. It is those who jump on someone or some avenue to have a piggy back ride to pack President Rajapakse and his government home that use degrading remarks. They first rode on the General but dumped him when he was hopeless. Then they talked about an Arab spring here and nattered to prop it through ‘Katunayake spring’, ‘Fisherman spring’ and ‘FUTA spring’. But they never bothered to understand why they failed. Now they are working on a ‘Haltsdorf spring’. Sriyani Bandaranayake got herself in the same shoes as the presidential candidate SF. I feel pity for the poor lady. (I)NGOs and their pay masters are the obvious hands behind all these vile acts. Kumar David’s write-up to feel the mood to promote Ven Sobtha as the next presidential candidate says it all. Such desperados may well be in touch with conniving IC gang but certainly they do not know ground reality of the Sinhala Buddhist world. Suffix to say that today there is no Buddhist monk comparable to Ven Soma. And if Ven Soma is alive today he would have supported MR every way. So many like binju safa kabi and et al suggest; the parliament is not supreme because it is full of uneducated crooks like Weerawansa, and therefore parliament cannot judge the ‘learned’ judges. They also accuse us the village voters for electing such ‘uneducated’ people, little they realize that it is our fundamental right just like right of the Northern Tamils to elect separatists as MPs. What “Independent Commission of Inquiry” you are talking about? Such a thing would have been controversial. What less contentious and better agreeable way than to follow precedents that judged a former CJ and proceed to judge another. If interpretation of the constitution and to create ‘standing orders’ to appoint the PSC is right then, why is it bad now? We are told that CJ is the supreme power in the Judiciary. She heads the committee that promotes, demotes, transfer and punish all lower court judges. Opposition members that demanded CJ’s husband be tried for corrupt NSB share purchase. Consequently, there is a case against CJ’s husband at a lower court. Husband standing at a court where CJ decide promotion and transfer of the very same judge doesn’t look right to me. Besides, CJ is no God but human. Surely, judgement by a judge on whose head CJ’s weight hangs like the sward of Damocles cannot be seen impartial. Who select which judges hear petitions on constitutionality of the PSC that was formulated to try the CJ. It is none other than the same CJ. These are the cases what we villages call ‘naduth hamuruwange, baduth hamuduruwange’, roughly can be translated as, ‘it is Lord’s Case and Lords’ goods’. CJ cannot head the judiciary; she should have resigned. Leela

    Leela
    November 30, 2012 at 3:54 am
    Reply

    • 0
      0
      “So many like binju safa kabi and et al suggest; the parliament is not supreme because it is full of uneducated crooks like Weerawansa, and therefore parliament cannot judge the ‘learned’ judges. They also accuse us the village voters for electing such ‘uneducated’ people, little they realize that it is our fundamental right just like right of the Northern Tamils to elect separatists as MPs.” I would like to answer a part of your comment as to why the crooks, thieves,robbers, murderers and liars are elected to Parliament. One of the reason is there is no good choice for the people. Look at how electoral candidates are selected by a party for elections in Sri Lanka?? Usually candidates are selected by a central committee.Central committee of any party, may be UNP or PA, is itself corrupted and disregards the background of the candidates. The ideal way to select the candidates for an election is to recruit party members at each village and town level. Village/town level members elect members for a district level committee. This district level committee should elect who should be candidates in an election for the district. This should be the way for all 24 districts. I don’t think this is happening in Sri Lanka. Money power and thugs power get a person to be a candidate in PA or UNP. Obviously we should accept that part of the responsibility lies with the idiotic voters as well.

      kabi
      November 30, 2012 at 5:13 pm
      Reply

  23. 0
    0
    If the Parliament is supreme why does the speaker refer bills to the supreme court before they are enacted? Why the speaker refer Divi Neguma” bill the closest cause of the impeachment to the SC in particulat?

    Anuradha Pieris
    November 30, 2012 at 4:00 am
    Reply

    • 0
      0
      Anuradha Pieris, It is not because the Judiciary is supreme that the Legislature refers bills to them but because it is the duty to of the Judiciary to interpret the constitution, whether the bills are in conformity with the constitution. That is why Divinaguma bill was referred to SC, to obtain their expert opinion whether the bill is in agreement with the constitution and does not violate it. I will give you a simple example to understand this clearly: when certain cases are investigated in courts like, murders, arson, robberies etc. why do the courts summon experts to the court to testify and express their expert and researched findings about some aspects of the cases like finger prints, stab wounds, bullet wounds, gun powder traces, the opinion of the inquirer into death as to the reason why the person died etc. If as you propose in the impeachment case the judiciary is supreme then the inquirer into death must be superior to the court or the judge! But in actuality he is not!

