{"id":86770,"date":"2019-03-26T17:16:37","date_gmt":"2019-03-27T00:16:37","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/?p=86770"},"modified":"2019-03-27T16:01:34","modified_gmt":"2019-03-27T23:01:34","slug":"yahapalana-and-corruption-part-2b","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/2019\/03\/26\/yahapalana-and-corruption-part-2b\/","title":{"rendered":"YAHAPALANA AND CORRUPTION Part 2B"},"content":{"rendered":"

KAMALIKA\u00a0 PIERIS<\/em><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n

BAMBALAPITIYA\nFLATS<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The cabinet\nhas approved a multi-million dollar project to replace the Bambalapitiya Flats,\na significant landmark in Colombo, lying on very valuable land. A plan was,\nfloated in 2014 to redevelop the ten-acre land on which the Bambalapitiya flats\nnow stand. UTL Global Projects registered in Singapore made the proposal.  A tripartite MOU was signed between UTL\nGlobal Projects, Engineering Projects India and the National Housing\nDevelopment Authority for this project. The land belongs to the National\nHousing Development Authority (NHDA). The\nproject did not materialize.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The project\nwas revived, when Yahapalana came in, on the recommendation of Housing and\nConstruction Minister Sajith Premadasa. The\nBambalapitiya redevelopment project was \u2018a novel and complex project, the likes\nof which had never been undertaken in this country\u2019, he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Cabinet\napproval was obtained and NHDA wrote to Global Project Pvt and Engineering\nProjects India Pvt that the Cabinet had approved their joint proposal and they\nshould  incorporate a company in Sri\nLanka for this project. Thereupon, a company called City Square Projects was\nduly incorporated in Sri Lanka. A formal agreement was entered into between the\nBOI and City Square Projects. Though Engineering Projects India was listed as a\npartner in the agreement, the agreement was signed only by  the directors of City Square. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In March\n2017, on Cabinet approval, National Housing Development Authority signed an\nagreement with City Square Projects, with the proviso that they had to bring\nUSD 10 million into the country within four to six weeks of signing the\nagreement.   Once the final project\ndocuments are signed, the land on which the Bambalapitiya flats stand will be\ntransferred to City Square Projects  on a\n99-year lease. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Minister\nSajith Premadasa recommended in November 2016 that a gazette notification be\nissued immediately to acquire the Bambalapitiya flats site under the\nCondominium Management Authority law which provides for any condominium that is\nover 40 years old to be acquired. He further recommended that the Bambalapitiya\nflats be declared an \u2018Urban development Site\u2019 under Section 2 of the Urban\nDevelopment Projects (Special Provisions) Act No: 2 of 1980. This provision\ndisallows appeals to courts regarding the acquisition of property for\ndevelopment projects. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

C.A.Chandraprema\nof the Island<\/em>  examined the  \nBambalapitiya project agreement and alerted readers to its very serious\nimplications. He pointed out that the main investor, UTL Global Projects  had been incorporated in Singapore only in\nFebruary 2011 and   its owners are three\nIndian nationals, Koorapati Premalatha Rani, Meena Pooja and Prashanth\nKoorapati, members of one family. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

They don\u2019t\nhave any known background in construction or real estate development and are\nnot known to have the financial resources to be able to handle a project of\nthis nature either observed Chandraprema.  \nThey definitely lack the financial standing to undertake a project of\nthis magnitude, <\/p>\n\n\n\n

City Square\nProjects is  not a joint project of  Global and Engineering Projects India.  It is  \nowned by Global alone.  Koorapati\nconfirmed in a letter to the Chairman of the Project Steering Committee of the\nBambalapitiya flats redevelopment project\u201d, Ministry of Housing and\nConstruction,  that City Square Projects\n(Pvt) Ltd is a wholly owned subsidiary of UTL Global Projects Pte Ltd, through\nits holding company Centennial Holdings\u201d Singapore. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Global\nProjects,  is just three members of the\nsame family of Indian nationals, with no background in construction or real\nestate development or the financial resources to be able to handle a project of\nthis nature, repeated Chandraprema. It is a family owned company with no\nhistory worth talking about,  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

