5 March, 2024


Two Responses: Bulldozers Cannot Destroy SL History And A Speaker’s Duty

By Elmore Perera

Elmore Perera

Money, bulldozers cannot destroy SL History – President

In a news item published in the Island of 20th December 2012, it was reported that at the opening of the new building complex at the National Archives Department the President had stated that “No one would be able to rewrite the country’s history with the help of money or destroy it by bulldozing places of archaeological value. He was quoted by the Policy Research and Information Unit as having said that no amount of money or might could change a country’s history.

Addressing the LLRC on 10th November 2010, I stated that on 9th December 2009 a Victory Memorial was unveiled to the Nation by HE the President at Puthukkudiyirippu. This Victory Memorial is “a tribute to the glorious Forces and to the State Leadership of H.E. the President Mahinda Rajapaksa, Commander in Chief of Armed Forces, who was born for the grace of the Nation, with the guidance and co-ordination of the Secretary Defence Hon. Gotabaya Rajapaksa, and the Operational Command and Military Leadership of the Commander of the Army Lt. Gen. Sarath Fonseka who led the military for the greatest victory through a humanitarian operation where terrorism was entirely eradicated from our motherland and restoring its territorial integrity and the “perpetual peace”.

However the Victory Monument of Puthukkudiyirippu which has since replaced that Memorial, reads as follows: “The Victory Monument was unveiled to the Nation by His Excellency Mahinda Rajapaksa, the President of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka, and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces with the participation of Honourable Lalith Weerathunga, the Secretary to the President and Honourable Gotabaya Rajapaksa RWP, RSP psc,   the Secretary  to the Ministry of Defence, Public Security, and Law and Order on the invitation of Lieutenant General J. Jayasuriya USP ndu psc the Commander of the Sri Lanka Army, on 9th December 2009.”

The first refers to the War Memorial unveiled to the Nation on 9th December 2009 by H.E., the President whereas the second refers to the Victory Monument unveiled to the Nation also on 9th December 2009 by H.E. the President.

At first sight, it appears that Money and Bulldozers seem to have destroyed and/or significantly altered Sri Lanka History. The President certainly cannot take kindly to this brazen attempt to destroy and/or alter Sri Lanka History. The onus is on him to set the record straight and discipline those who have wilfully undermined his credibility.

Entertainment of a Motion – A Speaker’s Duty

In an article published in the Daily Mirror of 19th January 2013, Senior Attorney-at-Law Sanath Jayatilaka had correctly stated that in terms of Standing Order 78A (i) (reproduced by him, in full) “the Speaker carries a huge responsibility and should not deal with the entertainment as we do in normal life when dealing with a social occasion”. Having referred to the definition of the word “entertain” in Black’s Law Dictionary he correctly states that “the Hon. Speaker ought to have examined the charges” and in doing so “he would have inquired how absolutely confidential information provided by the Chief Justice in her declaration of Assets, (access to which could have been only by a due process through the President, the Bribery Commission and, may be, by an order of Court) reached the signatories”. Jayatilaka goes on to state that “if” the Speaker had done so he would have referred the signatories to what he cannot entertain and even “gone the second mile” and “referred them to their respective legal remedy as provided for by law in Sansoni J’s judgment on the Paddy Lands Act”. Then on “investigation” by the correct authority   (perhaps the Bribery Commission which displayed remarkable alacrity and prowess in charging the spouse of the Chief Justice) the Chief Justice would have been charged and if the charges are proved, they would have a “proved misconduct” in their hands, to enable the Speaker to “entertain” their application,
place it on the Order Paper of Parliament, appoint a Select Committee and proceed further under Standing Order 78A.

Having stated these indisputable facts, Jayatilaka goes on to state “Hence Chamal Rajapaksa” failed in his statutory duty and an order in the nature of a writ would be available to any party interested.

Both Jayatilaka and I, and undoubtedly many, many others, are very well aware that Chamal Rajapaksa retired after exemplary service as a Police Officer, before venturing into politics. To succeed in politics there was no requirement that he should necessarily further his legal knowledge/expertise. As such it seems to me that Jayatilaka was being a little bit unfair in expecting Chamal Rajapaksa as Speaker to offer legal advice to the signatories of the Impeachment Motion, since their knowledge of matters “legal” are largely restricted to their appearances in Court in response to “summons” or “notices” served on them, or on those near and dear to them.

