Posted on January 27th, 2015

By Chandrasiri Atukorale

We are sick of hearing corruption allegations now being made against the former President Mahinda Rajapaksha. There, we see nothing but mere mud-slinging. Corruption and vices sprang in this country with the open economy we got under J.R. Jayawardena regime. When Mr. J.R. Jayawardena made the present constitution his desire was this: the Auditor General must be committed not to the constitution but to the Government of the day. We must not take things in politics at it’s’ face value.  Every issue in politics should be studied in conjunction with some other issues in politics. Things in politics are not easily understandable by the typical village farmer for he is not politically enlightened. There is nothing novel about trying to lay the blame at somebody else’s door and excite the base instincts of the ignorant people. It is against this background that analysis of Rajapaksha Government needs to be made.

See Article 154 (1) (2) (3) of the present Constitutions. This Article empowers the Ministers to appoint its’ own auditors to audit the accounts of their respective Ministries in consultation with the Finance Minister. Further Article 154 (3) says  ‘ the Auditor General shall also perform and discharge such duties and functions as may be prescribed by Parliament by law.

Whereas under the Soulberry Constitution Auditor General was a person independent of Parliamentary politics. See Article 71(2) of the soulberry constitution:  it says that the Auditor General shall report annually to the House of Repersentatives of the exercise of his functions under this Order. As the things stand at present, Business tycoons,           Parliamentarians and even cabinet Ministers often become involved in scandalous affaires linked with underground business. Why are we selective about persons, when it comes to the question of making corruption allegations? There were serious corruption allegations against all Rajapaksha predecessors who ruled this country in the past. Why then we blame Rajapaksha alone?

We must not waste too much time in exposing and demolishing false authorities and stereotypes of thinking. Here what we need is a logical analysis of fax.

The article said above has been framed in such way that it serves the narrow interest of corrupt politicians. In other word it is a door opened to corruptions. With the presence of such a provision as this in the constitution the public would become despondent with politics. Those UNP politicians who are very vociferous about wiping out corruptions have forgotten how corruptions were promoted by the previous  UNP regimes in the past.

Hence the most appropriate advice we can give them is that they should read

Ven. Ranasgalla Theros Lokopakaraya”

One who advises others to be virtuous

Should first conduct

Himself accordingly, Advices given by those with

Misconduct are just like

Bana”  (Doctrine of Lord Buddah)

preached by Veddah ( who kills for their living)


  1. ranjit Says:

    We condemned corruption in all forms and as voters of this country we expect our representatives in the Parliament to serve the people of their constituency with respect, dignity and honesty. Our country has a great history and we lived with every person who was born to this country in harmony and in peace. We had problems between races and religions but all were settled thru discussion in our democratic form of Governance.

    We enjoyed peace after 2009 after a long battle with terrorism. Now we cannot go back to that stage again if we do, that’s the end of the progress for a prosperous country. I hope these people who Govern now do not do any stupid thing by giving more powers to Tamils or Muslims behind our backs because of the pressure tactics by the International community and the Diaspora. They came to power by a coup orchestrated by those countries who were not happy with the Baiya Govt under his excellency Mahinda Rajapksa. They wanted to have a Tie Coat Gentleman as the head where they can easily play with. MY3 will be a puppet in a few days time. I hope the people of Sri Lanka specially the Majority Sinhalese will use their brains and use their valuable vote to oust these traitors and bring good people to Govern our Mother Lanka in the next General election.

  2. Nanda Says:

    Maa-Hinda destroyed the post called “Auditor General”. Chandrika was not so bad.. He forced them to give reports to save him.
    One of my best friends was a previous AG. I haven’t seen such a hardworking man in the whole world. Almost 24/7. He was forced to retire as he did not obey the big bugger. Those days I was a 100% supporter of Maa-Hindaa. I didn’t understand why he did that to him. 1-2 years later I understood.

  3. Marco Says:

    Finally action taken by the Govt to appoint independent forensic experts to examine monetary transactions that appear to be “out of the ordinary”.