 It is to a subsidiary wholly owned by them,\nCity Square,  that the Bambalapitiya land\nis to be transferred.  They are going to\nget 10 acres of the best land in Colombo on a 99-year lease without paying the\ngovernment any money.  The government is going to give this\nprime land, Bambalaptiya flats, to a company which does not have the financial\nclout to be able to handle a project of this nature Chandraprema again observed. As a result, three Indian\nnationals will hold a 99-year lease on ten acres of the best land in Colombo.\nemphasized Chandraprema.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Global  had misled the government into thinking that\nthey had brought in a large Indian government owned construction\nconglomerate,  Engineering Projects India\nLtd as their partner to  finance and\nbuild the project. BOI, the NHDA and even the tenants of the Bambalapitiya\nflats appear to be under the impression that Engineering Projects India Ltd has\nundertaken to invest 300 million USD in this project, said Chandraprema. That\nis not so, he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

 Engineering Projects India Ltd, a state owned\nentity in India, has extensive experience in construction and real estate and\nsolid financial backing. This company is already involved in water projects in\nVavuniya and Puttalam with the National Water Supply and Drainage Board. But\nthe company is not involved in this deal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Since doubts had\nbeen expressed, government of Sri Lanka asked for proof that Engineering\nProjects was actually working with Global. \nThey asked, is Engineering Projects India Ltd actually in a consortium\nwith UTL Global Projects, if so where is the consortium agreement. There was no\nconsortium agreement with Global. Instead, Koorapati   sent a\nredacted version of the agreement between Engineering Projects India and City\nSquare to the Project Steering Committee, claiming that the rest of it was\n\u2018highly confidential\u2019. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The version\nsent was a consortium agreement between City Square and Engineering Projects\nIndia Ltd had been signed on 5 March 2016.Engineering Projects India will take\nup equity in City Square Projects Pvt Ltd after applying for the required\npermission from the government of India. Till then they will continue to\ndevelop the project as a consortium. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Chandraprema  pointed out that  the dates on these letters show that Global\nwrote to Engineering Projects India Ltd making the initial proposal only on the\nday that they had applied to the BOI claiming that they were already in a\npartnership with Engineering Projects India Ltd   for redeveloping the Bambalapitiya flats.     He also\npointed out that even if Engineering Projects India Ltd joins City Square\nProjects later. That too means nothing. They have only a very limited role and\nthe three Indian nationals who own  Global\nwill still be calling all the shots. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Chandraprema\nobserved that the document sent by Koorapati  \ndid not say anything about the financial commitment of Engineering\nProjects India Ltd to the project. This is a significant omission. The redacted\nversion of the consortium agreement simply  states that Engineering Projects India Ltd\nwill \u2018endeavour\u2019 to find a third party to provide the working capital for the\nproject. That does not indicate a financial commitment. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The total\nproject is estimated to cost 500 Million USD. But, Koorapati\u2019s letter to the\nProject Steering Committee clearly indicates that they do not know where the\nmoney for the project is going to come from, said Chandraprema. They have mentioned that the money will have\nto be raised from third parties but no such third parties have been identified\n. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Engineering\nProjects India is a government owned business undertaking. It cannot invest any\nmoney overseas without the approval of the Indian Cabinet and other agencies\nsuch as the Reserve Bank of India. There\nis no guarantee that Engineering Projects India Ltd will get the Indian\ngovernment\u2019s permission for this project  \n<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If the Indian\ngovernment does not give Engineering Projects permission to go ahead with the\nproject they will drop out of it automatically. Then, three individuals, Koorapati\nPremalatha Rani, Meena Pooja and Prashanth Koorapati who own  Global Projects  and City Square will be left holding a\n99-year lease on 10 acres of land in Bambalapitiya without paying a cent to the\ngovernment,  said Chandraprema. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

