{"id":110997,"date":"2021-01-25T18:11:37","date_gmt":"2021-01-26T01:11:37","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/?p=110997"},"modified":"2021-01-25T18:11:37","modified_gmt":"2021-01-26T01:11:37","slug":"did-abraham-sumanthiran-lure-alponso-ranjan-to-his-orumitthanadu-den-part-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/2021\/01\/25\/did-abraham-sumanthiran-lure-alponso-ranjan-to-his-orumitthanadu-den-part-2\/","title":{"rendered":"Did Abraham Sumanthiran lure Alponso Ranjan to his Orumitthanadu den? \u2013 part 2."},"content":{"rendered":"

C.Wijeyawickrema, LL.B., Ph.D.<\/em><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n

Sweet dreams are made of this
\nWho am I to disagree
\nI travel the world and the seven seas
\nEverybody’s looking for something.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Some of them want to use you
\nSome of them want to get used by you
\nSome of them want to abuse you
\nSome of them want to be abused\u2026.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sweet dreams are made of this<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Who am I\u2026<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Eurythmics,1983 (written for future\nRanjan\/s?)\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I\nwas sent to jail for 19 years on false charges. If you see the Video tape\nrecording of what happened between me and the magistrate on that unfortunate\nday, you can see how I was framed.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ven.\nGalagodaatte Gnanasara (Bodu Bala Sena), February 2019.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Pillayan\nOut-Ranjan In<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2018Recently\nacquitted Pillayan says while he stayed in Sri Lanka and fought for Eelam, Shanakia\nRasamanickam (SR) went to Australia and came with an English education.\u2019 This\nTNA\u2019s young (born in Sept. 1990) Batticaloa district MP, SR says, Ven.\nGnanasara was sent to jail for only 2 years, for insulting\/threatening Pradeep\nEkanaligoda\u2019s wife, whereas Ranjan (R) was given 4 years for using his freedom\nof speech right! (Manjula Vlog, 1\/22\/21). This is an example of how 3rd<\/sup>\ngeneration federalists are also in the game of distorting facts intentionally,\nunknowingly, or stupidly. Ven. G was not punished for what SR thought. SR also\ntried to connect \u2018Pillayan out with R in\u2019 dirty distortion for political gain. But\nDSB Jeyaraj says the two incidents are totally different cases, and it is\nunfair to try to link the two outcomes (Daily Mirror, 1\/24). Then comes Lucien\nRajakarunanayake, who pours out his grieving heart to R, the freedom of speech\ncrusaders. Where was this preacher when Ven. G was hunted down as if the monk\nwas a highway robber? (Island, 1\/23). \nFor such Ranjanites, the Sunday Divaina editorial on 1\/17, Ranjan, Saradiyel<\/em>, Robinhood and Savdam gema,<\/em>\u201d was the best medicine one could offer. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. The\ndifference between those who see R as a yahapalana-created saint cum culprit,\nand the Divaina editorial or DBSJ\u2019s, is that the former group is blinded by an Orumitthanadu\ndust. There ought to be a clear and simple separation between reasonable\nnatural mind and an irrational politically biased game. Between part 1 of this\nessay and the writing of this second part, what I saw and heard were evidence\nconfirming my hypothesis: \u2018that R\u2019s Bitter Truth project was nothing but, a plot\nfloated by the yahapalana international, now fallen into the laps of SJB and\nHarin Fernando, a Ranjan clone in the making.\u2019 Chapa Bandara, the journalist,\nwith whom R once proposed joint social projects, is now convinced that R is a\npolitical assassin (1\/18). This supports my hypothesis about R. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Those who are genuinely worried about the \u2018welfare\u2019\nof R, should try to tell the truth nothing but the truth. The society in Sri\nLanka is corrupt to the core, and judiciary must be having its share of black\nsheep. But a corrupt society cannot be redeemed by introducing novel corrupt practices.\nThe rule, killing all bed bugs because of a bite by one bug, cannot be applied to\nall judges, lawyers, teachers, or officers. System errors must be handled\nsystematically, not by fumigating them with poison gas.  R\u2019s entire enterprise was a criminal, immoral\ngame based on invading and stimulating the darker sides of human mind. Without\nthinking of this aspect, attempts by black-white lovers of R to pass the buck\nto defects in law and judges, crooked politicians etc. is hypocrisy with secret\nagendas, such as balkanization of Sinhale. How many of such lovers thought\nabout these system defects, when Bodu Bala Sena raised the need to get rid of\nthe Suddage Neethiya<\/em> (white mans\u2019 law), when the Ven. G was cruelly\ntreated, a thousand times worse than what R is now faced with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

