Saturday 13 July 2019

Gajalakshmi Paramasivam

13 July  2019

Fundamental Rights Petitions

Today I learnt about two Fundamental Rights Petitions in Sri Lankan Courts – through Daily News. The first one was about the ‘pardon’ by President to Buddhist monk Gnanasara Thera. The other was about Easter bombings. In both instances – to my mind, the structure of the petitions – as stated do not confirm a valid Fundamental Rights complaint.

Simply stated – a Fundamental Right is the Judicial parallel of Declaration of Believe based ownership by the citizen. When I sued the then Prime Minister of Australia – Mr John Howard - on the basis of Racial Discrimination Act 1975, that was a fundamental rights matter. Fundamental Rights are those that we are born with.   But even the High Court – which is the Apex Court here in Australia – upheld that my complaint was frivolous. I then submitted my pain to God. This surrender helped me heal myself  by sharing my pain with fellow Australians. The fact that Mr Howard lost his seat eventually – confirmed to me that the system of Natural Justice delivers to those who believe in it. Fundamental Rights Court plays that role at human level. The Vaddukoddai Resolution 1976 is confirmation of such a declaration – which was upheld in 1977 when Tamils become Equal Opposition in National Parliament. To ask for Separate State after that was disrespectful of that the Court of Natural Justice.

I believe that my complaint was valid because by law I was entitled to be treated as an Equal to a fellow Australian – until known otherwise. Equal Footing to access Common Resources  is a Fundamental Right that every migrant is entitled to. Like in the caste system – those who have habitually taken senior positions due to their physical aspects – for example being White, would tend to take advantage of the easier pathway and take the migrant from an Aid-Receiving country/group  to be less than themselves. Unjust discrimination happens when the other person has  actually contributed more to the Commonness of the group and becomes the binding power. This becomes a fundamental rights judicial matter when the complainant  actually believes and practices the relevant law. Otherwise it is a matter for the Court of Natural Justice.

This complaint has been filed on the claim that the provisions of Article 12(1) of the Constitution have been breached.  As per the report ‘they sought a declaration that the petitioners fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 12(1) of the constitution have been violated.’
Article 12 (1) states:
[12. (1) All persons are equal before the law and are entitled to the equal protection of the law.]
The fact is that article 9 precedes article 12 and is more fundamental than article 12. Article 9 states:
[9. The Republic of Sri Lanka shall give to Buddhism the foremost place and accordingly it shall be the duty of the State to protect and foster the Buddha Sasana, while assuring to all religions the rights granted by Articles 10 and 14(1)(e).]

One driven by Buddha Sasana more than by Common Law – would consider her/his fundamental rights to be at risk when the Common Law Judiciary punishes a Buddhist leader. It is the parallel of White Australia Policy  protection in Australia which was a reality when I sued Mr Howard. It would still be a reality in some parts of Australia but the likes of me have contributed to eliminating it through judicial action – despite knowing that I would be dismissed.

The Equal Opportunity law for minorities  in Australia is the parallel of Prescriptive Rights in the case of Land Ownership in Sri Lanka. Interesting to note that, President’s Counsel Faisz Mustapha is  appearing for the Petitioners in the Easter Sunday attack. President’s Counsel Faisz Mustapha  appears also for my opposition in a land rights matter. As per my belief in that ownership the party that Mr Mustapha defends filed a false declaration of ownership. Such ownership is proven by continuous occupation despite any challenges from the calculated ownership. The parallel of that prescriptive right is the right to protection of elected government.  In this instance the two officers are my parallels in the land matter. They have to be proven wrong through the calculated merit based pathway. The law for that is not Fundamental Rights law. The appropriate party is the elected member of government who is responsible for the Administration.  The victims did not have belief in the  officers concerned directly. Their belief is through the elected member who is Mr Sirisena. President  Sirisena represented that belief and also had the ultimate responsibility as Minister with Executive Powers.
In both cases – the wrongs have been confirmed by the persons concerned. Buddhist monk Gnanasara Thera has already confirmed the ceiling placed on commonness by promoting Sinhala only state. In the case of Easter Bombings it is a manifestation of the wrongs by Government Forces which takes the Armed Forces back to the frontline to fight against their equals – i.e. those who have abandoned the common pathway regulated by common law. So the Christian power is bringing Westerners in America to protect their own who have been abandoned by the Buddhist government.
Fundamental Rights cases need to be heard in a Neutral Court – towards which the Sri Lankan Judiciary would need to put itself through much Affirmative Action. Foremost is the need to recognize lay litigants on Equal Footing – for it is the lay person who represents the common law abiding citizen who practices the law not because s/he has to but because that is the pathway to harmony. Truth is above the law and it would show up the excesses in law at the practical level.
If we accept that God is the parallel of Truth – then that God takes different forms to each believer/group of believers. The god I recognize would meet my real needs. If the Big God is different – then to me that God is Maya. Likewise the ancestors who gave us the laws.
If Buddha is the personal god of Sri Lankans as per article 9 - articles 10 to 17  in Chapter III – headed Fundamental Rights – become a myth. Once Sri Lanka adopts UN laws – article 9 must become an invisible right – as happens in rebirth.
Until Australia included UN principles – the Sovereignty of the individual and belief based groups  was a myth. But by including those laws as our own – we knew the connection that our personal god (in the case of Australians Jesus Christ and therefore White Australian) was identical in qualities to the Big God (UN).

Until Article 9 is removed – Sri Lankan Judiciary is handicapped to serve and be empowered by non-Buddhists. Such fundamental rights actions highlight this irreconcilable ‘gap’ between us and wider world. But the moment we become independent of the fruits of that human system – we would start recognizing and appreciating the wonderful world of Truth – which produces the other side at the level the ceiling was placed – provided someone submitted to the Highest power. The manifestation would be in the language of that person and not necessarily in the official language/form – be it Sinhalese for the case against the President or language of law against the officers in the Easter Bombing case.

The changes are likely to happen through changes to the law – the way Gandhi is honoured at the University of NSW where I was punished for peaceful assembly.

No comments:

Post a Comment