 Chandraprema also observed that there are\ncertain legal implications in the agreements signed. According to the\nrequirements of the BOI, both UTL Global Projects Pte Ltd and Engineering\nProjects India Ltd should have been the joint owners of City Square Projects.\nThe BOI agreement that was signed on 22 June 2016 said that the project would\nbe a joint venture between UTL Global Projects Pte Ltd and Engineering Projects\nIndia Ltd.  The agreement between City\nSquare Projects (Pvt) Ltd and the NHDA is also based on the premise that UTL\nGlobal Projects Pte Ltd and Engineering Projects India Ltd had jointly formed\nCity Square (Pvt.) Ltd. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

However,\nEngineering Projects India Ltd is not in a consortium with UTL Global\nProjects     and it is not part of City Square. This is a\nclear violation of BOI rules. Global\u2019s  argument that even though Engineering\nProjects India Ltd does not have a consortium agreement with Global, they do\nhave an agreement with City Square, \nis  also wrong. The consortium\nagreement should be between UTL Global Projects Pte Ltd and Engineering\nProjects India not between Engineering Projects India Ltd and City Square\n(Pvt.) Ltd. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The government\nhas imposed the condition on City Square that within 4 to 6 weeks of signing\nthe agreement with the NHDA, they will have to bring in USD 10 million to the\ncountry. This will not be difficult because City Square Projects (Pvt) Ltd will\nbe able to use that very agreement to obtain money by pledging the land as\ncollateral, said Chandraprema. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

City Square\nProjects Pvt Ltd has said that they have not pledged or mortgaged the land,\ncontinued Chandraprema. They haven\u2019t done so because the land has not been\ntransferred to them yet. But the moment the land is transferred to them, that\nis exactly what is going to happen. Once\nthe land is transferred to City Square Projects Pvt Ltd,  the land may be used as collateral to raise\nthe capital that UTL Global Projects Pte Ltd obviously lacks. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

 We have \u2018incontrovertible proof\u2019 that what\nGlobal intends doing once they get their hands on the land is to mortgage it to\nthird parties, said Chandraprema. They\nwill do so without paying a cent to the government of Sri Lanka. A new group will\nbe left in possession of the Bambalapitiya land for 99 years and the residents\nof the present Bambalapitiya flats and the government of Sri Lanka will be left\nhigh and dry. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The residents of\nthe Bambalapitiya flats have voiced their strong opposition to the project and\npoint out that neither the government nor the developers have had transparent\ndiscussions with them on the project. Minister Champika Ranawaka had filed a\nCabinet observation in 2016, stating that the financial credentials of the\ndevelopers did not appear to have been checked and that a proper feasibility\nstudy of the project had not been carried out. There is still no feasibility\nreport for the project said Chandraprema in 2017. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Everything about these\nproject smacks of a giant scam said Chandraprema. There is something seriously\nfishy in this whole business. Anyone can see from a mile away that this is not\na project that is ever going to be completed. The fact that the government has\nnot shown any interest in seeing the full agreement signed between City Square\nand Engineering Projects shows that powerful figures in the government are in\non the deal. Such indifference on the part of the government can only be the\nresult of massive kickbacks.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The government of\nSri Lanka should reconsider this project. \nFunding for the project should be available upfront before any approvals\nare granted or the land handed over, said Chandraprema. All agreements entered\ninto by the BOI and the NHDA with UTL Global Projects Pte Ltd or its wholly\nowned subsidiary City Square Projects (Pvt) Ltd should be suspended and\nreviewed because they have clearly attempted to deceive the government of Sri\nLanka without disclosing material facts. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

