Gajalakshmi Paramasivam
17
September 2020
Respecting
the Judiciary
There is People’s power and there is Government
power. In true democracy the two would be each other’s half. This applies to
any sovereign unit. When a leader is elected to Parliament that leader makes up
only half the power. If the real power of the People is greater, that leader
has to continuously listen to the People. It was with this in mind that I asked
the question as follows:
[Would appreciate very much the knowledge as
to which division within Jaffna District Mr Wigneswaran represents. This is
necessary for me to construct my response. There are others here in Australia
who also appreciate this alleged ‘fact’]
The
confirmation came as follows:
[Mr Vickneswaran MP
represents Jaffna district. The entire group of seven mps represent
the whole district. There is no division as such in the current system.]
I shared this knowledge on 15 September 2020 - through
my article ‘Is Tamil
Nationalism getting Defeated ?’
Yesterday, on that subject matter, I received email
headed – ‘Sumanthiran is pushing Deniswaran into a political disaster through
his lawyer.’
I was then referred to https://www.tamilwin.com/srilanka/01/256144?ref=archive-feed.
As per my understanding, this message said that Mr Deniswaran had
shown in action that he did not intend withdrawing his case against Mr
Wigneswaran. In addition, the article expressed anxiety that Mr Wigneswaran
might be punished by the influence of extremists who did not like the
statements of claim of Tamil Nationalism made by Mr Wigneswaran in National
Parliament. I did not identify with that. But I needed to know the truth as to
whether Tamilwin actually believed that to be true or was merely speculating. Of
assistance was the report about Justice Elancheleyan’s ruling in Trincomalee
High Court being upheld by the Supreme Court. This was seen positively.
As is my way I looked through the
Constitution to find out the risk to Mr Wigneswaran’s seat in Parliament and
responded as follows:
What
is the maximum punishment that is likely to be imposed? Article 89 (d) of the
Constitution states as follows:
[if he is serving or
has during the period of seven years immediately preceding completed serving of
a sentence of imprisonment (by whatever name called) for a term not less than
six months imposed after conviction by any court for an offence punishable with
imprisonment for a term not less than two years or is under sentence of death
or is serving or has during the period of seven years immediately preceding
completed the serving of a sentence of imprisonment for a term not less than
six months awarded in lieu of execution of such sentence : Provided that if any
person disqualified under this paragraph is granted a free pardon such
disqualification shall cease from the date on which the pardon is granted
;]
Would
the punishment qualify as per the above? If not why worry? Gandhi went to
prison because it was good for India. ]
This morning, Tamilwin reported that Mr
Deniswaran withdrew his case unconditionally. My attention however was drawn
first by Adaderana report headed ‘Appeals Court closes contempt of court
application against Wigneswaran’ – published yesterday evening by which time I
had retired for the day:
[Attorney-at-Law Suren Fernando, representing
the former Northern Province Minister of Fisheries, Transport, Trade and Rural
Development B. Deniswaran, who lodged the case against Wigneswaran for removing
him from the ministerial portfolio, told the judge bench that Wigneswaran and
Ananthi Sasitharan have agreed to withdraw an appeal filed with the Supreme
Court.
He
accordingly notified the judge bench that his client does not wish to proceed
with the application.
President’s
Counsel K. Kanag-Isvaran, who represented C.V. Wigneswaran and Ananthi
Sasitharan confirmed his clients’ wish to withdraw the relevant appeal.]
This was NOT included in Tamilwin’s report. I was
upset also because of my own high esteem for the Colombo Court of Appeal which upheld my rights in a Colombo
Land matter. The appeal itself had been pending for over 20 years. At the same
time Justice Elancheleyan – according to my mind,
miscarried justice in a testamentary matter which was about Family Rights.
Incomplete report towards conclusions that one likes
to produce, amount to cheating. When we
find fault with others for the sake of promoting ourselves, we lose our balance
in thinking. Sometimes we lack the ability to read both sides. Then we need to
limit ourselves to Reporting and prevent ourselves from practicing advocacy. If the Supreme Court upheld Justice Elancheleyan’s ruling, then that confirms that the
Supreme Court through which institution Mr Wigneswaran carries the status ‘Justice’
is within the group approved by Tamils. Despite this, when negative sentiments
were expressed by Tamilwin, it demotes the status through which Mr Wigneswaran
fortifies his dignity as a just person and integrity as an educated person –
upholding the law and the verdict of its judgments through current custodians
of its power.
Truth discovered in Jaffna and/or about
Jaffna would empower all those to whom Jaffna is ‘home’. One sided reporting
makes the medium sensational and frivolous and slows down the spread of the
deeper universal power which spreads itself
when there is a true need.
No comments:
Post a Comment