Gajalakshmi Paramasivam

03 July  2019

Sri Lanka has become International due to Easter Bombings?

[On Monday, the attorney general’s department said in a letter to acting police chief CD Wickremaratne that it had ordered Fernando and Jayasundara to be named as suspects and produced before a court because a presidential commission of inquiry found grounds to charge them with dereliction of duties and criminal negligence.

The letter said crimes the officials were suspected of having committed fall within “grave crimes against humanity” under international law.] Associated Press report headed ‘Sri Lanka bombings: police and defence chiefs held on negligence charge’

Tamils whose loved ones were killed in the ethnic war are awaiting the very UN declaration that the current Attorney General has made against these two officers. UN is duty-bound to use International law. Not so the above mentioned officers – Fernando and Jayasundara.

If indeed these officers are being charged under international law – why were their parallels not charged under the same law for negligence  that resulted in crimes being committed against Tamils during the 30 year ethnic war? Is it all a drama to fool the public?

The following is relevant in identifying with the mind-order that produced these outcomes:

[Fernando told the committee Sirisena was not easily accessible for discussions. Jayasundara said Sirisena asked him after the blasts to take responsibility and resign and said he would be cleared in any subsequent inquiry.

Jayasundara also said Sirisena had asked him not to attend national security council meetings since last October, when Sirisena fired the prime minister, Ranil Wickremesinghe, in a power struggle that triggered a seven-week political crisis.

Wickremesinghe was subsequently reinstated by the supreme court.]

In other words, as per the above one is entitled to conclude that the Easter Bombings happened due to the disconnection in the flow of Due Processes that the government was duty-bound to follow. Instead of explaining himself to the foreign diplomats – should Mr Wickremesinghe  not be taking legal action against the President – stating the Attorney General as the Respondent? This has been provided for in the Constitution through article 35(1):

[35. (1) While any person holds office as President of the Republic of Sri Lanka, no civil or criminal proceedings shall be instituted or continued against the President in respect of anything done or omitted to be done by the President, either in his official or private capacity: Provided that nothing in this paragraph shall be read and construed as restricting the right of any person to make an application under Article 126 against the Attorney-General, in respect of anything done or omitted to be done by the President, in his official capacity: Provided further that the Supreme Court shall have no jurisdiction to pronounce upon the exercise of the powers of the President under Article 33(2)(g).]

[126. (1) The Supreme Court shall have sole and exclusive jurisdiction to hear and determine any question relating to the infringement or imminent infringement by executive or administrative action of any fundamental right or language right declared and recognized by Chapter III or Chapter IV.]

Why did Mr Wickremesinghe not take action through the very process that reinstated him as Prime Minister? Was that negligence a confirmation of ingratitude to the Judicial process? The best way to say ‘thank you’ while we are active in a position is by doing our duty through the very process that protected our rights and thereby facilitated us to be active in that position. Beyond law we are always protected by truth. Practice of law through legal action strengthens our Administrative processes – especially in relation to those who are outsiders to us. The outcomes delivered ought to be secondary to this deeper value of common mind-order.

The October 2018 political crisis confirmed to the People that the judicial process in Sri Lanka was more reliable than the political process. Why did Mr Wickremesinghe not activate this process and invoke the blessings of our judicial ancestors? Article 14A of the Constitution covers the right to ‘intelligence’ as follows:

[14A. (1) Every citizen shall have the right of access to any information as provided for by law, being information that is required for the exercise or protection of a citizen’s right held by:-

(a) the State, a Ministry or any Government Department or any statutory body established or created by or under any law;

(b) any Ministry of a Minster of the Board of Ministers of a Province or any Department or any statutory body established or created by a statute of a Provincial Council;

(c) any local authority; and

(d) any other person, who is in possession of such information relating to any institution referred to in sub-paragraphs (a) (b) or (c) of this paragraph.]

The intelligence/information  that the President has gained is the property of  Common Sri Lankan. To the extent the Prime Minister needed to access it to protect that Common Sri Lankan’s right to manifest her/his religion,  he had the duty to take action against the President by stating  the Attorney General as respondent. Article 14(1) (e ) is of particular significance in the case of Easter bombings:

14. (1) Every citizen is entitled to – (e ) the freedom, either by himself or in association with others, and either in public or in private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching;

We are often discouraged from activating such judicial processes in an unreliable system. But to the extent we are genuine – it regulates our minds and helps us to find completion in areas where we are queens or  kings as well as citizens.

The ruler’s work is incomplete until there is an heir. The heir happens naturally  when the ruler and the citizen become one. The further away that heir is physically – the wider the coverage and hence confirmation that the experience tends towards being global.