HAMBANTOTA\nREFINERY<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

As this essay goes\nto press,  a second \u2018Bambalapitiya  flat\u2019 issue \nis taking place in Hambantota, where  \nthe Yahapalana government has announced \nin March 2019, the construction of a USD 4  billion oil refinery at Hambantota on  400acres of land, by Silver Park\nInternational  and the Omani government.\nIt was to be the biggest foreign investment in Sri Lanka since Independence.\nThis would provide 565 Sri Lankans direct employment and up to 185 jobs for\nforeigners.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The original investment proposal was submitted\nto the BOI in November 10, 2016, as a joint venture between Silver Park\nInternational (Pvt) Ltd, Singapore, and the Ministry of Oil and Gas of the\nSultanate of Oman\u201d. A Cabinet memorandum dated February 15 2019 reaffirms that\nSilver Park International (Pte) Ltd of Singapore will hold 70 percent of shares\nwhile 30 percent will be owned by the Ministry of Oil and Gas of Sultanate of\nOman\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

 A\nletter dated March 12 2019 from the BOI to Silver Park International in\nSingapore also refers to an undertaking from Silver Park to set up a project\nfor 10 MMPTA Green Field oil refinery in Hambantota for export market in\ncollaboration with the Sultanate of Oman Ministry of Oil and Gas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As soon as the deal was announced by the\ngovernment of Sri Lanka, Oman swiftly denied it had any part in the\nmultibillion dollar investment. Omani Government said it had not invested any\nfunds, nor agreed to invest any money so far on the project. That leaves Silver\nPark,  like Global, as the star of the\nshow. Thanks to the publicity, the identity of the investors have aroused local\ninterest. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

 Silver\nPark International (Pte) Ltd was incorporated on June 15, 2017, in Singapore.\nIt was, therefore, set up several months after<\/strong>\nthe first investment proposal was submitted to the BOI in Sri Lanka. The directors\nof Silver Park, like Global, are confined to one family. They are Jegath\nRakshagan Sundeep Anand, Jagathrakshakan Sri Nisha and Jagathrakshakan Anusuya.\nThey are the son, daughter and wife of S. Jagathrakshakan, a Tamilnadu\npolitician based in Chennai.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

S. Jagathrakshakan has held positions as\nMinister of State for Information and Broadcasting, Minister of State for New\nand Renewable Energy and Minister of State for Commerce and Industry.  He has been embroiled in several allegations.\nIt is widely reported that his personal wealth increased by 12 times in just\ntwo years from INR 5.9 crore in 2009 to INR 70 crore in 2011. Media reports\nsaid this was the highest percentage increase for assets among all ministers in\nthe central Cabinet during that period.  Jagathrakshakan\u2019s\nname was also associated with the infamous Indian coal allocation scam too.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

 This\n\u2018Silver Park\u2019 family have incorporated two companies in Sri Lanka. These two\ncompanies are Silver Park International (Pvt) Ltd and Silver Park Petroleum (Pvt)\nLtd. There are no Omani nationals or representatives in either company,   reported Namini Wijedasa.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Silver Park International in Sri Lanka was set\nup on September 10, 2018. Its directors are the same family, Jegath Rakshagan\nSundeep Anand, Jagathrakshakan Sri Nisha, Jagathrakshakan Anusuya plus a\nfourth, Kunasingam Jasoharan of Mullaitivu.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

 The stated\nobjectives  of this company are to carry\nout the business of manufacturing, importing, exporting, distributorship,\nintending, brokering, real estates, transportation and wholesale trade; to\nparticipate in Government tenders in order to implement the same project and to\ncarry on bulk or wholesale trading activities; to operate as an investment\nholding company; to act as an agent or representative to any other person or\ncompanies; and to carry out any other business whatsoever the company may\ndecide at a directors\u2019 meeting\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Silver Park Petroleum\u201d was formed on February\n21,2019,  six days after Development\nStrategies and International Trade Minister Malik Samarawickrama submitted his\nlatest Cabinet paper on the subject. Its \ndirectors are the same  family, Sundeep\nAnand, Sri Nisha, Kunasingham Jasoharan  with a fourth, Dr T.A.G. Gunasekara. \u2018Silver\nPark Petroleum\u2019\u201d was created  to build a\n10 MMPTA (million metric tons per annum) petroleum refinery for exports at\nHambantota. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The foundation stone was laid for the new oil\nrefinery on 24.3.19 at Hambantota. The Omani Oil and Gas Minister who was\nvisiting Sri Lanka  was also there. The\nOmani Minister had  met Prime Minister\nRanil Wickremesinghe at Temple Trees earlier on. The meeting at Temple Trees\nwas more in the nature of a courtesy call, a spokesman for the Prime Minister\u2019s\noffice said.. No specifics\nwere discussed. This  possible \u2018scam\u2019 has\nbeen incorrectly  compared to the\nVolkswagen deal, it is nothing like the Volkswagen deal. It is  like \nthe Bambalapitiya deal. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

