He cannot avoid taking the trodden path of mentioning JR quoting what he can do with the powers as the first executive President of Sri Lanka. What a poor attempt Gomin to compare JR to the “Present Incumbent” who you say “..meekly tried to shunt the impeachment on an Opposition plea and pleads for an independent panel to seek advice on a conclusion foregone..” What a fake you are with your convoluted writing to express your opinion as if it is a fact.
The President Mahinda Rajapakse was not meek in speaking about the appointment of a panel when the incorrigible Hultsdorf black coats with their palms perhaps “well palmed” by invisible Santa Clauses coming from the west dressed as NGOs continued their mad fiasco breaking coconuts, shouting slogans and going on manifestation, without taking a moment to read the Charges against the Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayaka to ask themselves whether there is after all some truth in the charges and whether or not even a judge may not resist falling for a few million dollars?
If the Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayaka had nothing to hide, being a lawyer she could have appeared before the PSC on her own to face the charges against her. In this particular case she had taken a retinue of lawyers, who could not even read through the documents to find a valuable argument to show that she is not guilty of the Charges.
There was something exceedingly “fishy” in her walking away from the PSC Session with out making a statement to clear her of the charges against her. She is not a “Goddess” sent from another planet to think that it was beneath her “dignity” to appear before a PSC composed of Members of Parliament to plead her innocence against the Charges on the Impeachment Motion. It may be that there was no dignity to be devalued in the ungainly conduct of the “ dignitaries” Gomin Dayasiri is bemoaning. Gomin Dayasiri may have an axe to grind when he portrays the President: “Looking sheepishly slippery instead of being majestically regal, a baffled President gives a bewildering impression: could be a ploy to quell opposition than to swap positions. A good case badly presented.”
When the President proposed the appointment of an Independent Panel it was to quell the unseemly conduct of the Hultsdorf Black Coats making asses of themselves acting as if they had never heard of an Impeachment Motion. The Presidents had to consider offshoots of the attempts of the Black coats becoming pawns in the hands of the self centred politicians preparing to discredit the government and invite the foreign interferers to intervene with a view to further destabilise Sri Lanka with more anti-Sri Lanka Resolutions at the next UNHRC in Geneva.
Talking of dignitaries; it is strange that it is they who are all out to discredit Sri Lanka and sell Sri Lanka, saved by a determined Patriotic leader, to the anti Sri Lanka foreign regime changers working along with the pro-terrorist Tamil diaspora. It was first the University Professors who went on a strike for three months, well paid for their efforts by these self same invisible Santa Clauses. Bala Tampoe also made a donation of Rs. 500,000. Where did he get that money from ? Now it is the dignitaries of Hultsdorf, braying from every corner hoisting perhaps a “fraudulent” Chief Justice, without knowing whether she is or is not guilty of the charges against her.
Gomin Dayasiri does not seem to question the comportment of the Chief Justice vis à vis the PSC, from the beginning of the Inquiry into the Impeachment Motion by the PSC. more occupied being critical of the President.
Gomin Dayasiri strangely follow the manifesting Hulftdorf black coats in stating , “ A rush to reach judgment erased the notion of a fair trial and impacted the value addition to Supremacy of Parliament. Justice- delayed or hurried- is justice damned. Lack of due process could originate multiple attacks across seas. With cryptic comments on NGOs, who are acting foot loose looking for a regime change? ”
They are flippant about a rush to go through the inquiry into the charges in the Impeachment Motion. Sri Lanka cannot possibly give up its own Sovereign democratic rights for “fear” of “multiple attacks across seas.”
But an Impeachment Motion against a Chief Justice cannot be continued for a long period of time as the Chief Justice charged under an Impeachment Motion is not “interdicted” (unless behaving with dignity she steps down on her own), and the Impeachment procedure cannot therefore be dragged on while the Chief Justice continues to hear cases. The PSC had however given her extended time to prepare her case.
If the charges in the Impeachment Motion were frivolous she could have waded through the documents and submitted her defence in a short time. But it was not the case, she preferred to flee the PSC like a vulgar criminal evading prosecution.
It is unbelievable the extent to which Gomin goes to ridicule the President in his sarcastic demonstration of convoluted writing:
“Present incumbent meekly tried to shunt the impeachment on an Opposition plea and pleads for an independent panel to seek advice on a conclusion foregone. Looking sheepishly slippery instead of being majestically regal, a baffled President gives a bewildering impression: could be a ploy to quell opposition than to swap positions. A good case badly presented.”
Or, “Is there apprehension, an irked Supreme Court may fix him with the blessings of the Election Commissioner on the eve of an election – 17th Amendment worked anti-clockwise? That’s a tricky doosra.” or again “Overpowering Presidency is stricken by parliamentary antics. Who is the conductor twirling the baton in this orchestrated political symphony engaged in a command performance?”