DBS Jeyaraj discussed the case of acquittal of\nPillayan, and I challenge any R supporter to write, for example, a brief to the\nsupreme court by way of pointing out the defects in the judgement against him.\nThe damage R did to the Sinhala Buddhists in Sinhale is impossible to measure.\nSimply because a yahapalana lobby is behind R, judges cannot reduce the\nsentence given, to satisfy this lobby. A new law can be passed, but without\nretrospective effect to let R escape. Considering the social gravity of the\ndamage done by R, any sympathy based, politics-oriented, leniency will seriously\nharm supreme court\u2019s reputation. R\u2019s case is not a solitary incident of an\nutterance by an eccentric bachelor.  See\nhow it had happened. PM RanilW had a meeting at TT on 21\/8\/2017 to discuss the topic\nof removing minister of justice, Wijedasa Rajapakshe, for NOT interfering with\nthe judiciary! R came out of that meeting after listening to lot of badmouthing\nagainst some judges who were considered as \u2018headaches\u2019 blocking their secret\nagenda. R was the pit bull assigned or himself volunteered to spit out this\nvenom at the gates of TT, playing the \u2018One Shot\u2019 role before the media. This\nand his continuation of this hammering of the judiciary was part of the plan to\nimport foreign judges to hear tiger-related cases. How could a supreme court\nignore such extra-judicial evidence, causally linked to a meeting at the TT, to\nsatisfy a new version of the old yahapalana ghost? How on earth one could\ninterpret SC decision on R as curtailing his freedom of speech?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Judiciary and the Sinhala Buddhists<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The treatment of Sinhala Buddhist voter as if he\nwas that same proverbial kind-hearted woman, by Sinhala politicians, became an\nopen game of attacking and arresting Buddhist monks during yahapalana time\n(2015-19). Orumitthanadu agent Ranjan and BBS leader Ven. Gnanasara played\nopposite roles during and after that time. Unlike R, Ven. G had the entire establishment\nand politicians of all parties eyeing for his pound of flesh for exposing their\nselfish games. He had to hide away from his temple to escape threats to his life.\nThen finally, one government lawyer and one JVP lawyer, were able to trap him\nusing one magistrate. The nationally loved monk was given 19 years of RI for a\ndiscussion he had with the magistrate of which a video tape is readily available\n(and linked below). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

A lengthy essay I prepared in 2019 about this\nunjust conviction titled, Six lawyers and a monk: importance\nof impotence.\u201d is retrieved from the achieved data base of the Lankaweb web site,\nis copied below especially for the attention of the two golden brains of Abraham\nSumanthiran and Ali Sabri in the Diyawanna boutique. The critique of the\njudgement without discussing the background (context) behind it is of a lesser\nvalue, because the black-white lobby behind R, should be given an opportunity\nto develop their case for an appeal based on law and facts and not on cheap partisan\npolitics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

=====================
\nSix lawyers and\na monk: importance of impotence<\/strong>
\nPosted on January 22nd, 2019<\/p>\n\n\n\n

C.Wijeyawickrema, LL.B., Ph.D.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Introduction<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