APPOINTMENT\nOF  HIGH COURT JUDGE KANNAN<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ramanathan\nKannan   who had failed to get a position\nas Magistrate was appointed a high court judge by the Yahapalana government,\nover the heads of all the others on the list. Three legal bodies, the Judicial\nServices Commission, the Judicial Service Association and the Bar Association\nof Sri Lanka, reacted strongly to this appointment. They all  said it was irregular. The senior-most judge\nwho should have been promoted was, D. L. A. Manaf, District Judge of Vavuniya. D.\nL. A. Manaf was promoted to the High Court in March 2017. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Judicial Services\nCommission (JSC) wrote to the President withdrawing its earlier recommendation\nthat Ramanathan Kannan be appointed a High Court Judge.  JSC said that if the BASL had made \u2018no proper\nrecommendation\u2019 on the matter, the recommendation that the JSC had sent earlier\nto the President had \u2018no force or avail in law\u2019. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Article\n111(2) (a) of the Constitution stipulates that judges of the High Court can be\nappointed by the president only on the recommendation of the Judicial Services\nCommission. This retraction by the JSC therefore made Ramanathan Kannan\u2019s\nappointment as High Court Judge unconstitutional, said the media, but the JSC\ndid not expressly recommend that Kannan be removed from office. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Secretary\nto the President wrote to the Judicial Services Commission seeking a recommendation\nfor the removal of Kannan in terms of Article 111(2) (b) of the Constitution,\nwhich provides for the dismissal of High Court judges by the President on the\nrecommendations of the JSC. But JSC  did\nnot make such a recommendation.   JSC\nsaid it could intervene only when there is a complaint related to a\ndisciplinary matter. Critics however, observed that once the JSC retracted\ntheir recommendation, he should have been removed by the President. However\nthis has not happened.   Kannan l continued to be a High Court Judge. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Judicial Service\nAssociation, (JSA), which represents the district judges and magistrates of Sri\nLanka, had met the Chief Justice, K Sri Pavan  to discuss the Kannan matter and to inform him\nof the concerns of the judicial officers of the minor judiciary. JSA requested the Chief Justice and other\nmembers of the Judicial Service Commission to reconsider the appointment of\nRamanathan Kannan as High Court Judge. Appointing\na lawyer practicing at the unofficial bar over the heads of many senior judges\nwho had been serving for more than 16 years was a case of overlooking the\nrights of the entire subordinate judiciary. A thing that has not happened in\nrecent history.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The JSA also requested the JSC to recommend to\nthe President the removal of   Kannan in\nterms of Article 111(2)(b) of the Constitution, since the said appointment was\nmade on the misrepresentation of facts. If\nthe need was to appoint a Tamil speaking High Court judge for the north and\neast, the senior most candidate would be the District Judge of Vavuniya D. L.\nA. Manaf.  He is a highly qualified judge\nwith LLB and LLM degrees from the University of Colombo and has served as a\njudge for 17 years . <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Judicial Services\nAssociation called  a  special General meeting to discuss the  appointment and also the involvement of BASL,\nin view of the fact that BASL  has no say\nin the appointment of judges. At the meeting JSA passed a unanimous resolution\nobjecting to the Kannan appointment and declaring it to be an interference with\nthe independence of the judiciary. They asked that the judge be removed and\nthat he be barred from functioning as a judge until he is removed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The JSA  adopted five resolutions seeking the removal\nof Ramanathan Kannan from the position of High Court Judge. The first\nresolution requested President Maithripala Sirisena to remove Ramanathan Kannan\nfrom the position of High Court Judge as the appointment has no force or avail\nin law. Judicial Services Commission (JSC) and the Bar Association of Sri Lanka\n(BASL) have re-affirmed that the recommendation with regard to the appointment\nof Kannan has no force or avail in law. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Second\nresolution requested the JSC to recommend the President to remove Kannan from\nthe position of the High Court Judge.   Third\nresolution requested the JSC to consider not allowing Kannan to function as\nHigh Court Judge till he is officially removed from the said position. The\nfourth resolution stated that the independence of the judiciary has been\nviolated by the controversial appointment of Kannan and requested the President\nand the JSC to restore and uphold the integrity and independence of the\njudiciary. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The last\nresolution requested the JSC to refrain from recommending nominations submitted\nto them from the unofficial bar for appointing High Court Judges directly in\nfuture. The appointment of Judges for High Court from unofficial Bar undermines\nthe knowledge, experience and sacrifices made by the District Judges and\nMagistrates who work under immense pressures and difficulties for long periods\nof time in difficult areas during their career.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Bar Association came under the spotlight\nover the Kannan matter. The Judicial Services Association  informed \nthe Bar Association that the Chief Justice had told them that the\nappointment had been made due to representations made to the President by the\nunofficial bar. This request had then been communicated to the Judicial\nServices Commission and the JSA had acceded to this request. The JSA  stated that it   had \nchecked with the Bar Association  and was told that neither the Bar Council nor\nthe Executive Committee of the Sri Lanka Bar Association had anything to do\nwith it. Some elements in the Sri Lanka\nBar Association have misled the President and the Chief Justice. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Bar Association\nwas also concerned. Their reputation was at stake. BASL appointed an expert\ncommittee to look into the matter. The expert committee consisted of Upul\nJaysuriya, Ikram Mohamed, Romesh de Silva, Upali Gunaratna, Nihal Jayamanne,\nAjitha Athukorale, W.Dayaratna, Faiz Musthapha and K. Kanageeswaran.\nThereafter  BASL held a meeting to\ndiscuss the Kannan issue. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