    Following on from my comments at Lankaweb regarding the appointment of independent forensic experts, I wrote to an acquaintance who is a “doer” in the current Govt.
    Within days I had a response stating that independent experts have been appointed to examine certain transactions and projects to ascertain the viability of the same and legality of funds flow and obtain third party confirmations.

    International accountants like E & Y and PwC have so far been appointed.
    BoC internal audit are examining the accounts opened in Seychelles. It should not be the Internal Auditors it should be external independent firms as IA will cover up any KYC regulation breaches which falls within their responsibilities.

  4. Ananda-USA Says:

    Will the NEW Chief Justice #45 RUBBER STAMP ANY & ALL Constitutional Amendments to PERMANENTLY EMPOWER the SEPARATISTS?

    YOU be the JUDGE!

    The FOX has been HANDED the KEYS to the HENHOUSE!

    Aiyoooo Sirisenaaaa ….. What are you DOING to our Motherland??

    Sri Lanka’s impeached Chief Justice returns to Supreme Court to resume duties

    ColomboPage News Desk, Sri Lanka.

    Jan 28, Colombo: Sri Lanka’s former Chief Justice Dr. Shirani Bandaranayake returned to the Supreme Court complex today two years after she was unjustly impeached by the previous government.

    The 43rd Chief Justice arrived at the court complex in Hultsdorf this morning amid a grand welcome from the President of Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) Upul Jayasuriya.

    Dr. Bandaranayke who was unceremoniously removed from the Supreme Court in 2013 says she was still the “legal” Chief Justice of the country.

    The President and the Cabinet have reportedly acknowledged that her removal was “illegal” and “flawed.”

    Sri Lankan President Maithripala Sirisena and the Prime Minister meanwhile have informed the 44th Chief Justice Mohan Peiris as the top judge to the apex court by the previous government was illegal and asked him to resign gracefully to pave the way for an independent judiciary, Convener of the Lawyers’ Collective attorney-at-law J.C. Weliamuna said.

    The Bar Association of Sri Lanka maintains that Dr. Bandaranayake does not need to take oaths before President Maithripala Sirisena as she was removed from office through a flawed impeachment process.

    It has been reported that Peiris has agreed to step down. However, he has still not handed over his resignation from the post of Chief Justice as yet.

    Highly placed legal sources said that Dr. Bandaranayke will sit in courts tomorrow and resign paving the way for the appointment of a new Chief Justice. Senior Supreme Court Justice K. Sripavan is expected to be appointed as the next Chief Justice.

  5. douglas Says:

    I agree that the “BANE” for everyone who assumed power in this office of “Executive Presidency” was the “UNCLEAR” and “UNLIMITED” power that devolve on it’s functions. The last Presidency held by Ex President MR very clearly and explicitly demonstrated how its powers and privileges could be used and manipulated to the detriment of, not only the country and also to himself. We suffered with that “epidemic” situation from 2010 to 2015. So enough is enough.

    Now, with that hands on “experience”, we have to go for a “CHANGE” in that system and PLUG the “Leaking Holes” thus preventing any further “USE” and “ABUSE” of the powers of this position, by anyone who is aspiring to be the President of the country. In that process as a “First Step” this “draconian” 18th Amendment has to go. A new “Amendment” to the Constitution with legislation has to be written to establish and strengthen the “INDEPENDENT” “Institutions” such as the Judicial; Police; Election; Public; Bribery and Corruption; Audit; Public Services and Human Rights Commissions. No one, from the President downwards, hereafter, must be “ALLOWED” to act with “disrespect” and “immunity” of the Laws of the country. He/She who assumes the Presidency will be made “Accountable”and “Transparent” on all actions taken to the Public and the public must have the RIGHT to choose in how to deal with such lapses through a legal process. After that all this “circus” of mentioning “His Excellency” at every breathing has to STOP and uphold the SUPREMACY of the Public. Our subjugation will be only to the Law of the land and not to “INDIVIDUALS”.

