"Libel is such a profitable High Court casino, because only rich people can play - or, those with access to taxpayers’ money or trade union funds - and only big organizations can think of fighting them," states David Leigh, in an article in the London Observer.
During the criminal defamation trial against The Sunday Times editor,
one of the matters that came to be discussed was why the sanction of the
Attorney General was necessary to file an action for criminal defamation.
The only logical reason is that the voters opposed to the Government, the
oppressed, the suppressed, and the ‘praveni dasayas’ could be sued for
defamation. 
The
President cannot do any wrong. Neither the minister nor their henchmen
- or even the I.G.P - cannot defame any one as their words by the grace
of God are immune to slander and libel.
But vice versa is not true. That is why if any one belongs to the Lowly Category of persons, he cannot defame the Super Category. If a minister abuses you using the most obscene expletives, you have to believe that they are an exhortation from God. If you make a complaint about the manner in which a minister defamed you, the police will probably put you in the cell and start their usual rounds of battering you with sand filled alkathine pipes till your limbs and soul are sore with pain, but without any visible injuries.
Anura Bandaranaike made a complaint to the CID when the present ‘Sapumal Kumaraya’ made a statement questioning his paternity. Nearly six months have passed after the statements of Anura and his witnesses were recorded. Neither the CID nor the AG could decide whether the statement made by the modern ‘Sapumal Kumaraya’ about the paternity of the son of the great S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike who is the father of the President and the husband of the world’s first woman Prime Minister, is defamatory or not mainly because he is an opposition Member of Parliament.
The criminal defamation laws of this country do not permit Anura Bandaranaike to file even a private plaint against anyone who defames him casting unpardonable aspersions as to his paternity and the motherhood of the revered Sirimavo Bandaranaike, as Anura has to obtain the sanction of the Attorney- General.
This is the most ludicrous and undemocratic piece of legislation that has come into the statute book, introduced by the UNP to prevent private persons challenging the politicians in court.
But on the other hand, the speed with which the Attorney General’s Department indicts newspaper editors, shows either the efficiency of the Department or the political pressure brought on the Department. The case in which The Sunday Times Editor Sinha Ratnatunga and the case in which Lakbima Editor Bandula Padmakumara were charged, were based on the same news item. It is ironical that the case that drew the attention of the public of Sri Lanka and the international organizations which stood for liberty, human rights and the freedom of the press ended up in a conviction. The Lakbima case where there was little fanfare ended up in an acquittal.
Shiranie
Tilakewardena, High Court Judge, Court No.1, has throughout her career
displayed fierce independence. She has always maintained the decorum and
dignity of the Court wherever she presided, with great acceptance.
During the period of terror brought upon by the fascist JVP to overthrow a democratically elected Government, the JVP tried to establish that the Government was corrupt to the core; the Courts never dispensed justice, and worked against the oppressed classes of this country. The access to justice was denied by lawyers who fleeced the poor litigants; the poor had absolutely no way to obtain justice. It is a well known fact that the JVP collected material relating to some unfair judgements that had been given in favour of the rich as against the poor and brainwashed the JVP cadres to attack one of the pillars of the establishment, the Courts of justice.
A number of Court houses were burnt, record rooms destroyed and vandalized, notices were served on judges ordering them to close down. Most Judges had no other option but to close down their Courts. But in this turmoil, bloodshed and utterly insecure situation, Ms. Tilakewardena, was one among a few judges who sat during the period of the insurgency. She sat as the High Court Judge of Kalutara without any hindrance.
I believe even the terrorists who had their own intelligence network, were aware of the sense of justice which prevailed in that Court. She was not threatened and the Court staff continued to do their duty to the best of their ability during those dark days.
When Kamal Addaraarachchi was brought as an accused before the Magistrate Court, the Court house was filled with females and a large number of lady lawyers and female law students. They came and took seats early, not to sympathize with the teenage girl from a poor family who had been allegedly raped by Kamal Addaraarachchi, but to support the cause of Kamal Addaraarachchi, who to their reckoning was the greatest artiste that this country has produced in the recent past. It was their belief that if a girl over 16 years of age gets into a car and goes into a hotel with a man and was raped she is supposed to be the guilty party.
Ms. Tilakewardena’s judgement brought in a new dimension and cleared the false notions prevalent even today about the conduct of a girl in a society dominated by male chauvinists and Victorian puritanism. Ms. Tilakewardena shocked the conscience of the social hypocrites when, she convicted the accused and sentenced him to 10 years R.I. and ordered Rs. 900,000 as compensation for the victim.
On the other hand in acquitting Mr. Padmakumara, the editor of ‘Lakbima’, Ms. Tilakewardena carefully analyzed the role of the editor of a newspaper.
She said: "Every journalist, editor and publisher must display accountability. This can only be achieved by strict adherence to objectivity in journalism. Objectivity is only achieved by a commitment to a strong sense of discipline with the pledge to reveal the truth that is the reality of the moment.
Narrow approaches confined to petty personal prejudices, biased or hidden agenda must be kept out of journalism. Investigative journalism also requires journalists to act without fear or favour to the ultimate holistic good of the community. However, the criminal charges brought against the accused in Count 1 and Count 2 of the indictment have not been proved by the prosecution. Accordingly I find the accused not guilty and I acquit him of all charges".
In
Kamal’s case, the virtual complainant, or the victim was a destitute girl
who came from the poorest of the poor and the entire case in the lower
court was handled by the Legal Aid Commission free of charge as she or
her parents could not afford to retain lawyers.
In Mr. Padmakumara’s case the virtual complainant was the most powerful person in this country, Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga, the President of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka. It is my belief that the judgements in both cases reiterate the dictum of Lord Denning on Judges, in his book ‘What next in the law’. "They will not be diverted from their duty by any extraneous influences, not by hope of reward, not by the fear of penalties; not by flattering praise, nor by indignant reproach. It is the sure knowledge of this that gives the people their confidence in their Judges".
Return to the Editorial/Opinion contents page