The writ application filed by former Army Commander Sarath Fonseka on Thursday seeking a stay order on the move to unseat him from his position as a Parliamentarian was referred to be heard on the next day by a full Bench of the Court of Appeal.
The petitioner cited Parliament Secretary General Dhammika Kithulegoda, Parliament Deputy Secretary General Dhammika Dassanayake, Elections Commissioner Dayananda Dissanayake, Returning Officer J. Sylvester, Prisons Commissioner General Maj. Gen. V.R.de Silva, Lakshman Nipunarachichi and the Attorney General as respondents
Romesh de Silva P.C. appearing for the petitioner said that the order delivered by the Court Martial against the petitioner cannot be considered a reason to expel the petitioner from Parliament as the Court Martial cannot be considered as a Court according to the Constitution. Further he said that the conviction of the Court Martial was not endorsed by the President but only the sentence was endorsed. Therefore there is no conviction at all. He stated that even though the Court Martial arrives at a verdict the final declaration is of the President who has the power of vito. The petitioner states that every person should be tried on equal terms while his expulsion from Parliament not only deprives him but also deprives the franchise of all the voters who voted for him.
Addressing the Court, Deputy Solicitor General (DSG) Farzana Jameel said that the Court Martial was a Court and the judgment should be considered as Article 89(d) of the Constitution encompasses the Court Martial as a Court by the word “any Court” stated therein. She said that there is no prima facie case as referred to by the petitioner as he was tried like any other citizen.
When DSG Farzana insisted that it is a case of a combination of interpretation on the issue whether the Court Martial was a Court or not Justice R.L.Ranjith Silva said that the Court of Appeal will decide whether to seek a constitutional interpretation from the Supreme Court and not from the Attorney General. The Court of Appeal was not an incompetent Court and had the power to take a decision as to whether to grant interim relief and issue notice.
The Court of Appeal requested the DSG to assist the Court to come to a decision.
Justice Ranjith Silva said that the Court was divided in the issue of interim relief and referred the matter to the President of the Court of Appeal to constitute a full Bench on Friday.
Court directed the Court Registrar to issue notice to all respondents except the 6th respondent Nipunarachchi.
Romesh de Silva P.C with Saliya Pieris, Sugath Caldera, Riad Ameen, Shanaka Cooray and Eraj de Silva instructed by Paul Ratnayake Associates appeared for Sarath Fonseka. Deputy Solicitor General Ms. Farzana Jameel appeared for the Attorney General.
The case came up on Friday before the President of the Court of Appeal and Justice N.Lekamwasam and was listed for hearing tomorrow. |
E-mail