    If, the above “ASSIGNMENT” given to the new Government is carried out, before the next election coming after April 23, 2015, our dreams are more than fulfilled. Let us also allow those “Ex Excellencies” to mend their ways and follow the path laid down and work for the common good of the country and the nation.

  6. Lorenzo Says:

    “Senior Supreme Court Justice K. Sripavan is expected to be appointed as the next Chief Justice.”

    THIRD in a series of TOP legal officers of a particular tendency.

    1. Siva Pasupathy
    2. C Vigneswaran
    3. K Sripavan

    So that was why he was ready OUTSIDE OFFICE HOURS to swear in My3 so quickly!!

    Favouritism at its DIRTIEST! Yuk!

  7. Marco Says:

    Informative article courtesy of FT- Chief Justice saga.

    The tale of two CJs

    The high domed, iconic red roofs of the Superior Court Complex shimmering in the scorching sun. A gathering of black coats outside the gates at noon. Activists and demonstrators, their protest ended, chatting in small groups. Journalists, cameras poised, standing by the gates endlessly waiting for the footage of the day.

    Dressed in a simple grey Kandyan sari, Shirani Bandaranayake returned to Hulftsdorp Hill to resume duties as the lawful Chief Justice of Sri Lanka last afternoon. Received with a bouquet of flowers, Bandaranayake was escorted into the premises by Attorney at Law and TNA Parliamentarian M.A. Sumanthiran and Bar Association President Upul Jayasuriya.

    Present on the scene were several other key activist lawyers including Dr. Jayampathy Wickremaratne PC and attorney at law J.C. Weliamuna.

    For the legal fraternity, it has been a two year struggle to reinstate her. Her reinstatement, even symbolically, is seen to be the culmination of a battle waged with all the power they could muster against her illegal sacking in 2013. The Rajapaksa state overrode every constitutional roadblock, every moral and ethical argument against the impeachment of Bandaranayake two years ago.

    Creating history, the previous regime moved STF troops into the Supreme Court premises overnight and barricaded the gates to prevent Shirani Bandaranayake, who had declared herself to be the lawful Chief Justice of Sri Lanka, from returning to her office inside the Superior Court Complex on 15 January 2013. Instead, under armed guard, Mohan Peiris – the regime’s special choice for Chief Justice – was driven into the premises and ensconced in the chair.

    For the legal community, the lights went out in the Upper Judiciary on 15 January 2013. That grave injustice was undone yesterday, with Bandaranayake’s reinstatement. Few lawyers would publicly attest to her being the most upstanding of judicial officers. But legally, the contention was and is that Shirani Bandaranayake was not removed in accordance with the laws of the land and in blatant disregard of the rulings of the country’s two highest courts.

    Her restoration to office, to be accorded a dignified exit with her benefits and service record intact, has remained a priority for sections of the legal fraternity who worked tirelessly on the Sirisena presidential campaign.

    Earlier in the day, President Maithripala Sirisena had issued two letters. One letter was dispatched to de facto Chief Justice Mohan Peiris. The other was issued to de jure Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake.

    In the letter to Peiris, President Sirisena said that his purported appointment had no legal validity and was therefore void. The letter said, there was no vacancy created for the position of Chief Justice because Shirani Bandaranayake was not removed in accordance with the terms of the constitutional provisions by an address of Parliament. Peiris was therefore asked to take note that he was not the lawful Chief Justice of Sri Lanka.

    The second letter to Bandaranayake was a copy of the first. It also included a covering letter, signed by President Sirisena, informing the ousted Chief Justice that Peiris had been informed that his appointment was void. The letter asked her to kindly resume duties as lawful Chief Justice of Sri Lanka. Copies of the letters were also issued to the Supreme Court Registrar.

    Looking back

    The entire premise is technical, legalistic and difficult to comprehend. But it begins with the debate in Parliament on 11 January 2013, at which the UPFA was hoping to impeach Chief Justice Bandaranayake after the Select Committee probing her ‘misconduct’ had arrived at its conclusions and found her guilty on three counts three days previously. To understand the circumstances surrounding Peiris’ ouster and Bandaranayake’s reinstatement yesterday, it becomes essential to look back.

