Thursday 27 June 2019

Gajalakshmi Paramasivam
27 June 2019


[The system of administration of justice that we have now commenced with the Charter of Justice introduced by the British in the year 1801 which constituted the Supreme Court of Judicature in the Island of Ceylon. This brought about for the first time a separation between the Governor who exercised executive and legislative power and the courts which exercised judicial power. Thus, a firm tradition of separation of powers was established which forms the bedrock of the Rule of Law. The Britannica describes a Charter as a document granting specified rights, powers, privileges or functions from the sovereign power of a State to lesser beings or bodies.] - Professor Sarath Mithilal De Silva in the Daily News article headed ‘Structure of Courts under the 1978 Constitution 

Why is Separation needed? The ordinary citizen with little or no knowledge of law is still bound by the law. Likewise, the government that represents the citizens. The greater the gap between the manifestations of the government and that of the judiciary - the stronger the need for separation of powers. Last year this need was firmly confirmed by the ‘political crisis’ which was duly resolved by the Judiciary. To the extent our British ancestors shared their wisdom / intelligence with us - we continue to be blessed by them. Ancestral powers are true powers and are naturally invoked by those who believe in the ancestors. To that extent the Judiciary become ‘Common’ - even though they may be religiously diverse. The deeper the belief in British law - the more global minded a Sri Lankan is. The parallel of that for the government is cultural belief ‘common’ to the electorate. Diversity is valuable due to ‘privacy’ in which we find Truth. It’s like meditation. 

On Tuesday - in Colombo - I was directed to a different ‘gate’ to the one used previously, to enter the Court premises. The security officers were quite courteous and the lady officer suggested that I carried my little bag as a purse rather than hanging it from the shoulder. I spontaneously    patted the lady on the cheek - because the lady demonstrated natural commonness. Not so the officer checking me at the entrance of St Anthony’s church Kochchikade. That lady was talking to someone on the phone while checking me. This meant that her heart was not in the job she was doing.  Likewise the male security officer at the entrance of Mallakam District Court - in Northern Sri Lanka who ‘told’ me I could not take my handbag inside. This meant that I had to carry my money and important documents in hand - at the risk of dropping one thing or the other. Our lawyers also did not educate me about the changes. They live in their own world of relative luxury. But Truth says that as per the actual practice of law I was entitled to carry more of the support facilities than any lawyer there. 

Our religious faith would bring about commonness within the religious group. But to become common with those outside that group - we need the Truth that we discovered through that common travel. To the extent we are driven by that Truth outside the religious group - the commonness is invoked by that Truth. 

Hence the question needs to be asked as to whether common practice or multicultural  practice is healthy  for a society - in this instance Sri Lankan society.  Lawyers and Judges who are heirs of the British Judicial system - are different in culture to politicians who have to ‘show’ separation from the British. Lawyers who are active in politics and v.v. continuously corrupt both systems. 

 News 1st report confirms this as follows:

[The President also said that the 19th amendment to the constitution should be abolished and added that the country will not be able to move forward if it is not abolished. President Sirisena noted that the 19th amendment did not being about the results envisioned by those who drafted it and that it gave rise to a situation where two drivers were fighting to control the direction in which the country heads. He added that it would be best if the 19th amendment could be abolished before the presidential election.
He added that the 19th amendment was drafted by individuals like Jayampathy Wickramaratne, M.A. Sumanthiran and other NGO personalities who want to destroy the country. President Sirisena stated that if he had known this from the beginning, he would not have supported the 19th amendment. The President categorized the 19th amendment as a political conspiracy.]
Mr Jayampathy Wickramaratne and Mr M.A. Sumanthiran are active minded in the practice of the law. As per that culture - the laws they recommend would have a strong component of British ancestral mind which cannot be worked by the likes of Mr Sirisena or the Rajapaksa dynasty nor the Bandaranaike dynasty. If we chose  the alternative of  leaving it to the politicians who are likely to convert their desires as law - majority are likely to use minorities as juniors. The extreme example that confirms this is Buddhism Foremost article in the alleged Democratic constitution. One that endorses one culture above others loses the power of Democracy. This happens automatically when a minority who believes in her/his/their sovereignty takes equal position of opposition to the ruling person. Denying Sri Lanka of this was in breach of the fundamentals of Democracy which even Mr Sumanthiran did not challenge in Courts but rather joined the bandwagon to take credit for restoring Mr Wickremesighe to the position of Prime Minister.

Our belief is basis of our personal law which would never fail us. The official laws that are born out of belief of majority likewise is the real laws that Sri Lanka is regulated by. One who operates within the boundaries of common faith is always protected by that group. Those who continue to leave Sri Lanka including by boat to countries like Australia - confirm that the laws made by their elected representatives in  Sri Lankan parliament  did not work for them. 

No comments:

Post a Comment