However, Jayatilaka has, quite correctly stated “Hence Chamal Rajapaksa has failed in his statutory duty and an order in the nature of a writ would be available to any party interested”. The justification for this irrefutable conclusion of Jayatilaka lies in the proviso to Article 107 (2) of the Constitution, which states clearly that “no resolution for the presentation of such an address shall be entertained by the Speaker or placed on the Order Paper of Parliament, unless notice of such resolution is signed by not less than one-third of the total number of Members of Parliament and sets out full particulars of the alleged misbehaviour or incapacity”.

Whereas the first pre-condition has clearly been satisfied the Speaker has failed to reject the motion on the basis that the second pre-condition re full particulars of the alleged misbehaviour (which clearly excludes anything other than “proved misconduct”) or incapacity, had not been satisfied.

It is significant that even on 4th January 2013, the Deputy Speaker who is a lawyer stated to the media that the Select Committee was only mandated to “investigate and report” only, and specifically that it was not mandated to make a “finding of guilt”. Had the Speaker consulted his Deputy before “entertaining” the resolution he may not have failed in his statutory duty and certainly would have averted the present state of  anarchy, where the rule of law has been replaced by the rule of men who consider themselves infallible and above the law.

An open apology to the nation will not be out of place.

*Elmore Perera, Attorney-at-Law, Founder CIMOGG, Past President OPA  


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Latest comments

  • 0

    “Money, bulldozers cannot destroy SL History – President” However, thuggery and arson with a little help from a powerful megalomaniac of a Minister can. Just ask what happened to the Jaffna Library.

    • 0


      but today we are not in the uneducated age or confined to SL
      but well versed and diversed, spread throughout the globe
      these low class behaviour is good to drag SL backwards

      Stalin tried with Georgy Zhukov and Mao tried Deng Xiaoping & Liu Shaoqi


  • 0

    MR is making a grave charge against himself! Very often he delvers sermons he himself should follow. For instance, I remember that he once `preached’ at a public meeting that political leaders should never should never resort to acts of revenge and there is no place for hatred in politics!

    • 0

      This is the reasons why the analysts repeat that the man is dangerous and totally unpredictable. He is not practising anything what comes out of his mouth to the nation – instead doing totally the opposite even not respecting the RULE OF LAW and even the respect and dignity towards the people. Earlier days he behaviours were almost like slain leader of the JVP.

  • 0

    The availability of a writ on the Speaker is good advice. Today one cannot pursue that as a cause of action for the reason that the Court of Appeal may want certain provisions in the Constitution interpreted by SC and who controls the SC. It reminds me the Sinhala proverb “Horage ammagen pena ahanawa” Seek advice from the thief’s mother. Your guess is good as my guess about the end result

    • 0

      @Srinath Gunasekera
      Here is another example of “Horage ammagen pena ahanawa.” It’s called, “Nadooth hamuduruwan ge, badooth hamuduruwan ge.”

      [Edited out]

  • 0

    History will record all the hora acts of this govt in undermining the constitution and rule of law. The damage that is to be wreaked from this point onwards by the Chief Injustice is yet to be seen.

  • 0

    If ,we laymen can see and explain how this JARAPASSA AND SCOUNDREL CLAN behaviorism,what about the learned intellectuals?.
    The learned intellectuals know the cause, roots of the problem of governance AND SOLUTIONS, ANSWERS ALSO.

    The MR and THE CLAN vomit their words and eat again.

    we all know, how their looted money and bulldozers change history from POINT PEDRO TO POINT DEVUNDARA.


  • 0

    I still await PROOF of ‘financial impropriety’ and ‘misbehaviour/misconduct’ commited by CJ Shirani B – referred to by the truncated PSC of 7 members.
    I also await the publishing of the Full Report of the PSC,submitted to parliament.
    If she is/was guilty,why no action in a Court of Law – instead of suppositions and abuse on presumptions of guilt?
    She says she is innocent – this has to be beleived in the absence of PROOF to the contrary.

    • 0

      Thug minded president is unpredictable – he can kill you tomorrow and claim that you are a terrorist and that is the reason why he had to kill you. He is like that.
      If FORMER CJ SB was that abused – the charges against MR, GR, BR and the other ministers like Kehelmal, SB, Kumar, Mervin and all should be exemplary declaring their assets by now.

      As one of the commentators pointed out in previous weeks, RW could have done it long back to be an example to all of them. These buggers maraud the country abusing all funds allocated to the poor.

  • 0

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

Leave A Comment

Comments should not exceed 200 words. Embedding external links and writing in capital letters are discouraged. Commenting is automatically disabled after 5 days and approval may take up to 24 hours. Please read our Comments Policy for further details. Your email address will not be published.