[six lawyers = AG\/DSG+2 AC judges\n+Magistrate+ Senior St. Co.+ JVP attorney; monk = Ven. Galabodaatte Gnanasaara]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Inspire public trust and confidence.\u201d<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Nobody disputes the motto of the Supreme\nCourt (SC) and the Court of Appeal (CA) copied above, which is applicable\nuniversally to any court of law in the world. The question, however, is that\njudges entrusted with this noble task are mere mortals, not saints. For\nexample, a recent case handled by these two courts in Sri Lanka did not make\nlot of people (specially Sinhala Buddhist) comfortable. The decision given by\nCA on the contempt of (Homagama magistrate) court case against the BBS leader\nVen. Galabodaatte Gnanasara (GG) is laden with several minor (factual) and two\nmajor (legal) problems. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Subsequently, the petition submitted to\nthe SC seeking its permission to make an appeal was dismissed by it in a very\nunfortunate manner, reminding one the famous rule of natural justice, \u2018not only\nmust justice be done; it must also be seen to be done.\u2019 One of the judges who\ndisallowed the petition was an active opponent of BBS in the recent past when\nhe was an officer of the (publicly anti-BBS), Sri Lanka Bar Association.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In America, there are hundreds of law\nschool law journals, in which one can find essays critically analyzing court\ndecisions. Such scholarly work helps everybody, including the judges. In USA,\ncontinuing education is mandatory for judges.  I do not know if Sri Lanka\nhas law journals or if there are any good faith efforts by legal professionals\nto constructively dissect court decisions. For such service one does not have\nto be a lawyer. If democracy requires voters to be vigilant, an intelligence\ncheck on judges\u2019 decision-making process is a healthy sign of a people-centered\njudicial system, because a judge could make a kabaragoya<\/em> a talagoya<\/em> or vice versa with\nthe magic (subjective?) power of interpretation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Today, we see only one such effort from\nan applied law (efficacy of law) perspective. Public interest lawyer Nagananda\nKodituwakku has challenged former CJs, SC judges, AG\u2019s Dept., and Bar\nAssociation officers for improper and unprofessional behavior. He was not\nafraid of contempt of court threats, but other lawyers are afraid to sit next\nto him at SC proceedings because they fear such \u2018bad association\u2019 could affect\ntheir pocketbooks, sooner or later, when they appear before judges with their\nclients. Ravaya\u2019s Victor Ivan has written a courageous (documentary) book, \u2018the\nsilence of the court,\u2019 which disclosed antics of the legal establishment from\nlower to the highest level. Then there are examples of rash outbursts by\njuvenile politicians, who spoil the cake. There is no question that some of our\ncourts of law are under severe stress, partly due to their own misbehavior.\nOnly one soul named, Victor Tennekoon, former CJ, left his job with his and his\ncourt\u2019s dignity\/integrity intact.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I began to write this essay, long before\nthe political crisis started after, the October 26, 2018 bombing of his\nyahapalana prison by prisoner Maithripala Sirisena himself, which dragged both\nSC and CA into a dirty political arena. What this means is that courts are\ncompelled to weigh political facts (not law) and make subjective judgements on\nwhether the president acted fairly and not arbitrarily. Inherent in this task\nis the reality that one side to the dispute will be unhappy and angry with the\njudges! Despite these darker clouds on the horizon, I think what I wanted to\nwrite must proceed because it is an important story the country should not\nforget.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Background of BBS case<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n

The first thing we do, let\u2019s kill all\nthe lawyers\u201d<\/em><\/strong>– Shakespeare.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

