06 October 2019
THE TRUE JUDGMENT
On 18 April 2019 – I wrote under the heading ‘Tamil Presidential Candidate – CV Wigneswaran’. Today, I learnt through Lankasiri news channel at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhUQEmUu8yE that Civil Community leaders have approached Mr Wigneswaran to consider being the Common candidate of the Tamil community. Even though Mr Wigneswaran has declined – I was happy that other Tamil community leaders believed in that structure as I did. Back in April – there was discussion about it at our level. It took placed based on the following analysis:
[The question was raised on the basis of my article headed ‘Natural Governance in Sri Lankan Post-War Governance’ in which I have highlighted the difference in rate of participation in elections by Tamils and the variation it had in the election outcomes:
[But where there is no structure – the Tamil only voter’s vote goes to the Sinhala only candidate as opposition. That was how Tamils who failed to participate in the Presidential elections in 2005 and later in 2010 empowered the Rajapaksa side but in 2015 they made that Rajapaksa side the Opposition within Sinhala Nation. The percentage of Tamil voters went up in 2015 relative to 2010 when many were under the influence of Tamil only syndrome and therefore did not have the mandate to vote in Sri Lankan elections. Belief based mandate is universal and works through any structure. Not so external knowledge based vote. The block was removed by 2015. In Jaffna for example the participation went up from 26% in 2010 to 66% in 2015. In Vanni it went up from 40% to 72%. Relatively speaking in Eastern electorates of Batticaloa and Trincomalee the increase was not as dramatic. The Jaffna voter voting through the educated leader who thinks Sri Lankan, contributes directly to Sri Lankan governance power. The Tamil only voter needs to find a true believer in self governance, participating in Sri Lankan elections. True belief merges naturally with any reliable structure. Sinhalese leaders who develop common structures in Tamil areas and/or merge minds with Tamil leaders who believe more in commonness than in local power only – are assured of being leaders of common Sri Lanka. By electing such leaders, Sri Lankans pass the test of self-governance at National level. ]]
In essence I believe that to the extent we believe in each other beyond race and religious borders – we would naturally influence each other. When we go past the 50% mark towards true and absolute belief – be it in our own race or religion or in humanity itself – we start mind-merging with others in that environment. When our belief is close to being Absolute – we connect Universally – and invoke vertical ancestral powers as well as lateral global powers. Our positive Energy then flows through naturally whenever someone close to Absolute Belief has a need for our positive support. If there are no such takers in our immediate environment it travels by itself – beyond those borders. Likewise negative Energy – known as sins. It is to preserve our privacy during this development period that we need Separation of Powers & be considered as Equals.
It was for these reasons that I urged Mr Wigneswaran to become the Tamil candidate which meant a bridge between educated Tamils and Sinhalese. But today a Civil Society Group from beyond Jaffna borders did refer me to the following Sunday Observer article :
‘Mob frenzy in the halls of justice’ by Sarath De Alwis. This Sri Lankan of Sinhalese origin has been concerned about the Judicial outcome delivered recently and I believe is a Common Believer in the higher values. Even feeling sad together helps influence our own electorates. By electorate I mean the voters over whom we have influence through local common faith – including in the Judicial system. The voting pattern by Tamils in this year’s Presidential elections would confirm whether or not victims of war feel that Mr Gotabaya Rajapaksa excessively punished Tamil militants who BELIEVED that they were protecting their homeland. The voting pattern in majority Sinhalese areas would confirm whether or not they feel for the Tamils in pain. Mr Rajapaksa is on trial here. The judges are the People. If the two verdicts are vastly different – then we need to expect more wars which would hurt both sides.
As per that article by Sarath De Alwis :
[In due course, the court will give its reasons.
“Formal notices of this application should not be issued to the respondents, and the application should therefore be dismissed,” was the terse ruling announced by President of the Court of Appeal tribunal that heard the case.]
Until I read the above – I did not know any reason why. But if ‘issuing notice’ to respondents is the main reason – then the Court has seriously erred in hearing the matter beyond the preliminaries. The petition ought to have been dismissed in limine – if there was no provision for the Judicial Registrar to make a ruling on Administrative basis.
I myself learnt about this difference in systems - on Australia Day 2012 – when his honour Justice Ariyanayagam of Mallakam District Court in Northern Sri Lanka, strongly disciplined the Petitioners’ lawyer for sending us – the Respondents the notice. Until then I ‘assumed’ that the practice was common – with Australia. That lawyer was from Colombo. The communication had the effect of ‘influencing’ us to avoid judicial process. The communication was an annexure to the Affidavit by my husband who applied for the Estate of his brother to be Administered. But the judge who heard the case after his honour Justice Ariyanayagam retired – delivered judgment to set aside the Affidavit – due to alleged error in the Jurat Clause. Our Affidavit did show when, where, and before whom the actual oath was taken. Hence technically there were no grounds on which the Affidavit could have been set aside. Even the Jaffna Court of Appeal did not cure that mistake in the Judgment. As is my way – I explained all that in my book ‘Jaffna is my Heritage and not Dowry’. It is being shared during this Navarathri period when Hindus celebrate the goddess of Courage, Money wealth and Education.
The conduct of Northern court Administrators confirmed to me the root cause of why people become boisterous when they do not like a verdict. Those who celebrated on Friday – turned the Courts into a political arena. But is the Court deserving of better conduct? The answer is NO. They say that we get the government we deserve. Stated in reverse it says that you get the behaviour you reward.
The substance of the petition was about deviating from Due Process. Sarath highlights this as follows:
[The two civil society activists were raising a reasonable question. Was due process followed?]
The judgment effectively says ‘Yes’ to that question. That is the way the Common civilian would read the judgment. In other words ‘who you know’ is more important than ‘what you know’. The People demonstrated it immediately within the Court room. They would get a highly subjective system. But to the extent we believe in independent Judiciary – we would become their continuous opposition – diluting their power.