08 October 2023

Gajalakshmi Paramasivam

 

JUDICIAL KARMA RULED RETURNED THROUGH THE JUDGE WHO ABANDONED DHARMA

 

The system of Dharma/Righteousness  is common to both Buddhists and Hindus of Sri Lanka. Where human  law enforcement is unreliable, all of us have recourse through our truth and its natural powers of Universal Energies. Today I was able to identify with its power as follows:

A respected elder of the Sri Lankan Diaspora directed my attention to ‘udaruppu’ discussion regarding the resignation and departure of Mullaitivu District Judge T. Saravanaraja. Lawyer K. Sugash of Vaddukoddai was interviewed in this regard.

 

Sugash who is a lawyer kept blaming the police for not taking action against politician Mr Sarath Weerasekara. I expected the Judge to order that the obstructing politician. Sugash kept stating that the plight of ordinary Tamils had accumulated and extended to the judge’s level. I was in similar situation in Mallakam District Court in Northern Sri Lanka. Excerpt from chapter 29 of Naan Australian:

 

During swearing-in ceremony the Clerk asked me as to my details and when it came to asking whether I was a Ceylon Tamil – he looked not at me but hesitatingly at our lawyer. Our lawyer kept quiet. I stated firmly that I was a Ceylon Tamil. May be the young clerk did not know of any Ceylon Tamils but went by the approval or disapproval of his seniors – including judges in court. On 05 September when I put my file down on the floor because it was heavy – he said not to leave it on the floor. The ‘security officer’ asked me to put my handbag on the floor but away from the witness box. I obliged both but in the case of the former I added that Mrs Sabanathan was asked by the Judge whether she needed a chair to sit on when giving evidence whereas I was not allowed to keep my files on the floor!

Back then I did not think ahead but now I recall that during the proceedings on 07 November 2013, I was not asked whether I needed a chair – even though both my sisters in law were asked whether they needed a chair.  Yet I was the one to remove my shoes when I gave evidence. To me that was practice of Hindu part of Thesawalamai culture – so we contact Mother Earth when giving evidence in that local area………. As I picked up my file I said to our lawyer ‘I am really disappointed with you.’ At that moment Mr. Yogendra who was standing next to our lawyer – at the head of the bar-table also looked in my direction – and I said to him in Tamil ‘Naan Vilai Maathu Illai’  / ‘I am not a prostitute’. So saying, I  walked towards the Public end of the Court. Then I heard our first lawyer Mr. Nadarajah say to me that I was being summoned. I turned around and walked back to the  witness box and removed my shoes. But I did not get on to the box because no one asked me to.  Then the Judge asked me in a stern voice …….

‘ This is Court house – Don’t you know that you should not show street behavior here in Court? You claim to be educated and sought Administrative authority. But now  through your conduct you have proven that you do not deserve that.  It’s not good enough to say in words. More importantly your conduct must confirm your claim) 

I looked blankly at the Judge for the first part of the above outburst by the Judge. Then the penny dropped – that somehow the Judge had got knowledge of my statement to Mr. Yogendra. It’s often mind reading.

 

So – on top of being effectively labeled as a prostitute and a cheat – I was now being accused of street behavior. I just stared at the Judge.  The woman in me broke down and cried – silently inside. It really was too much at this point for that soft woman within. 

 

As per my experience in a full Tamil Court, the Tamil Judiciary earned this return karma, due to discrimination between English-speaking litigant and Tamil-only litigants.

 

Sugash found fault also with Mr CV Wigneswaran who became politician after retiring from the Judiciary. Back then when I wrote that Mr Wigneswaran also had failed to uphold Thesawalamai law, he wrote back asking me for details. I said words to the effect that he ought to have publicly analysed the judgments that were in breach of the fundamental structure of Thesawalamai law.

 

Today, when I learnt that he had stated that Judge Saravanaraja might have misunderstood communications due to lack of proficiency in English I felt that that part of my prayers had been answered.

After Mallakam court dismissed us, we appealed to the High Court where the language is English. We approached Sugash first but he said our opposition was known to him and referred us to his friend. The judgment by that court shows very little logical connection between law and facts.  On page 18 of the judgment of the Civil Appellate Court  judgment of   of 19 March 2018,  is the following:

‘Section 30 of Matrimonial Rights and Inheritance Ordinance No.15 of 1876 as amended states, that

‘Except when otherwise expressly provided, if all those who succeed to the inheritance are equally near in degree to the intestate, they take per capita, and not per stirpes.’

 

The file was sent back to Mallakam District Court, where the judge permitted substitution of children when of the Petitioner and a respondent who passed away. This as per my interpretation is as per stirpes and is therefore in breach of the above judgment. I wonder how Sugash who lives in a glass house would interpret the above judgment.