      Silva
      December 1, 2012 at 6:16 pm
      Reply

  24. 0
    0
    Lowly educated ex-cop Chamal read out a paper written by MR’s cronies Asoka De Silva (ex CJ),GLP and Mohan (lie)Pieris. Chamal doesn’t have a miniscule of white matter in his upstairs to under stand what he read out. Also other clowns in the well cheered although they didn’t understand what the old clown in cloak muttered.

    Kautilya
    November 30, 2012 at 5:40 am
    Reply

  25. 0
    0
    Vasudeva Nanayakkara MP, a senior minister and a member of the dead left claims in Parliament that the legislature is supreme and that the Courts are set up through legislative acts and he continues to raise a hypothetical question that if the constitution is for some reason destroyed, who comes together to make another constitution? Vasudeva is entirely wrong in his claims It is not the Parliament that make constitutions. it is the people that is why people are supreme. I want to remind Mr Nanayakara as to who had made the 1972 Constitution. The 1972 constitution was formulated based on the mandate given by the people to the United Front led by Mrs Bandaranaike in the elections held in 1970. On this mandate the elected 1970 parliament was converted into a constituent assembly and that constituent assembly had brought the 1972 constitution. The Parliament is given powers only in terms of the constitutions. The constitutions are subsequently amended in terms of the provisions in the constitution and all laws in the form of bills and passed into Acts of Parliament in terms of the provisions in the constitution. The parliament cannot function in a vacuum. The parliament has only limited powers. The standing orders are not acts of Parliament because these were not passed in terms of the constitution. Further, the Speaker had ruled that the Legislature will not bow to the dictates of external bodies and asserted that Members of the House were not bound by court orders. Even if the speaker has interpreted correctly in this . It does not mean that what the Parliament is doing is legal. The Parliament can function only within the parameters set by the Constitution. It is the people who are supreme.

    Srikrishna
    November 30, 2012 at 5:46 am
    Reply

  26. 0
    0
    Rajapaksas seem to buying everything these days in order to steamroll their corrupt regime through everything they want to do.With the open cheque they got by defeating the LTTE they have even bought over the shameless Ranil who is now virtually working for the Govt.Vasi Deva the bogus Maxist is now boot licking MARA.What more can you expect from this Govt.

    Gamini
    November 30, 2012 at 8:37 am
    Reply

    • 0
      0
      gamini, Is that all you have to say about your honest man, eh? I say, this time Ranil’W stood by his uncle’s constitution and ‘standing orders’ that he created with fellow UNPers. It looks as if poor gamini misjudged him all the way. Now, you should seriously ponder whether to join BTF or GTF. otherwise all that toil you made is in the doldrums. Leela

      Leela
      November 30, 2012 at 1:16 pm
      Reply

      • 0
        0
        Haw! Haw! Haw! It’s Christmas time.

