{"id":118483,"date":"2021-09-22T16:56:55","date_gmt":"2021-09-22T23:56:55","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/?p=118483"},"modified":"2021-09-22T16:56:55","modified_gmt":"2021-09-22T23:56:55","slug":"unhrc-basl-what-about-the-human-rights-of-cj-mohan-pieris","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/2021\/09\/22\/unhrc-basl-what-about-the-human-rights-of-cj-mohan-pieris\/","title":{"rendered":"UNHRC\/BASL \u2013 What about the Human Rights of CJ Mohan Pieris?"},"content":{"rendered":"<h2><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><em>BY\u00a0\u00a0SHENALI WADUGE\u00a0\u00b7\u00a022ND SEPTEMBER 2021<\/em><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image is-resized\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/09\/Ashenali2309121R.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-118484\" width=\"594\" height=\"153\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/09\/Ashenali2309121R.jpg 504w, https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/09\/Ashenali2309121R-300x77.jpg 300w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 594px) 100vw, 594px\" \/><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p>Whether anyone likes or dislikes Mohan Pieris\nis irrelevant. If due process was alleged to be denied to CJ43 Shirani\nBandaranaike, was due process applied to CJ44 Mohan Pieris. This is the\nquestion and the response must be based on principled facts. If entities like\nUNHRC and BASL took up the case of CJ Shirani Bandaranaike, why did they not do\nthe same for Mohan Pieris? CJ Mohan Pieris was unceremoniously removed as 44<sup>th<\/sup>Chief Justice of Sri Lanka on 28 January 2015 by the\nRanil-Sirisena led yahapalana government. His position as CJ44 was virtually\ndeleted and he was replaced with CJ SriPavan who was appointed as CJ44.&nbsp;\nIf Shirani Bandaranaike was CJ43 while CJ Mohan Pieris was sworn in as CJ44\n(Jan2013-Jan2015), how can Sri Pavan be made CJ4 thus erasing the judicial\ndecisions served by Mohan Pieris as Chief Justice? BASL need to respond and\nUNHRC need to answer why they adopting biased attitudes to human rights of one\nignoring the human rights of another!<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>CJ Shirani Bandaranaike&nbsp;<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>CJ43 appointed on 18 May 2011<\/li><li>Impeachment motion in November 2012<\/li><li>CJ43 impeached on 11 January 2013<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>CJ Mohan Pieris<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>CJ44 appointed 15 January 2013<\/li><li>(Govt change 9 January 2015) \u2013 group of lawyers protest at\nHulftsdorp demanding Mohan Pieris step down as CJ &amp; give him 48hrs to do so<\/li><li><strong>17 January 2015\u2013 BASL called for the resignation of Chief Justice\nMohan&nbsp;Pieris<\/strong><\/li><li>Mohan Pieris was not allowed into his Chambers \u2013 that ended his\nposition as Chief Justice.<\/li><li><strong>22 January 2015<\/strong>\u2013\nCID grills CJ Mohan Peiris over a complaint filed by Mangala Samaraweera. The\nfirst time a sitting CJ is questioned by the police!<\/li><li><strong>28 January 2015 President Sirisena\u2019s secretary informs CJ44 by\nletter quoting ab initio claiming Mohan Pieris\u2019s position as CJ was considered\nnull &amp; void \u2018as it was never valid from the beginning\u2019<\/strong><\/li><li><strong>28 January 2015\u2013 BASL organizes protest against CJ Mohan Peiris<\/strong><\/li><li>CJ 43 Shirani B gets reinstated in a media frenzy but only for a\nday &amp; she is made to resign the same day (did she become CJ45 with\nreinstatement \u2013 who can answer?) <a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=DGfSbhqKcVQ\">https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=DGfSbhqKcVQ<\/a><\/li><li>30 January 2015 Justice K Sripavan is appointed Chief Justice44 &amp;\nnot CJ45 (as Mohan Pieris was CJ44)<\/li><li><strong>31 January 2015<\/strong>&nbsp;\u2013\nCJ Mohan Peiris issues statement&nbsp;<strong><em>I have not retired, resigned\nor vacated my office of Chief Justice<\/em><\/strong><em>, but,\ndue to exertions by external forces reinforced by an extra judicial chain of\nevents, find myself displaced from office by an unconstitutional process having\nfunctioned continuously in my appointment for over two years\u201d.&nbsp;<\/em>&nbsp;<a href=\"http:\/\/www.sundaytimes.lk\/150201\/statement.pdf\">http:\/\/www.sundaytimes.lk\/150201\/statement.pdf<\/a><\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li><strong>No Constitutional provisions or Parliamentary Standing Orders were\napplied for the removal of CJ Mohan Pieris.&nbsp;<\/strong><\/li><li>Can a President remove a CJ via only a letter?<\/li><li>Can lawyers stop a CJ entering his chambers &amp; remove him\/her\nas CJ?<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Removal of a Chief Justice\nrequires to apply provision of Constitution &amp; follow Parliamentary Standing\nOrders<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ol class=\"wp-block-list\"><li><strong>Articles 107(2) &amp; 107(3) of the Constitution<\/strong>sets the procedure to be adopted to remove a Chief Justice,\nPresident of the Court of Appeal or any other judge of the Supreme Court &amp; Court\nof Appeal on \u2018grounds of proved misbehavior or incapacity\u201d?