News
|
||||
Politics
of contempt Claiming that Mr. Dissanayake was the first parliamentarian in the world to become a political prisoner, Opposition Leader Ranil Wickremesinghe has appointed a high-powered committee to secure the release of Mr. Dissanayake. The committee comprising G. L. Peiris, Hemakumara Nanayakkara, Dilip Vedaarachchi, Ravi Karunanayake, Tissa Attanayake Sajith Premadasa, Mahinda Wijesekara and Rajitha Senaratne will explore all avenues of getting the former minister freed, UNP sources said. The UNP also hopes to make submissions to international bodies, including the Inter Parliamentary Union (IPU), the Commonwealth Parliamentary Union (CPU), the Amnesty International (AI), the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the International Council of Jurists (ICJ). Sources said that on the judicial front the UNP was hoping to seek a review of the verdict by a full bench of the Supreme Court. It would also appeal for a bench excluding Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva, the sources said. On a legislative level, The UNP leadership was considering the possibility of presenting a Bill to repeal the judgment of the Supreme Court. Local government bodies and provincial councils were also expected to pass resolutions in support of the Bill. The battle on the local level would also include a nation-wide protest campaign titled "National Movement to Free Political Prisoner S. B. Dissanayake". This campaign would begin with a mammoth rally in Colombo on December 21. The sources said the UNP hoped to gain the support of other opposition parties for this campaign. Though the UNP regards Mr. Dissanayake as a political prisoner, Prisons Chief Rumy Marzook does not agree. He said Mr. Dissanayake was being treated just like any other prisoner. "He is not a political prisoner, I don't even know where that term comes from," he said Mr. Marzook also denied that Mr. Dissanayake's lawyers had been obstructed from seeing him in prison. "All persons coming to see prisoners must comply with the Prisons Ordinance," he said. The S. B. Dissanayake case has given rise to a debate over the relevance of contempt laws in modern and vibrant democracies and constitutional provisions regarding a convicted MP. Transparency International's Sri Lankan chief J.C Weliamuna said that in other parts of world the law was applied restrictively. "In the United States, there is no contempt of court law and the judiciary is advanced enough to accept criticism. In my opinion, no law should curtail the freedom of speech, which is a fundamental right," he said. Former Parliamentarian and LSSP leader Batty Weerakoon said he believed there was no written law in Sri Lanka specifying either the definition or the methodology of administration of justice with regard to contempt of court. He said as Parliament was supreme, and its legislative powers unrestricted, it could bring a bill to repeal the verdict as long as it was consistent with the Constitution. Such an exercise has been adopted in the past. He was referring to the passing of a bill in parliament in 1979 by the UNP regime to overrule an injunction order issued by the Court of Appeal, restricting the Presidential Commission to inquire in to the conduct of former Prime Minister Sirimavo Bandaranaike. The Presidential commission went ahead and stripped the civic rights of Ms. Bandaranaike for seven years. In 1994, the People's Alliance Government passed a bill, nullifying the Presidential Commission verdict. UNP frontliner G.L. Peiris said that under Article 86 (d) of the constitution, Mr. Dissanayake could attend Parliament sessions. He said that the legal position was that a person would be disqualified to be a voter or an elected representative only if he/she was convicted for an offence for which the prescribed punishment was an imprisonment term exceeding two years. Prof. Peiris said that as there was no prescribed sentence for contempt of court in Sri Lanka, the sentencing was done as the court desired. The UNP Parliamentarian also referred to the recent "Haryana Declaration" which stated\ that contempt laws had to be applied with great care and not so as to impede the freedom of expression and not applied in such a way as to create an adverse effect. He said there should be no malice in the application of the sentencing for contempt of court. In Sri Lanka, sometimes murderers and rapists got away with six months imprisonment and Mr. Dissanayake had been sentenced for using a 'few words', he said. UPFA Parliamentarian Wimal Weerawansa accused the UNP of adopting double standards. He said that when Mr. Dissanayake was first charged for contempt of court while he was a minister in the former PA Government and received a pardon, the UNP had cried foul and said the Court had been too lax. Mr. Weerawansa said that it had been the UNP that had petitioned court in that instance asking that action be taken against him for undermining the judiciary. However, as Mr. Dissanayake was a member of the UNP, it had changed their stance. Justice Minister John Seneviratne said that there was no provision in the law to enable Mr. Dissanayke to attend parliament as the court ruling had stripped him of his civic rights. |
||||
Copyright © 2001 Wijeya Newspapers
Ltd. All rights reserved. |