        gamini
        December 1, 2012 at 8:02 am
        Reply

      • 0
        0
        Go to hell you stupid Leela! There is no misjudging of Ranil by anybody, I will see to it! You stupid person must now be very happy that you have nailed both Gamini and Ranil by your stupid dribble! Hang on loser! Ranil hasn’t committed an iota of wrong! He perfectly correctly interpreted the constitution which these Supreme Court people whose profession is to interpret the constitution could not do it correctly in this particular instance. What is the constitutional procedure to remove a CJ or a President? Impeachment! Now this PSC is like the Darusman Report! An impeachment has been submitted to parliament, with that the constitution has prescribed what to do, so the Speaker constitutionally appointed the PSC to report on the issue. This PSC will hand over its report to the Speaker and the Speaker to the President. Now all this is a constitutional process and therefore falls within parliamentary privileges. And the SC cannot pass judgments or issue summons against a constitutionally established body of the parliament which is PSC and carrying out its constitutional legislative duties! That is exactly why Ranil said SC cannot serve them with summons! And when Ranil interprets law and constitution it is not propping up the regime like all these stupid persons are yelling out! Ranil’s brilliance among the stupidity of the many is no fault of Ranil! And don’t forget Ranil said PSC has not judicial power meaning it can only submit a report stating their findings and opinion based on the findings! It is these Judges who have created this mess in the country by giving wrong and politically and otherwise motivated judgments against UNP. All these pole vaulters after obtaining UNP votes cross over to the government due to these horrendous judgments because otherwise this government would have been history by now. By those wrong precedents they created this Rajapaksha Jaggarnaught which is now trying to devour the very Judiciary! And it is too late now I am afraid! Everybody knows this impeachment is utterly wrong and unjustified. With its cooked up majority Rajapakshas would try to steamroll CJ or would try to intimidate her to silence and bias towards them. But CJ does not seem to give in. May be Rajapakshas would just abandon this without doing anything after the report of PSC. But one thing is sure. Rajapakshas have opened Pandora’s Box! Though seems unconstitutional the stance of the Supreme Court is praiseworthy and this would and already created a formidable opposition against the regime which has the potential of crippling the entire law and order situation and justice dispensation system in the country provided the legal paradigm galvanize together and launch a massive protest campaign. And if they go on the offensive by passing correct judgments and do not stoop to the regime and bring every culprit in the regime to the book I am sure they can decisively contribute to the unseating of this government. They must legally prove and declare that this government is unconstitutional, criminal, undemocratic etc. if they want to attach any result oriented meaning to their cause! As Ranil very correctly said today, this government does not fall just because we blame it but we have to take to the streets to unseat it. So throw this constitutional ass pain to the dogs and get ready for the street revolution-the lawyers, the doctors, the CEB, the Oil people, the transport people, the trade unionists, the Banks, the teachers, various political parties and everybody. It is your duty now to roll this Rajapaksha mutilated constitution and thrust it in to the assholes of the brats of the regime beginning from Wimal Weerawanso to MR. Thereafter let us write a new Constitution!

        Silva
        December 1, 2012 at 7:38 pm
        Reply

  27. 0
    0
    Vasu is in Alice’s Wonderland. How could the constitution get destroyed? Burn all paper copies, delete all electronic copies, kill all the judges, burn all courts, etc.. etc? Making another constitution shall only be done in accordance with the existing constitution under the scrutiny of the supreme court. Nobody else legally allowed to interpret the constitution except the SC. How could a puppet organ with all brain-dead (or majority uneducated, thugs, rogues, corrupts, etc) become supreme institution? If the parliament is supreme why they all give oath to abide by the constitution?

    Raigamrala
    November 30, 2012 at 9:02 am
    Reply

    • 0
      0
      At last you admitted , bravo

      srilal
      November 30, 2012 at 9:28 am
      Reply

    • 0
      0
      “..How could a puppet organ with all brain-dead (or majority uneducated, thugs, rogues, corrupts, etc) become supreme institution?..” Ha..haa.. ha…! Who sent these bastards to this hallowed place? Who is responsible then? You must all jump to the sea at the nearest shore!!!!

      Silva
      November 30, 2012 at 11:50 am
      Reply

  28. 0
    0
    sorry above comment meant for Gamini

    srilal
    November 30, 2012 at 9:32 am
    Reply

  29. 0
    0
    Leela – I did not say that you passed bad remarks on me. I requested others including, of course you, to refrain from vulgarity and engage in a more constructive discussion on this subject. Sorry, You have not addressed my opinion on the 4(c) question you, yourself quoted, but proceeded to beat about the bush with referrences to “General” and the NGO activities of toppaling the Govt. Can you remember (if you followed the proceedings of the Supreme Court) in regard to the reference from the Court of Appeal on the interpretation of the Constitution of applications contesting the Impeachment, the Judge asked from the AG: Is the Standing Order 107 a Legislation. The AG (as reported) remained silent. Why? My proposal to have a Presiential Commsission was to aviod all these unnecssary problems and also to avoid confrontations. Thank you for your input.