    Based on what was witnessed in Parliament on that fateful day, this column reported the following on 17 January 2013, in an article entitled ‘The End Game’:

    “The eagerness with which the resolution was being drafted, however, was not reflected in the manner in which the Government went about its legislative business on that crucial day, with the UPFA having failed to include the vote on the resolution of impeachment in the Order Paper or Parliament agenda for the day, including in its stead the motion of impeachment against Bandaranayake that was tabled in Parliament and included in the order paper on 6 November.

    “Waiting for the last possible moment to strike, the combined Opposition – sans the JVP-led DNA, which boycotted the entire debate saying it was an unconstitutional farce – charged at 6:30 p.m. that a vote could not be taken because the resolution and vote was not part of the agenda for the day.

    “TNA MP M.A. Sumanthiran told the Speaker that if Parliament was debating on the motion of impeachment, the next thing on the agenda would be for the Speaker to once again appoint a select committee to probe the charges contained in the motion. The furore resulted in an exasperated Speaker suspending the session for 10 minutes at 7 p.m. in order to study precedents and give a ruling on the issue.

    “Irritated at the last minute hiccup, Speaker Rajapaksa asked senior UNP Parliamentarian and former Speaker Joseph Michael Perera why the Opposition had decided to bring this issue up at this late stage. Perera shot back that it was up to the Opposition to raise matters whenever they wished.

    “The suspension lasted longer than the prescribed 10 minutes, but the Speaker returned to the Chair at 7:30 p.m. with the inevitable ruling that the motion was sufficient notice on the agenda for the vote to be taken. Opposition legislators railed against the ruling later saying that the motion of impeachment contained 14 charges against Bandaranayake, whereas the Select Committee found her guilty only of three and a proper resolution of impeachment put up for voting would have contained all that information including the findings of the PSC.

    “But the UPFA majority Parliament had its way and the vote was taken, irrevocably relegating Shirani Bandaranayake to defeat, despite her consistent victories before the law, which found the process to be profoundly flawed and constitutionally unsound.” (Ends)

    Two years later, lawyers contend that the former President did not have the power to remove the Chief Justice, because in accordance with Article 107 of the Constitution, President Rajapaksa did not receive an address by Parliament – a prerequisite to the constitutional removal of a sitting Supreme Court judge.

    What transpired yesterday was fundamentally an Executive error by President Mahinda Rajapaksa, undone and rectified by his successor, Maithripala Sirisena, on a procedural point.
    Parliament voted on 11 January 2013, on a motion of impeachment, which sought to set up a Parliamentary Select Committee to investigate 14 charges that had been brought against her. The trouble was, that motion had already been voted upon on 6 November 2012, and several sittings by the PSC headed by Anura Priyadarshana Yapa had already been held. Chief Justice Bandaranayake had hired lawyers and appeared before the Committee herself before refusing to attend any more sittings after ruling party MPs on the committee verbally abused and insulted her.

    It was this same motion that had been included on the Order Paper two months later, when the UPFA-controlled Parliament was preparing to vote on her impeachment.

    The error was pointed out. But Speaker Chamal Rajapaksa ruled at 7:30 p.m. on 11 January that the motion of impeachment ‘would suffice,’ in blatant disregard of Parliamentary procedure. But there was a tragic flaw in the process as yesterday’s developments have now made clear. The Constitution also requires that after an accused judge is found guilty, Parliament must present an address to the President, requesting him to remove the senior judge.

    Had the Rajapaksa regime remained in power, the correction of this anomaly would never have been possible. But State power has changed hands. And the Sirisena administration moved to fulfil a campaign promise by reinstating her, exploiting a legal loophole in the way she was sacked from office.

