By Sunil Wimalawansa –

A prominent civil rights lawyer and public interest litigation activist, Nagananda Kodituwakku, has called upon the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) to intervene in what he describes as a “deeply flawed and politically motivated” Supreme Court rulings that permanently disbarred him from practicing law in Sri Lanka.

Kodituwakku, a Solicitor (England & Wales), has spent over a decade fighting corruption across all three branches of the Sri Lankan government—executive, legislative, and judicial. Despite his commitment to exposing abuse of power and filing over 45 pro bono public interest lawsuits, he now finds himself silenced and barred from the courtroom, stripped of his professional standing, and denied due legal process.

This week, he formally submitted an appeal to the UNHRC, alleging that the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka violated his constitutional and international human rights, particularly those protected under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Sri Lanka is a signatory. The appeal outlines systemic failures in due process, lack of judicial impartiality, and suppression of anti-corruption legal activism.

The Heart of the Dispute

In February 2024, the Supreme Court delivered a ruling in case SC/Rule/3/2017, banning Kodituwakku for life from practicing law and filing public interest litigation. The ruling stemmed from a 2015 affidavit he filed requesting a fuller bench—excluding then-Chief Justice K. Sripavan—to hear a constitutional case concerning election fraud. Although this request was subsequently withdrawn with the Chief Justice’s approval in 2016, the disciplinary charge unexpectedly resurfaced in 2018 under new judicial leadership.

The bench that ultimately decided his fate consisted of three judges—Justice Priyantha Jayawardena, Justice Padman Surasena, and Justice S. Thurairaja—whom Kodituwakku had earlier named in judicial corruption complaints filed in the Supreme Court. Despite multiple formal motions requesting a new, independent panel, all were rejected, demonstrating abuse of power.

Kodituwakku states that the hearing was conducted without the basic tenets of natural justice: he was denied the opportunity to cross-examine witnesses or present a defense. He was not even notified of the date of the final ruling. Nevertheless, the judgment falsely claimed it was delivered in his presence.

Broad Impact on Justice and Civil Rights

Beyond personal injustice, the consequences of the Supreme Court’s decision are far-reaching. More than 45 public interest lawsuits that he had filed—ranging from large-scale financial fraud and environmental destruction to gas explosion fatalities and homes, and electoral violations—have been stalled or dismissed.

The ruling has effectively created a chilling effect within the legal community, discouraging future public interest litigators from pursuing cases that challenge political or judicial corruption; thus, indirectly encouraging corruption. Critics argue that this decision sets a dangerous precedent and weakens the judiciary’s role as an independent check on power.

What makes Kodituwakku’s appeal even more urgent and important for the country is the silence from the Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL), which has failed to publicly condemn or question the legality or implications of the ruling.

Kodituwakku’s Core Allegations

In his appeal to the UNHRC, Kodituwakku lists several fundamental rights violations:

* Denial of due process and legal representation

* Judicial conflict of interest, as judges involved were previous respondents in corruption cases he filed

* Delivery of judgment without his knowledge, falsely stating he was present

* Prohibition from continuing public interest litigation

* Media-driven public character assassination aimed at discrediting him and his organization, the Vinivida Foundation

He also noted in his appeal that the ruling used the charge of “malpractice” under the Judicature Act, which he contends is legally inapplicable to his procedural request for a “fuller bench’ in 2015.

What the Appeal Seeks

Kodituwakku is not just asking for personal redress. His appeal urges the UNHRC to pressure Sri Lankan authorities to:

1. Reinstate his right to practice law and file public interest cases

2. Reopen his pending Revision Application filed on October 1, 2024

3. Restore due process and judicial integrity in Sri Lanka

4. Safeguard legal professionals and civil rights advocates from political retribution

He argues that without UN intervention, Sri Lanka’s judicial independence and constitutional democracy remain under threat.

The Electoral Manipulation Controversy

Another major point in the appeal concerns Kodituwakku’s legal battle surrounding the postponement of Provincial Council elections in 2017. In a letter dated September 20, 2017, then-Attorney General Jayantha Jayasuriya advised the Speaker of Parliament that amendments to the Provincial Councils Elections (Amendment) Bill could be made at the committee stage—so long as they adhered to constitutional requirements. However, his opinion controversially suggested that these changes could override an earlier Supreme Court ruling that elections should not be delayed.

Kodituwakku initiated legal proceedings, accusing the Attorney General of contempt of court for allegedly undermining judicial authority and facilitating constitutional manipulation. He believes this triggered further backlash and contributed to the judicial persecution he now faces.

What the Public Should Know

* Kodituwakku has dedicated his career to fighting corruption in Sri Lanka’s public institutions.

* He was permanently disbarred by a Supreme Court bench he previously accused of misconduct.

* His disbarment halted more than 45 ongoing public interest cases.

* He was not allowed to present a defense and was not present when the judgment was delivered.

* His appeal to the UNHRC aims to restore justice, transparency, and civil rights.

Why This Matters: Important to the country and the Public?

Sri Lanka’s standing in the global community is closely tied to its adherence to international human rights agreements. The case of Nagananda Kodituwakku presents a litmus test for the country’s commitment to judicial integrity, freedom of expression, and the rule of law.

As a legal professional who ventured to challenge systemic corruption, his case symbolizes both the risks borne by whistleblowers and the urgent need for institutional reform. His call for UNHRC intervention is not just about individual justice—it is about restoring public trust in a judicial system that many now view as compromised. The contents here is based on the information presented in the UNHRC Appeal.

By spotlighting this issue, Kodituwakku hopes not only to regain his right to practice law but to ensure that future generations of Sri Lankans can rely on an independent judiciary to defend their rights and uphold democratic principles.