<\/li><li><strong>Resolution presented to Speaker or placed on Order Paper of\nParliament<\/strong>signed by 1\/3 of total\nmembers in Parliament &amp; appointing of Select Committee of not less than 7\nMembers to investigate &amp; report to Parliament regarding the allegations.<\/li><li><strong>Select Committee<\/strong>given\n1 month to deliberate.<\/li><li>Select Committee requires to hand over to the CJ a copy of their\ndeliberations &amp; CJ must supply a written statement in defense.<\/li><li><strong>Opportunity for CJ to appear before Select Committee<\/strong>to give version.<\/li><li>Decision of Select Committee presented to President by Speaker\non behelf of Parliament.<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Were these 6 steps followed for\nthe removal of CJ Shirani Bandaranaike \u2013 Yes&nbsp;<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>117MPs handed petition on 1 Nov 2012 (Standing Orders of\nParliament &amp; Constitution was upheld)<\/li><li>11 Member Select Committee appointed on 14 November 2012<\/li><li>Deliberation of Select Committee handed on 8 December 2012\n(before 1month)<\/li><li>Parliament debated 10<sup>th<\/sup>&amp; 11<sup>th<\/sup>January 2013 \u2013 Resolution passed by 155 votes in favor &amp; 49\nagainst<\/li><li>CJ43 Shirani B was impeached on 11 January 2013.<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Were these 6 steps followed for\nthe removal of CJ Mohan Pieris \u2013 NO<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The question is why not &amp; how legally valid is the removal\nof CJ Mohan Pieris.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Why did the BASL defend CJ\nShiraniB and not CJMohan Pieris?&nbsp;<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Shouldn\u2019t BASL be upholding principles\/facts &amp; the law and\nnot their dislike for Mohan Pieris?<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Evidently, the bias was the same internationally.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>While the human rights of CJ\nShiraniB was important to the UNHRC, the human rights of CJ Mohan Pieris was\nnot.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li><strong>18 January 2013 \u2013 UNHRC head Navi Pillay&nbsp;<\/strong><em>further eroded the rule of law in the country and could also set\nback efforts for accountability and reconciliation\u201d<\/em><\/li><li><strong>15 November 2012&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Commonwealth_of_Nations\">Commonwealth<\/a>Secretary\nGeneral&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Kamalesh_Sharma\">Kamalesh Sharma<\/a><\/strong>&nbsp;issued 3 separate statement denouncing the\nimpeachment&nbsp;<em>The dismissal of the Chief Justice will be\nwidely seen..as running counter to the independence of the judiciary, which is\na core Commonwealth value.\u201d<\/em><\/li><li><strong>18 January 2013&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/European_Union\">European Union<\/a><\/strong>\u2013&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/High_Representative_of_the_Union_for_Foreign_Affairs_and_Security_Policy\">High\nRepresentative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy<\/a>&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Catherine_Ashton\">Catherine Ashton<\/a>&nbsp;<em>the independence of the judicial branch cannot be made subject to\nactions by any other branch of government\u201d<\/em><\/li><li><strong>11 January 2013 &nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Canada\">Canada<\/a><\/strong>\u2013&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Minister_of_Foreign_Affairs_(Canada)\">Foreign\nMinister<\/a>&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/John_Baird_(Canadian_politician)\">John\nBaird<\/a>&nbsp;<em>highly politicized, lacking basic\ntransparency and respect for the guarantees of due process and fair trial\u201d<\/em><\/li><li><strong>11 January 2013 &nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/United_Kingdom\">United Kingdom<\/a><\/strong>\u2013 The&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Foreign_and_Commonwealth_Office\">Foreign\nand Commonwealth Office<\/a>&nbsp;<em>respect democratic principles\u201d<\/em><\/li><li><strong>2 November 2012 The&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/United_States_Department_of_State\">United States Department of State<\/a><\/strong><em>guarantee due process, and to ensure that all investigations are\nconducted transparently and in accordance with the rule of law\u201d.