    douglas
    November 30, 2012 at 11:46 am
    Reply

    • 0
      0
      I must say again that I am no lawyer. But in my opinion, one need not be a lawyer or even be educated in a western university to be able to read and understand the contents of a sentence or a paragraph or a chapter or even an entire journal for that matter. But I agree that one must possess an excellent knowledge of the language it is written if one is to extract the exact meaning on complicated writing such Articles of the constitution. Not just that; commas, colons and etc also should be taken in to account to understand it in full. Perhaps it is better if a specialist of that language is employed to extract the correct meaning. Not just that; the language that the original constitution is written must also taken into account for translations does not give the exact meaning. If you ask from Bible and Koran scholars on God’s word they will explain this better. Now, you may appreciate why I didn’t entangle myself in to an argument with you on interpretation of a sentence. Instead I chose to quote opposition leader’s opinion as it refers to 4(C) as my explanation. A trained lawyer can convincingly argue that the right is wrong, or the wrong is right. A learned person on any subject could listen to such arguments and deduce a good judgement. I do not believe being a lawyer is in anyway advantageous. Logic is not a subject reserved for lawyers indeed mathematicians study it much deeper. If a lawyer can give judgement on medical or engineering matters why not vice versa. Leela

      Leela
      November 30, 2012 at 4:48 pm
      Reply

      • 0
        0
        Hurrah! Sri Lankets you are following the right path of the Buddha. The road to nirvana has dawned just do it.

        Wuliangguobinjiu
        November 30, 2012 at 4:56 pm
        Reply

      • 0
        0
        Herold Leelawardne (aka Leela) Think you missed the “Common Sense”

        Chandra
        November 30, 2012 at 9:19 pm
        Reply

  30. 0
    0
    Almost everyone including me was of the opinion that our Constitution comprised Sovereignty of people and the three pillars of Executive, Legislature and Judiciary whereas Ranil now comes up with another advanced and updated version adding Fundamental Rights and Universal Franchise. His observation that he could observe only a single pillar which is the Sovereignty of people instead of three pillars and elucidating five arms of its exercise is perfectly correct. The least discussed and demanded two the Fundamental Rights and Universal Franchise are the most important safeguards of the Sovereignty of people. Just understand the gravity and meaning of a single word he used here-the “People’s”, People’s Sovereignty, People’s Executive, People’s Legislature, People’s Judiciary, People’s Fundamental Rights and People’s Universal Franchise-it is People’s, ours and not Rajapakshas’, Legislatuer’s or Judiciary’s! Just understand the meaning of this simple fact which is of enormous value, gravity, importance and impetus. This is the seed of revolution and uprising! This is where the People themselves become the Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary-the revolt-civil, military or whatever means they think possible! Ranil has elucidated the existing Constitution, its mechanisms, precedents and operation. He has pointed out that within the existing system we all must find the correct solution to the issue constitutionally. If people are not happy with the existing mechanism they can use their Sovereignty and set up another mechanism-that is where they use Universal Franchise. But to do that they have to wait for the next election. And if they are in a hurry then they must use their Executive power now and wage a civil riot/war and obliterate or amend the existing constitution and write a new one. And no use attacking the messenger who is Ranil! People who criticize Ranil do it out of their sheer desperation of not being able to change this government and also due to their poor understanding of the Constitution and the power of the Executive and the Legislature. No wonder even Gamini has got overcome by the pressure and lack of overall and subtle implications. Everyone must understand that we are dealing with JR’s Constitution and to extensively understand it one has to have a good understanding about world history, world governance, world’s system of governance, USA, UK, France, Switzerland constitutions because JR has derived concepts from those sources when writing his constitution. This Constitution has components of Hitler, Lenin, Charles de Gaulle and American constitution. How many of those who are commenting here are familiar with these things? JR had a purpose for introducing this constitution which is to introduce Free Economy to country and to survive any challenges to his development plan. JR did not write this Constitution keeping gaping holes or loopholes so that the Judiciary appointed by the Legislature will someday be able to challenge the Executive or Legislature! This fact at least you all must understand. JR was a person of unparalleled statesmanship and craftiness and you are dealing with his Constitution! You need much more penetration than this to touch upon the intrigues and intricacies of it. And given Ranil’s experience, exposure and knowledge can anyone imagine Ranil would commit himself to a silly mistake as many of the comments here suggest?

    Silva
    November 30, 2012 at 11:47 am
    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>