A discussion of background information\nrelating to this case is helpful in our task of analyzing the decision of CA in\nits objective and subjective context. Many statements in the judgement reveal\nthe judges\u2019 personal \u2018bias\u2019 (prejudice) against the accused in his role as the\nleader of BBS. The behavior of the AG\u2019s dept. during yahapalana years, has\ngiven people the impression that it is a politically bias agency operating\nagainst the Buddhist monks targeting those who are actively engaged in\nsocio-political problems created by the black-white politician class. It looks\nlike the anti-Buddhist arrogance of this agency is contagious, going against\nthe Sinhala Buddhist heritage in the island. For example, in the case that sent\nVen. Galabodaatte Gnanasaara to jail, the public record of the Court of Appeal,\nmentions AG as Hon. AG,\u201d and Ven. Gnanasaara (GG) just as Galabodaatte\nGnanasaara.\u201d Why did it not cite GG as Ven. GG?\u201d (or at least as monk GG). Is\nthis a trivial matter? I do not think so. Do they treat other religious clergy\nthe same disrespectful way, in the rare case of one of them become an accused?\n(rarely, because they do not \u2018fight\u2019 publicly on social issues).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

How does this attitude operate at the\nstreet-level or one step above? On 19th November 2018, at the old parliament\nbuilding, a small group of monks came to hand over a petition to President\nSirisena appealing him to pardon Ven. GG. A man from president\u2019s office came\nout and told the monks that they could see the president at the end of\nDecember! After this crazy response, the police used tear gas and water canon\nto disperse the crowd. Later, at a meeting arranged by Tilanga Sumathipala, the\npresident apologized to the monks, and said that he was not informed of the\nmonks\u2019 arrival to hand over the petition. Neither was he consulted by the\npolice before using tear gas against the monks. How shoddily some officers of\nthe government (judges and\/or court clerks, civil officers, police officers in\nthis case) treat the monkhood in the country is evident without doubt. The\nmonks experience more than other sections, the dirty side of suddage neethiya <\/em>(white mans\u2019 law).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Balu kuudu (dog cages) and AG\u2019s Dept.<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Ven. Bengamuwe Nalaka said recently\n(Oct. 2, 2018) that the AG\u2019s Dept. and the police, intentionally fabricated a\nfalse case against Ven. Ganansara. The public record is that the officers of\nthe Bar Association also hated BBS. In fact, the latest news (Oct. 5) is that\nSC judge Prasanna Jayawardena (with Nalin Perera agreeing and Eva Wanasundara\nopposing) who decided against Ven. G\u2019s appeal was an ardent \u2018enemy\u2019 of BBS when\nhe was VP of the Bar Association. This is against the principles of natural\njustice. He should have recused from hearing this appeal. More importantly,\nunless a full bench of SC is activated, BBS case now has no judicial option,\ndespite the fact courts only implement the judicial power of the people (of Sri\nLanka).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Monks and laymen are careful not to add\nthe courts into this allegation. Their formula is perhaps based on what Mrs.\nChandrika said some time back that balu sena will be put in balu kuudu (dogs\nand dog cages).\u201d As discussed later in this essay, if the AG\u2019s Dept. studied\nthe facts of the case carefully, using the video clip evidence, the CA would\nnot have made the two fatal errors in its judgement that I have found. \nAG\u2019s Dept. should have advised the court not to proceed with the case. But this\nwas a case of lawyers from different state entities working in collaboration to\nfix from their perspective, a \u2018notorious\u2019 monk, and their biased minds must\nhave missed the legal theories supporting the monk. It also depends on how\nthese lawyers as citizens of this country view, sometimes critical, role monks\nhave played in the 2,500-year-old history of this island. The history records\nhow a king of Kandy wanted to kill Velivita Sri Saranakara Sangaraja, for\nopposing his behavior, and agitating for his ouster. A person who has no\nknowledge of the Sinhala Buddhist heritage cannot appreciate the roles played\nby monks such as Migettuwatte Gunanada, Gangodawila Soma or presently, Ven. GG.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is no secret that ever since BBS\nstarted (May 2012) its militant Buddhist movement (militant in Gandhian and MLK\n(USA) sense), not just anti-Buddhists but the entire black-white political\nestablishment in the country, including the officers of the Bar Association,\nhated it, and wanted to \u2018kill\u201d it just like somebody killed (December 2003),\nthe previous Buddhist awakening started by the late Ven. Gangodawila Soma. Ven.\nSoma got trapped due to his human weakness (a desire to get a worthless Ph.D.,\nsecretly arranged, via a Sinhala Christian Russian agent). Similarly, the whole\ncountry knew very well that enemies were waiting in the dark to get Ven.\nGnanasara \u2018trapped,\u2019 sooner than later. The monk himself knew about this danger\nand of late acted cautiously both as a private individual and as the BBS\nleader, but tear drops fell on his arm from one of the helpless soldiers\nworshipping him after the Homagama magistrate re-remanded them on war crimes\ncharges, the monk\u2019s heart melted taking momentary control over his brain!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ironically, law recognizes this kind of\nemotional reaction known as the defense of grave and sudden provocation, but\nthe monk was destined to be disallowed that universal benefit. A judge who\nunderstands almost mechanically (like we brake automatically at traffic red\nlights) the application of this defense in a murder trial, depending on his\nperceptions and attitudes may not realize the applicability of that defense in\nthe case of a monk devoted his life to protect Sinhala Buddhists\u2019 lost rights\nin the country. Even if AG Dept. either forgot or ignored the relevance of this\ndefense to this accused\u2019s case, the judges of CA have a statutory duty to\nexamine the applicability of this defense in mitigating his punishment. The\nfacts in this case would have taken a totally different shade if the accused\nwere given the benefit of this universal defense.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Law is [not] an ass!<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n

