Jaffna 
              lawyer wants access to his land in high security zone 
              By Telles Anandappa  
              A lawyer in Jaffna who claims his rights has been violated by the 
              failure to remove a barricade put up by the Army on the grounds 
              that the area belongs to a high security zone has been granted leave 
              to proceed by the Supreme Court in a fundamental rights petition 
              filed by him.  
             The 
              Bench comprised Justices T.B.Weerasuriya, N.E. Dissanayaka and G. 
              Amaratunge. The petitioner P.V.Sriranjan of Vadukoddai who is practising 
              in Jaffna and Colombo cited the Commander of the Sri Lanka Army, 
              Security Forces Commander for Jaffna and Palaly, and the Attorney 
              General as respondents.  
             He 
              states he is the owner of land and premises no. 187 and 189 in Power 
              House Road presently named C. Ponnambalam Road. This land is situated 
              in the heart of town, 10 metres from the Jaffna main bus stand and 
              also in close proximity to the Jaffna General Hospital. This is 
              also a prime commercial area.  
             He 
              claims that when the Army entered Jaffna in 1995 and set up, inter 
              alia, a high security zone in a portion of Jaffna town this move 
              included the petitioner's premises and land. The zone also included 
              two leading hotels.  
             He 
              further states that several barricades have been placed at the point 
              on entry to the high security area which prevented movement of civilians 
              and area residents.  
             After 
              the ceasefire agreement was signed the situation in Jaffna improved 
              and peace prevailed. Eventually some of the barricades were removed 
              or moved and access and movement was freely possible.  
             Several 
              requests to the relevant authorities to have the barricade moved 
              to about 50 metres away from its present position and also to vacate 
              his premises were futile.  
             The 
              petitioner declared that the continued occupation of his premises 
              by the Army and his continued restriction from entering the area 
              is arbitrary and capricious and is violating his fundamental rights 
              under Article 12(1) of the Constitution. He requests the Court to 
              order the 1st and 2nd respondents to shift the barricade and to 
              grant access to his premises and land.   |