This committee\ninformed the Bar Association that  it was\nnot possible to ask for Kannan\u2019s removal as  Kannan had not violated any conditions set out\nin Article 111 (2) of the Constitution.  If\nthe President was to remove Kannan without due cause, it would set a bad precedence.\nAlso a disciplinary committee would need to be appointed to investigate  the Judge and his actions before any\nrecommendations for his removal are made. The BASL decided that since the BASL\ndid not recommend the appointment, they would now not intervene to either ask\nfor his removal or continuance.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

BASL President,\nU.R. de Silva, told reporters that the BASL did not approve of the appointment\nof Kannan to the HC and that the former BASL President Alagaratnam had\nrecommended Kannan in his private capacity, using letterheads of the BASL and\nthat it was wrong to have done so. According to the BASL Constitution, the\nPresident of the Association could not issue such letters without the knowledge\nof the Executive Committee. BASL made it clear that this recommendation was not\nmade by the BASL. BASL has nothing to do with this. A few people from the BASL\nacting on their own had gone to the President and asked that this appointment\nbe made. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

What  really happened  is this, said Chandraprema. A political party\nhad first approached the Minister of Justice regarding the Kannan appointment\nbut he had refused to accommodate them on the grounds that political parties\nhave no role in the appointment of judges. Then this political party approached\nthe Bar Association. Some members of the Bar Association had then written to\nthe President and followed it up with a personal meeting as well. The\nPresident, BASL then wrote to the JSC saying that the Bar Association would\nlike this person appointed to the High Court. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Presidential\nSecretariat said that Geoffrey Alagaratnam had met the President twice to\ncanvass for Kannan\u2019s appointment, not with members of the BASL Executive\nCommittee but with some outsiders. This was denied by Alagaratnam who told the\nBASL that he did not meet the President. Alagaratnam  also said that despite any canvassing he\n(Alagaratnam) may have done to the President and to the Chief Justice on behalf\nof Kannan, it was up to the CJ and the JSC to exercise \u2018due diligence\u2019 before\nrecommending Kannan to the President for appointment to the High Court.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