    Had Parliament voted on the correct resolution of impeachment, issuing an address of Parliament to President Rajapaksa requesting him to remove the Chief Justice from office, Bandaranayake’s removal would have been in accordance with Article 107 (2) of the Constitution. The resolution sent to him by Parliament, on the contrary – the motion of impeachment calling for the setting up of a second PSC – did not empower President Rajapaksa to remove Bandaranayake according to the terms of the Constitution.
    In essence, President Mahinda Rajapaksa acted without legal authority to remove Bandaranayake, eroding the sacking of its legal validity, explains Attorney-at-Law M.A. Sumanthiran.

    Essentially, President Rajapaksa had removed Shirani Bandaranayake without a request by Parliament – as constitutionally mandated.

    President Sirisena’s reinstatement of Shirani Bandaranayake therefore was quite simple.

    No vacancy

    Since President Rajapaksa did not remove her in accordance with Constitutional provisions made in that regard, he had no power to appoint a successor, since no vacancy had ever been created. President Sirisena, in his letter to Peiris informed him that his appointment had been unlawful, since the removal of Bandaranayake had no force in law.

    Ultimately, it was the Rajapaksa regime’s tearing hurry to sack her and conclude their vengeance plan against the judge that had dared to cross them, that ensured Mohan Peiris could be ousted on a technicality two years later.

    With this procedural option available to the Government, it is unclear why it has engaged in a series of negotiations with Peiris over the past two weeks. Bar Association President Attorney-at-Law Upul Jayasuriya claims that despite Peiris’ appointment being illegal, for two years he served as ‘de facto’ Chief Justice. Under the circumstances, there had been hope that Peiris could be offered a dignified exit, Jayasuriya said.

    At the very beginning of the discussions, Peiris told the Government representatives that he would be retiring in August 2016, when he turned 65 years. But when the Government insisted that he step down immediately, Peiris backed down somewhat, and said he would retire in August this year. Subsequently, Justice Minister Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe claimed that the Chief Justice had even been offered a diplomatic posting to Rome to step down from office.
    Peiris had initially been accepting of the terms. But suddenly, presumably because Cabinet Spokesman Rajitha Senaratne made a premature revelation or some sections of the defeated administration were applying some pressure on the Chief Justice to remain in office, Peiris stood his ground. He appointed a dubious spokesman to issue statements on his behalf, insisting that he had not resigned from office.

    There were concerns in some sections of the Government that Peiris was also being asked to remain where he was for a specific reasons. Speculation is rife that an election petition could be filed, which requires to be heard by five judges of the Supreme Court, including the Chief Justice. As corruption scandals engulf sections of the previous regime, concerns were also running high that a Peiris-led Supreme Court could scuttle judicial processes to hold ex-regime officials accountable.

    It was on this basis, and the unceasing agitation of the legal community led by the Bar Association of Sri Lanka, that the new administration moved to cut off the head of the snake.
    Shirani Bandaranayake will sit in the Chief Justice’s chair only for 24 hours. Today, she will retire from office and a ceremonial sitting will be held at the Supreme Court for the legal fraternity to give her a traditional farewell. In a letter informing the Government of her retirement, Bandaranayake notes that under the circumstances, she cannot function in the office.

    With effect from 29 January, therefore, Sri Lanka’s 43rd Chief Justice, the first woman to hold the position, will retire from office.

    Sri Lanka’s most senior Supreme Court Justice K. Sripavan is tipped to be appointed Chief Justice once Bandaranayake officially retires.

    The ethical conundrums related to the Mohan Peiris ouster persist. Confusion reigns about the legal basis of his removal. The move was neither undemocratic nor legally flawed, yet there remains something ugly and unwholesome about it. The Government wanted to create a shock to the system, but it would perhaps have better served its own purposes by explaining the provisions and rationale to the public in depth beforehand.

    Political strategists would argue that it had to be done, to ensure the legitimacy of the new regime would not be called into question by a puppet judge still heeding the orders of his old masters. The new regime has an election to face in three months’ time and Constitutional reforms to put in place before then. A Supreme Court holding a brief for the former political rulers could also be potentially devastating to the reforms process.