I read the decision of the Court of\nAppeal (CA) on this case, and the moment I saw how the case was listed on the\nCA website, I was greatly perturbed. I found two factual errors made by the two\nCA judges, that go to the heart of the prosecution\u2019s case. Law is not an ass,\nbut some lawyers and judges make law an ass, because they too are human.  It\nwas only a few days ago that Ms. Sugandhika Fernando revealed that the Bar\nAssociation president U. R. de Silva, in his pep talk to a new set of female\nlawyers preached, that they should use one or two of their 64 mayams<\/em> (feminine cahrma\/tricks?) to\nget favors (such as early hearing dates for their clients) from judges. What a\ndisgrace to womanhood and to the legal system!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The USAID recently commenced a\nmillion-dollar project to \u2018modernize\u2019 (to Americanize it along with its\nnotoriously defective justice system?) the justice system in Sri Lanka. They\neven gave a separate grant to the SL Bar Association. American help to\nmodernize can mean different things to different people. A coherent, open,\nresponsive, and effective justice program (CORE) means what?  Are they\ngiving computers or try to brain-wash targeted personnel? Would they promote\nlegal scholars or lawyers writing critical analyses on court decisions that\nthey think incorrect?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I felt the CA decision was defective,\nand I think the BBS monk should file a fundamental rights violation case\nagainst the CA, because the SC had already refused to give permission to file a\nnormal appeal. I wonder how SC did not see the two glaring errors that I saw in\nthe CA judgement. If a monk like Ven. GG could be treated like this what must\nbe happening to hundreds of others?  Depending on how one looks at the\nrole of BBS as a national movement, one could decide whether the monk is\npolitically guilty or not, but a court of law must be objective and decide\ncases based on facts, and in this case, facts are in the public domain.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Naked title<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Galagodaaththe Gnanasara Vs.Hon.\nAttorney General-Hon. P Padman Surasena (P\/CA), Shiran Gooneratne (decided on\nAugust 8, 2018).\u201d  This is how the Court of Appeal website lists the case\nagainst the Bodu Bala Sena (BBS) leader Ven. Gnanasara. He was given a\npunishment of 19 years of rigorous imprisonment for \u2018insulting\u2019 the Homagama\nmagistrate Ranga Dissanayake. In another recent case, a complaint by a monk\nrelating to the pollution of Tissa wewa, decided on September 4, 2018, the citing\nstyle was Venerable Halmillawe Saddhatissa Thero and others Vs R. M.\nWanninayake and others-Hon. Mahinda Samayawardhena. (J).\u201d In each case a monk\nwas involved in a public affair. It was not about rape or murder by a monk.\n In the first case, what was the reason that the term \u2018Hon.\u2019 was used for\nthe legal eagles while the monk\u2019s name was listed nakedly as \u2018Galagodaaththe\nGnanasara?\u2019 Who made this decision?  Who decides who is a \u2018Hon.\u2019? The\nHansard is full of \u2018Hons.\u2019 But one reason why a monk is addressed as\n\u2018Venerable,\u2019 is because his robe represents part of the Triple Gem in Buddhism.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It was because of this national norm,\nthat in the previous case of monk Vatareka Vijitha, the magistrate did not ask\nthe monk Gnanasara to stand in the accused\u2019s box. On this incident, the lawyer\nfor the monk Vatareka, Maithri Gunaratane, now a new political party leader,\ncomplained that the magistrate was violating human rights of his client by\nallowing the accused to sit in a separate chair instead of the, hira kooduwa<\/em> for the accused!\n Another female Tamil magistrate went beyond this, and arranged a chair\ncovered by a white cloth for an accused monk to sit, and there was no objection\nfrom the Tamil lawyers.  Thus, reasonable judicial discretion is a\nprerogative of judges. In this regard, one must note that the Homagama\nmagistrate, used his discretion to report the Ven. Gnanasara to the Court of\nAppeal, because, he said that he did not have authority to impose a punishment,\nsevere enough, for the criminal offence committed by the monk!