<\/em><\/li><li><strong>15 January 2013 State Department spokesperson&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Victoria_Nuland\">Victoria Nuland<\/a><\/strong>expressed concern about the impeachment\u2019s impact on the\ndemocratic process, saying&nbsp;<em>we were concerned about the\nperception of reprisals against somebody for independent thinking and action\u201d<\/em><\/li><li><strong>6 December 2012&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/International_Commission_of_Jurists\">International Commission of Jurists<\/a>(ICJ)&nbsp;<\/strong>stated that the impeachment process ignored&nbsp;<em>international standards and practice\u201d<\/em><\/li><li><strong>On 15 January 2013 ICJ<\/strong>issued\na statement which condemned Mohan Peiris\u2019 appointment as chief justice,\ndescribing it as a&nbsp;<em>further assault on the\nindependence of the judiciary\u201d<\/em>and called for Bandaranayake\u2019s\nre-instatement<\/li><li><strong>23 January 2013 \u2013 44 senior judges and jurists from around the<\/strong>globe wrote an&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Open_letter\">open letter<\/a>to President Rajapaksa\nwhich condemned Bandaranayake\u2019s removal, urged her re-instatement, saying that\nthe impeachment was&nbsp;<em>in contravention of the\nConstitution, international human rights law and standards, including the right\nto a fair hearing, and the rule of law\u201d<\/em><\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>Leaving aside the intrusive and interfering\nnature of demands upon a sovereign government, the more important question\nis&nbsp;<strong>why these same entities did not issue similar statements for the\nunceremonious removal of CJ Mohan Pieris that saw lawyers protesting and not\nallowing the CJ to sit in his chambers &amp; the President issuing a letter\nremoving the CJ without adopting any due process whatsoever. What is the\njustification BASL and UNHRC et al have for this?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The same question is posed to Sri Lanka\u2019s media,\nprofessionals\u201d, civil society and other self-claimed \u2018human rights activists\u2019,\npolitical commentators who kept mum about the unceremonial removal of CJ Mohan\nPieris but went to town over removal of CJSHiraniB. All this only highlights &amp;\nshowcases all their bias.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>The unanswered questions&nbsp;<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>If the \u2018human rights\u2019 of ShiraniB was denied \u2013 what about the\nhuman rights of Mohan Pieris?<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>If local and international media\/individuals\/organizations\nclamored to denounce the removal of CJ ShiraniB \u2013 why did they not do the same\nfor CJ Mohan Pieris<\/li><li>What is the legal position of CJ Mohan Pieris\u2019s 31January 2015\nstatement that he has not resigned, retired or vacated his position as Chief\nJustice\u201d &amp; the appointment of CJSriPavan as CJ44 and his judgements\nthereafter?<\/li><li>If due process was followed to impeach ShiraniB why was it not\nfollowed to remove Mohan Pieris?<\/li><li>Can a President remove a CJ via only a letter?<\/li><li>If \u2018void ab initio\u2019 is applied for the removal of CJ Mohan\nPieris what about the legal validity of every judgement made by CJ44 Mohan\nPieris from 15 January 2013 to 28 January 2015) \u2013 BASL needs to respond.<\/li><li>If ShiraniB was reinstated as CJ (even if it was for a day as\nshe resigned) \u2013 did she become CJ45?<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>How can there be 2 CJ\u2019s on\nhistorical records?&nbsp;<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>CJ43 is ShiraniB<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>CJ44 \u2013 MohanP &amp; Sripavan (we have 2 CJs) \u2013 this cannot be!<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>CJ45 \u2013 Priyasath Depp<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>CJ46 \u2013 Nalin Perera<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>CJ47 \u2013 Jayantha Jayasuriya (sitting)<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>We may not know the law like lawyers which is why the BASL\nrequires to respond with legal arguments as to the legal validity behind the\nremoval of Mohan Pieris, the legal position of CJ44 &amp; appointments\nthereafter given the controversies that have ensued and the legal validity of\njudgements by Mohan Pieris if we are to remove his role as Chief Justice from\nhistory books and the obvious bias of BASL in their treatment of 2 Chief\nJustices while the UNHRC and international bodies must explain why the human\nrights of one is not as important as the human rights of another. What\nhypocrisy!<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Shenali D Waduge<\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>BY\u00a0\u00a0SHENALI WADUGE\u00a0\u00b7\u00a022ND SEPTEMBER 2021 Whether anyone likes or dislikes Mohan Pieris is irrelevant. If due process was alleged to be denied to CJ43 Shirani Bandaranaike, was due process applied to CJ44 Mohan Pieris. This is the question and the response must be based on principled facts. If entities like UNHRC and BASL took up the [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":true,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[47],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-118483","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-shenali-waduge"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/118483","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=118483"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/118483\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=118483"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=118483"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=118483"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}