    This ouster was certainly the most expedient route. But it was not the new administration’s finest hour. The controversial Peiris had offered up on a platter several unshakable grounds on which he could have been constitutionally impeached. Impeachment, however messy, however lengthy and however tedious, may have been the more democratic, ethically-sound option.

    Still, there was no STF or armed guard in the Supreme Court yesterday. Peiris was not listed to appear in cases before the Court, therefore he was not in the premises when the ‘transition’ took place. Firecrackers and fireworks displays are not lighting up Colombo’s skies to celebrate his departure. There are no mobs being transported to the gates of his official residence, to cook milk-rice and scream slurs. Police have not been mobilised to prevent Peiris from addressing the media, even though he has failed to do so yet.

    None of these courtesies were granted to Shirani Bandaranayake two years ago. While mobs of people, joined by several ministers of the previous regime celebrated the vote in Parliament on 11 January 2013 on Wijerama Mawatha, Bandaranayake and her family were holed up indoors, afraid to step outside. Stripped of her pension and benefits, life has not been easy for the controversially-ousted Chief Justice these past two years.

    There is therefore, no cause to weep for Peiris, whose appointment has been shadowed in controversy and scandal since his first day in office. In fact, the newly-restored Supreme Court, under Justice Sripavan, must strive to remedy the terrible injustices perpetrated during his tenure in office. It is PTA prisoner Ganesan Nimalaruban, the Slave Island evictees and the victims of the Welikada Prison riot for whom these tears must be saved. These were the true victims of the Mohan Peiris years.

    The battle to protect Shirani Bandaranayake from impeachment and subsequently, the legal wars waged against the manner of her removal, will go down in the annals of Sri Lankan political history, as a pivotal moment. The regime was gravely wounded by her sacking in 2013. It created a domestic and international outcry. Morally, her removal was indefensible.

    State media, in an editorial published the day after Parliament voted on the flawed motion, expressed the following sentiment: “There is no doubt therefore that the current impeachment is something that is soon to be relegated to the limbo of essentially forgotten things, despite the fondest wishes of the haters and the saboteurs.”

    The contribution of the legal fraternity to the ultimate defeat of the Rajapaksa administration earlier this month was irrefutable proof that the impeachment of Bandaranayake was an unforgotten injustice.
    Yesterday, when Bandaranayake stepped out of the same red jeep that had driven her away from her official residence two years ago, the mood was not jubilant. It was sober. It was composed.

    There was no raucous merry-making or gloating. As far as the legal fraternity was concerned, Shirani Bandaranayake had remained the lawful chief justice of Sri Lanka. After a long war for restitution, they were merely walking her back to her office.

    I repeat again

    The ethical conundrums related to the Mohan Peiris ouster persist. Confusion reigns about the legal basis of his removal. The move was neither undemocratic nor legally flawed, yet there remains something ugly and unwholesome about it. The Government wanted to create a shock to the system, but it would perhaps have better served its own purposes by explaining the provisions and rationale to the public in depth beforehand.

  8. Nanda Says:

    Before that there was another one (Chandrika took advice from him, my friend’s seeya, good man as far as I know).

    Looks like , similar to MR-MS meeting MRO-MSQ meeting took place and MRO won. MSQ surrendered. No more buzzing in the eras of MRO.

    We are not so fortunate , still need coils. But I have plenty of coils to keep this useless annoyer out.

  9. douglas Says:

    If CJ 44 was an “illegal” appointment, what would be the fate of “decisions” given by him in the Supreme Courts? This Government is obliged to give us an explanation. We are waiting.

  10. Dilrook Says:

    The manner in which Mohan Pieris the Chief Justice was removed is most disgusting. He was threatened physically, then threatened with corruption charges and even the president demanded him to resign. When none worked, the government played a game of checkers. There is no legal issue invalidating his appointment. That is total hogwash. The government wants a Yes man Chief Justice so that it can bypass the parliament and enact laws detrimental to the country without the people knowing them (Article 122(1)).

