News
Three of the five sacked SLMC members petition court, challenging their removal
Three of the five Sri Lanka Medical Council (SLMC) members, including its President who were sacked by the Health Minister challenged their removal in the Court of Appeal this week.
SLMC President Prof. Harendra de Silva and two council members, Dr. Sunil Rathnapriya and Dr. Upul Gunasekara on Wednesday filed a Writ of Certiorari in the Court of Appeal on several counts including their removal from the SLMC and seeking an inteim injunction stopping their removal.
The other two sacked council members, Prof. Narada Warnasuriya and Dr. Pushpitha Ubesiri, are expected to challenge their removal on Monday.
The petition filed by Attorney-at-Law Sampath Wijewardena on behalf the three SLMC members is due to be heard tomorrow (Monday).
The five SLMC members were sacked by Health Minister Pavithra Wanniarachchi on November 29 following a report by a five-member committee appointed by her to inquire into complaints against the SLMC, the state watchdog body of medical education and professionalism.
The petitioners have also sought interim orders staying the appointment of a new President of the SLMC and from him holding any Council meetings until a final determination of the application by the Court of Appeal.
Meanwhile, the dramatic removal of these SLMC members created an upheaval among the medical fraternity, with media conferences being held in protest against this move by the Association of Medical Specialists (AMS) and several other organizations and in support by the Government Medical Officers’ Association (GMOA).
In Parliament, Dr. Tissa Vitharne questioned the legality of the removal of the SLMC President and other council members.
Former SLMC President Prof. Lalitha Mendis in amedia statement states; “What has taken place is against the legal provisions of the Medical Ordinance, harmful to the interests of the general public and an insult to the medical profession,” calling upon all medical professional bodies to take up this matter and express their views.
She adds: “As I am informed, there is now a very strong influence of a trade union bearing upon functions of the SLMC. As much as trade union action is important in the life of a profession, any influence it has on the SLMC is counterproductive as the SLMC is mandated with disciplining members of the profession (including members of trade unions). The presence of trade union members in the various disciplinary committees of the SLMC will make these disciplinary inquiries a farce.
“This is the kind of undesirable situation the SLMC is in which is mandated to protect the health of the public and regulate the profession.”