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hon vs. Ven<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Coming back to the Hon-Ven issue, only\nsuch scenario in the world (if one video tapes the ceremony of how a layman\nbecomes a monk) where a son worships his mother first, and a few minutes later\nthat mother in turn worships her son, is associated with the concept of\nmonkhood in Buddhism, which was above the kingship of Sinhale for 2,500 years.\nThe queen of England is below a monk in Buddhist hierarchy of politics.\nSemantics apart, if judges are \u2018Hon.\u2019 and the AG is \u2018Hon.\u2019 irrespective of the\nfact whether the holders of the respective positions are qualified, honest, or\nmoral, the same standard or same courtesy should be applied to the concept of\nmonkhood. Lowering the dignity bestowed upon one concept (the yellow robe),\nintentionally, inadvertently, or due to stupidity or ignorance, automatically\nlowers the dignity offered to the other (learned counsels wearing a black coat\nwith a pocket on the back) especially, when it happens next to each other in\nthe same sentence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Judges cannot be immune from the\ncurrents and cross currents occurring in Sri Lanka, especially since 1978. The\nthinking that courts decide cases within the framework of case law and legal\ncase books, was abandoned as far back as in 1954 in the landmark case of Brown\nVs. Board of Education, when extra-judicial sociological evidence was accepted\nby the U.S. Supreme Court in overruling its own 70-year-old previous decision.\nBesides, judges are human and can never be objective because everything in this\nworld is relatively linked to a continuum running from subjective to objective.\nCourts need to understand that they are part of the society and bound by the\nsocietal norms. If somebody attached to CA thinks that calling or citing the\nname of a monk without the traditional honorific is acceptable, he should be\nrequired to attend mandatory continuing education classes. It is no different from\nother incidents such as the title, Budunge\nRastiyaduva,<\/em> or Mrs. Chandrika\u2019s radio drama, Nirvastram Paraman Sukan<\/em>\n(nakedness is ultimate happiness?)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Two\nFatal errors<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Publicly disrespecting a monk without\nusing the honorific Ven could be an unfortunate attitude of some judges, but it\nis no reason to suspect the specific intent of the two judges who handled this\ncase. Instead, one must see if there are specific facts which are clearly\nerroneous. It is now an accepted fact that even an eyewitness account could be\ndifferent from reality. Thus, several persons witnessing an incident could look\nbut \u2018see\u2019 it differently, depending on their status of mind, ideology,\nperception, angle of vision, distance etc. Referees of football games now use\nvideo footage as a recording of the absolute truth for instant correction of\ntheir mistakes. Placebo effect means mind has controlling power over matter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Videotaping (and CCTV) technology has\nbecome a savior of life and liberty in the modern world. The CA decision states\nthat (1) the monk Gnanasara did not apologize to the magistrate and (2) he\ncalled the AG dept lawyer a \u2018napunsakaya.<\/em>\u2019 \nBut the video clip attached prove otherwise.  It shows the monk\napologizing to the magistrate not once but twice in no uncertain terms. The\nintention to insult a court is a deciding element in a contempt of court\nhearing, and the CA judgement is unacceptable with this contrary, concrete\nevidence. The derogatory term was used as \u2018this napunsaka government,\u2019 and not\nas \u2018this govt lawyer.\u2019<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\nhttp:\/\/lankacnews.com\/%e0%b6%a5%e0%b7%8f%e0%b6%ab%e0%b7%8f%e0%b7%83%e0%b7%8f%e0%b6%bb-%e0%b7%84%e0%b7%92%e0%b6%b8%e0%b7%92-19-%e0%b7%80%e0%b7%83%e0%b6%bb%e0%b6%9a%e0%b6%a7-%e0%b7%84%e0%b7%92%e0%b6%bb%e0%b7%99%e0%b7%8a\/\n<\/div><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