    All these smoke and mirror tactics just to fulfil the Singapore Principles of 2013 of division and secularisation of Sri Lanka into the Balkan of the East.

    I stood up against the impeachment of Bandaranayaka which had no basis. Her judgement which triggered the impeachment was perfect. Instead of removing 13A, the then government took it on her which is wrong.

    However, the Sirisena government is far worse. Now Sri Lanka is under a complete despotic dictatorship.

    I will write an article on this extremely important matter of which most are not aware. It is not about the Chief Justice. That is just the tip of the iceberg.

  11. Nanda Says:

    “I stood up against the impeachment of Bandaranayaka which had no basis. Her judgement which triggered the impeachment was perfect. Instead of removing 13A, the then government took it on her which is wrong.”

    – Very true. I opposed too, because at that time 13A opposition was building up and it was a distraction.

    Tend to agree with Dilrook that “Now Sri Lanka is under a complete despotic dictatorship”, Sirisena is using Rajapkasa created powers even more than him, not so much for his own benefits.

    Main reason is creation of a government completely against the people’s democratical wish in 2010. I don’t know how he managed to create this 100 day government. Only reason I can think is MR’s SLFPiers are corrupt to the bone. Otherwise there is no reason for My3 to get SLFP Presidency, as he was not a member of SLFP that time.

    However, a 100Day good Dictatorship to clean up the country is good. Not sure whether he would manage well though by controlling UNPers.

  12. Marco Says:

    I would not call the manner in which Mohan Pieris was removed disgusting, far from it, controversial and leaves alot of unanswered questions. The treatment of Shirani B by MR Govt was disgusting and not many would disagree.

    The removal of MP via this technical method is far better than an impeachment motion against him. How can you impeach a Chief Justice when his appointment to the Office is found to be invalid in the first place.- cart before the horse.

    I await the article by Dilrook. Perhaps he can address his point “There is no legal issue invalidating his appointment” without dismissing it as mere hogwash. The Govt followed the Constitutional provisions set out in relation to the impeachment of the CJ. Assume he would argue otherwise quoting chapter and verse without throwing in red herrings which are not relevant to the Office of the Chief Justice or legal procedural aspects.

    Masters of Conspiracy Theories come up with amazing imaginations.

    The Govt is going about the business of restoring the Independence of key functions.
    The final part being curtailing the (excessive) powers of the Executive President, until that is done we cannot say if the key functions are truly Independent.

  13. Marco Says:

    Following on from my comment above- 28 Jan

    As reported in the Asian Mirror

    Finance Ministry Affirms Probe Into “Seychelles” Operations

    An official audit and investigation process will be initiated to inquire into the non-strategic investments at Seychelles, Finance Minister Ravi Karunanayake said.

    “Seychelles is a country reputed worldwide as a tax haven has a handful of Sri Lankans living there as expatriates. Another issue of concern is to rationalize the reason for an international Branch of a state Bank to be established at Seychelles. Our government will ensure a critical analysis and an in depth evaluation pertaining to the viability of such an operation,” Karunanayake said in his statement to Parliament on Thursday.

    Planning and Economic Affairs Deputy Minister Dr. Harsha de Silva earlier told Asian Mirror that there were various ways through which the government could conduct investigations.

    “We can seek the assistance of private auditors and proceed with the matter. At the same time, we can conduct inquires with the help of the Stolen Assets Recovery Programme of the World Bank. The government can assure the public that no one will be able to hide the ‘stolen assets’ in Seychelles and dodge local law enforcement mechanism,” the Deputy Minister said.

    Former President Mahinda Rajapaksa, nearly seven months before his exit from office, opened a Sri Lankan High Commission in Seychelles while setting up a branch of the Bank of Ceylon in the island.

    Despite its population which does not exceed 90,000, Mihin Lanka, an airline started under directives from former President Rajapaksa, started a direct flight to the island last year.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.



Copyright © 2023 All Rights Reserved. Powered by Wordpress