But Gomin says, “ If sovereignty is with the People after the parliamentary debate on impeachment, President should refer it to the People to decide the issue at a Referendum. A process to expensive, eh! Otherwise who did what where and why…it goes on endlessly. Finality is needed to end this fiasco.”
Does the Article 107 speak about a referendum Mr. Leading Lawyer ? The articles calls for an inquiry by the PSC and then a debate on the report of the PSC in the Parliament, the result of which would be submitted to the President. He-the President, may go along with the decision of the Parliament or take his own independent decision, for which a report by an Independent Panel may help him as the issue had caused such a brouhaha amoung the Hultsdorf Black Coats and the foreign interfering elements who knows nothing about the “issue in question” but vociferous hearing about it from a third or fourth party.
It is only in Article 120 read along with Article 83 the Constitution mentions a referendum. Not in Artcle 107.
“ Furrowed eyebrows will be raised- if judges are seen in huddle frequently with lawyers. A suspicion of bias arises when such black coats appear in court before them or enlist their causes for adjudication? Judges must never be excessively obliged to lawyers since it unconsciously disturbs the appearance of judicial equilibrium in court. Need of a lawyer for service is irrelevant, if judicial paws are kept clean with detergent. Judges are entitled to be aggrieved parties if injustice is caused.” Says Gomin Dayasiri.
That is the very reason why it is incorrect for the CJ under impeachment investigation, to carry on as if nothing had happened, she should have temporarily suspended her legal activities as the CJ until the Impeaching proceeding have come to a final end. That may have perhaps allowed the President to take a decision more favourable to her.
Then from what Gomin Dayasiri says below one wanders whether he strutters with his complex satire seeking vengeance for having been overlooked by the President for “political largeness” crowning him as the Chief Justice.
“Those vaulting over the bar through political largeness without being filtered through the judicial process sometimes lack judicial wisdom gained through wide experience. Naturally, they are not toilet-trained from a tender age.”
Then refering to the impeachment proceedings of Neville Samarakone, Gomin Dayasiri says “ outstanding lawyer with immense experience vaulted to the prime position of Chief Justice on a political appointment in later life, advised by smart slick legal minds, fought his impeachment battle on his private turf with his lawyers in resplendent quiet dignity. He kept a distance away from his former brotherhood- the legal fraternity – that offered wholesome support. None faulted him, as he did not choose to play to a gallery. Presumptions were unanimously in his favor because he acquired by conduct- the repute of a respected judge. There was no divided Bar.”
That is a wise piece of advise only if the CJ - Shirani Bandaranayake, could follow that pattern.
Gomin Dayasiri says, “ Though devilishly possessed of sovereignty not even a request can be made for a referendum. No calls are taken on sovereignty on any count. Yet, sovereignty is said to be exclusively with the people: On paper, yes. Cannot be taken away from the people being ‘inalienable’. The pocket is bare with nothing to steal? A tasteless constitutional mouthwash gargled down the throats of an unsuspecting nation.”
The Parliament represent the people doesn’t it ? It is composed of the elected representatives of the people, and they play their role on behalf of the people. The majority mass of the people are satisfied with the democratic procedures with which they have been ruled for many decades now. It is only the “educated dignitaries” that do not respect those democratic procedures.”
Any Government, as much as a Society or an Institution needs rules and regulations for it to function. So does a Government or a Domocracy. The Constitution of Sri Lanka is our Constitution. It is the Constitution of the people with what ever its faults has been accepted as “the manual” in the conduct of the affairs of the Legislature, the Executive and the Judiciary. In the procedure for the Impeachment Motion against the CJ the Constitution has been meticulously followed.
No one can interpret the Constitution as one wants, nor can it be amended, make addition or removals by any one except the Parliament with the required majority. The Judiciary cannot assume that which is not explicitly excluded in the Constitution could be interpreted as included. As the Appellate Court of Sri Lanka had stated that it has the right to subject to scrutiny the decision of the PSC, as “ neither the Article 107 of the Constitution nor the Standing Orders excluded judicial scrutiny of the decision of a PSC.”
Therefore, why raise objections for the appointment of a PSC to inquire into the Charges in the Impeachment Motion, and the presentation of its report to the Parliament. It is for the CJ and the Hulftdorf Black Coats and the Leading lawyers to await patiently the debate in the Parliament and the final decision by the President.
Finally Gomin Dayasiri Says, “ Come clean – sovereignty means sweet nothing- shows a zero decimal. People have no power including the power to prevent dignitaries from losing their dignity…a myth that has became a misnomer”
It is for the “ dignitaries “ to make sovereignty mean “sweet something”. If it is these dignitaries that raise their voices to be heard “beyond seas” to make sweet nothing of “ sovereignty”, then it would be those from beyond seas who will intervene to make nothing of the existing sovereignty, which the blind “dignitaries” do not see .
It is not others that devalue dignitaries, but it is themselves that devalue their dignities.