It is strange why the monk\u2019s lawyers did\nnot present this video clip as evidence.  It is also strange why two monks\nwho gave evidence on behalf of the monk said contradictory stories, which the\njudges used against the accused monk. The evidence used by CA was what the\nthree lawyers said in the court and not the video tape recorded at the scene\nwhen it took place.  Lawyers are not supposed to coach prospective\nwitnesses to tell lies, but under an adversarial system of litigation, lawyers\nhave a duty to examine the witnesses in advance, assess them, and decide not to\nuse them if their evidence is going to harm the accused instead of helping hm.\nThe use of such evidence by a court to impute criminal intention is a case of\ncutting pork on a leg of pork.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Balu Theendu and BBS<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n

When S B Dissanayake was sent to jail\nfor branding SC decisions as balu teendu<\/em>\n(decision by dogs?), his intention was crystal clear. He did not apologize. Or\non the pending case against Ranjan Ramanayaka for condemning the court system\nas corrupt, his purpose in doing that is not clear. When Nagananda Kodituwakku\ngoes to SC with briefs against SC judges, Chief Justices, or the AG, no one\nsaid his purpose was not noble. The way BBS monk was trapped using clause 105\nof the constitution is unique. The magistrate Ranga Dissanayake had a dialogue\nwith the monk and the monk accepted his mistake, gave an explanation as to why\nhe had to talk and apologized twice and went on to ask the judge in the\nGandhian style to impose on him appropriate punishment for his behavior if it\nwas judge\u2019s wish. All this is in the video clip. The magistrate could have\nfined him, imprison him for the day, warn him or sent him to jail for a longer\nduration. The magistrate was aware that he was dealing not about a solitary\nmonk, but a kind of national entity. He would have settled it in a casual\nmanner, if not for the intervention of the AG dept lawyer Dileepa Peiris and\nthe JVP-connected lawyer Upul Kumarapperuma, who appeared for the wife of an\nallegedly disappeared person, Ekneligoda.  With their intervention, the\nmagistrate lost his judicial independence and discretion. A minor incident\nbecame a national issue.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Continued \u2026 Part-3.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

C.Wijeyawickrema, LL.B., Ph.D. Sweet dreams are made of this Who am I to disagree I travel the world and the seven seas Everybody’s looking for something. Some of them want to use you Some of them want to get used by you Some of them want to abuse you Some of them want to be […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":true,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[59],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-110997","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-c-wijeyawickrema"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/110997","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=110997"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/110997\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=110997"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=110997"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=110997"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}