Do our Judges follow the great wisdom of Kakille Rajjuruvo or Maha Danamutta to solve political problem ?

 A Gamarala  and his family were locked up in their home surrounded by Alibaba and 40 thieves coming from the  cavern under temple trees and making impossible demands.  The Gamarala  sent a message to  Maha Danamutta asking for  a solution and  liberate him and his family. Maha Danamutta and his goloyo said they want time to receive visitors and count what they receive before they  find a solution to liberate the Gamarala and his family. In the mean time  Alibaba and his 40 thieves were making Gamaralas life miserable.

Maha Danamutta  took his own time looked into the books as even the judges  always read most of the old judicial decision of  Kakille Rajjuruvo and more those of Maha Danamutta. Maha Danamutta  considered the case of the Goat’s head stuck in a pot and how wise was his solution. But that entails cutting the heads of Gamarala and all his family.

Then  Maha Danamutta thought that he would  go on his elephant to meet the Gamarala and discuss the matter, but then he may have to get Gamarala to break the wall in front to allow him and his elephant to go inside, but thought otherwise as he  thought that it may cause damage to him and his Goloys, and thought of other solutions. 

Maha Danamutta  discussed long with his Goloyo Polbamoona, Kotukithaiah, Indikatu Pancha, Rabboda Aiya and Puvak Badilla they had all their ideas which Maha Danamutta took into consideration. Polbamoona spoke up suggesting  a long lockup of Gamarala and his family  for  four and half years, which by then would tire Alibaba and 40 thieves and stop bothering  Gamarala and his family any more. Maha Danamutta was pleased and clapped his hand in approval of his practical suggestion, and said so be it.

Like wise the SC  after long and deep  consideration came to the conclusion that the dissolution of Parliament by the President by  Gazette Notification was un-Constitutional and that the President could dissolve the parliament if he wants only after four and half years . That was a dumb solution as in any case the Parliament ceases its term of office  in four and a half years.

What a great judicial ruling which  even Mahadanamutta would have been put to shame ?

In Europe there are long Tunnels one such long tunnel is the Tunnel of Frejus which connects France and Italy. It is 12895 meters long. These tunnels have  at regular intervals on either side small doors marked Sortie or Exit. If there is a train catching fire in the middle of the tunnel (as it once happened) the tunnel will be gutted with fire and smoke  and these small exit doors  are used to evacuate the passengers from the trains out of danger from fire and smoke..

Like wise in the 1978 Constitution of Sri Lanka despite its short comings or if any ambitious fool were to introduce an Amendment such as 19A, and find the country in a political impasse, the Constitution has provided means to overcome the difficulty( like the Exit Doors inside tunnels).

Hence when Article 70 of the Constitution prohibits the President from dissolution of the Parliament for any reason before four and a half years even if the President is confronted with a serious  political impasse, the 1978  Constitution fortunately provides Article 33 which permits the President to dissolve the Parliament before the period specified under Article 70.

This provision had been overlooked by our great judicial minds of the SC in their verdict pronounced  with “pomp and glory” on the 13 December,2018 coming  close to Maha Danamutta’s solution.

The Judges are not there merely to interpret the Constitution, but also examine the reasons behind  legal issue in question  such as why the President used one Article of the Constitution,  without referring to the other which restricts his actions.  There is some thing called cause  and effect which the Judges should examine. The Judges are not mere technical robots, but human beings with a mind to be used when necessary to understand the whole of a political problem which is in  question and  now under their judicial examination.

In applying their commonsense, apart from legal arguments,  they should have examined the cause that led the President to resort to article 33 to dissolve the parliament by Gazette Notification despite the prohibition at article 70, which he would have certainly read and understood,  if not him personally  at least by those who advised him on the issue. 

That was the cause , now  the reason was, after working with Ranil Wickramasinghe as Prime Minister   on whom he had placed all his confidence , he realised that the Prime Minister Ranil Wickramasinghe is not the man he had accepted him to be. When the UPFA Ministers left the Yahapalanaya Government  the Cabinet was automatically dissolved under the relevant Article 42 of  Constitution. Then the President had to appoint another Prime Minister and he did so under Article 46.

That was the back ground which the five Judges of the SC had not examined. That is a serious lapse on their part.

There is another case being examined by the Supreme Courts with regard to the appointment of the new   Prime Minister and a cabinet of Ministers . There too the Judges should not  rest after interpreting the relevant Articles of the Constitution, because the law is not for the President and the Parliamentarians, but  the law is primarily for the people.

Therefore the Judges should also examine the cause that led to the appointment of a new Prime Minister and his Cabinet. And also observe what had been  the need of the hour.

Was it to leave the people stranded without a government functioning and their daily needs unfulfilled and country being pushed into anarchic with a disposed Prime Minister Ranil Wickramasinghe  not seeing reason acting  undemocratically and without moral decency ?