President Maithripala Sirisena stated that he\nhad not made an arbitrary decision in this regard. He stated that this\nappointment was made following a written request made by the Bar Association of\nSri Lanka (BASL). Mahinda\nRajapaksa  said that in the nine years\nthat he was President, he had appointed only one Supreme Court judge from the\nprivate bar and not a single member of the private bar had been appointed to\neither the Court of Appeal or the High Court by his government. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Bar\nAssociation is now a highly politicized body with a UNP parliamentarian once\nfunctioning as its President, said Chandraprema. BASL President played a major\nrole in the regime change project of 2015 and was given a top political\nappointment the moment the government changed.\nYahapalana was ready to give further powers as a reward for the role\nplayed by many lawyers in the regime change project of January 2015.  These lawyers knew exactly what power they\nwanted, it was the right to appoint judges. A group within the BASL, seeing\nthat Yahapalana was under obligation to them,   exerted\nthis power straightaway. It is they who nominated Kannan, said Chandraprema.  Kannan\nis obviously being backed by an influential lobby, said Hemantha\nWarnakulasuriya.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Alagaratnam just\nbefore he stepped down from the position of President of the BASL, had written\na letter to the new Chief Justice Priyasath Dep  saying  that\nthe BASL has \u2018every right\u2019 to make recommendations to the President to appoint\neminent members of the bar for judicial appointments and called on the President\nto consider the recommendations made by the BASL for appointments to the\njudiciary from time to time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Unfortunately, there\nwas no provision in the law to enable the Bar Association to make such\nrecommendations. Therefore, the first draft of the 19th Amendment contained a\nprovision that the Constitutional Council would have to consult the Chief\nJustice and the Bar Association in making appointments to the Supreme Court and\nthe Court of Appeal. This was shot down by the Joint Opposition  but re-\nappeared in the draft prepared by Constitutional  reform committee , which  gave the Bar Association a role in the\nappointment of judges to the superior courts. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

. <\/strong>Lawyers  for Democracy\u201d  in a statement issued in 2017,  justified the appointment of Ramanathan Kannan\nas a High Court Judge .There have been several appointments of private\npractitioners to the High Court from 1974 onwards, one of the recent\nappointments being that of  Paramarajah\nduring Chief Justice Sarath Silva\u2019s tenure of office. One of the reasons being\nthe lack of Tamil-speaking judges . <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In our view,\nwhen appointing a practicing lawyer to the higher judiciary, views should be\nobtained only from the President of the Bar Association and not from its committees\nsuch as the Bar Council or the Executive Committee. If the whole Bar Council or\nthe Executive Committee is involved there will be canvassing and open debate,\ncompromising the nominee\u2019s independence. The practice has always been for the\nPresident of the Bar Association to make such recommendations, whenever\nsuitable candidates are proposed.\u201dThe statement was  Signed Lal Wijenayaka, K.S. Ratnavale and JC\nWeliamuna, on behalf of Lawyers for Democracy. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hemantha Warnakulasuriya\nresponded. The appointment that was made when Sarath Silva was the CJ  was in 2007 when the High Court judge in\nJaffna retired and no other Tamil speaking judge was willing to go there out of\nfear, he said. Then Sarath  Silva went to Jaffna, and appointed S.\nParamarajah a highly respected senior lawyer as a High Court judge. The Jaffna\nBar Association and The BASL was not informed that such an appointment was\nbeing made. Paramarajah was posted to the Eastern province and the Eastern\nprovince High Court judge was posted to the North. That was a special\nappointment made in difficult circumstances by the JSC so as to keep the Jaffna\ncourts functioning, said. (Island\n3.3.17 p 10 )<\/p>\n\n\n\n

You have to look\nat all this from the point of view of the members of the judicial service.\nThose who join the service as Magistrates serve in various difficult areas and\ngradually get promoted. Their ultimate aim is to reach the superior courts,\nafter which they retire. That is their chosen career path. To deprive any one\nof them of a justly earned promotion by appointing an outsider is a crime,\nWarnakulasuriya added. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Judicial Services\nAssociation said that Justice Minister Wijedasa Rajapakshe had told them that a\npolitical party had wanted Kannan appointed a high court judge, suspicion\nnaturally centered on the Tamil National Alliance. TNA flatly denied\nresponsibility,  but loudly supported Kannan. TNA but strongly opposed the JSA call to remove\nKannan. JSA\u2019s\ndemand amounted to interference in the JSC. HC judge Kannan is still in office,\nSumanthiran said. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

President\nSirisena had made the appointment following JSC recommendation in consultation\nwith the Attorney General. “Therefore, legally, the appointment is valid,  said\nM.A. Sumanthiran. Kannan\u2019s appointment couldn\u2019t be rescinded by\nthe President.   The Constitution states\nthat once appointed a HC judge could be removed only on disciplinary grounds on\nthe basis of an inquiry carried out by the Judicial Service Commission (JSC)\nand thereafter on a recommendation made to the President. We don\u2019t see any reason to initiate a\ndisciplinary inquiry in respect of the new HC judge, said Sumanthiran. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sumanthiran said\nthat appointments to the Supreme Court, Court of Appeal as well as High Court\ncould be made from the judiciary, official bar and unofficial bar. He gave the example of appointment of C. G.\nWeeramantry from the private bar to the Supreme Court, It is conveniently\nforgotten that the Kannan appointment was made against the backdrop of a\nshortage of Tamil speaking judges. Kannan\u2019s\nappointment was also supported by Tamil lawyers. There was an unusual number of\nlawyers from Batticaloa at the BASL meeting, ready to defend Alagaratnam, observed\nthe media.   <\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is now admitted,\nsaid analysts, that Kannan has been appointed as a judge of the High Court by\nmistake. The former Chief Justice  had\nassumed that Alagaratnam was speaking on behalf of the BASL.  We now have\na preposterous situation where a High Court appointment has been made without\nthe proper procedure being followed. That High Court judge has taken oaths and\nis now functioning as a High Court Judge. He cannot be removed unless some\nwrong doing is proved on his part. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Bar\nAssociation of Sri Lanka has no constitutional, legal or moral right to make\nrecommendations for the appointment of judges and that if the private bar\nis given the power to recommend the appointment of judges, that would corrupt\nthe entire justice system with judges being dependent on the lawyers appearing\nbefore them for promotions and appointments, said analysts. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

If the judges of this country are going to be\ndependent on the lawyers appearing before them for appointment and promotion,\nthey will be compelled  to give them the\nverdicts that they want and it will lead to unimaginable corruption in the\njudiciary. If a member of the private bar is to be appointed to the judiciary\nat all, it should never be done on the recommendation of that lawyer\u2019s\ncolleagues. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Judges of the\nCourt of Appeal and the High Court are best appointed through promotion from\nthe lower judiciary or the Attorney General\u2019s Department. Furthermore, if at\nall a judge is being appointed from the private bar it is best that such\nappointments be restricted to the Supreme Court. Kannan   in the\nmean time, continues  as HC judge in\nJaffna. (Continued)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

KAMALIKA\u00a0 PIERIS BAMBALAPITIYA FLATS The cabinet has approved a multi-million dollar project to replace the Bambalapitiya Flats, a significant landmark in Colombo, lying on very valuable land. A plan was, floated in 2014 to redevelop the ten-acre land on which the Bambalapitiya flats now stand. UTL Global Projects registered in Singapore made the proposal.  A […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":true,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[118,104,106],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-86770","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-corruption-and-bribery","category-kamalika-pieris","category-106"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/86770","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=86770"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/86770\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=86770"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=86770"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=86770"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}