Hulftsdorp Hill

29th November 1998

The meeting of the ‘Friends of the Chair’

By Mudliyar

We must wholeheartedly congratulate President Chandrika Kumaratunga for having exhibited the true nature of her governance, by appointing Bandula (Show) Wickremasinghe as director of the Crimes Detective Bureau.

This post became vacant when Chandra Perera died in Jaffna in a recent bomb blast. Mr. Perera was a gentleman, and a computer buff. He had his colour printer in his office with charts showing the progress the CDB had made during his short but eventful tenure.

The CDB director under the UNP was an important post. The director was known as D1. All the police stations had branches of the CDB. All grave crimes were investigated by these branches and instructions came directly from the CDB Headquarters at Gregory’s Road. The director and not the OIC of the station had control over the CDB.

Later the PA government dismantled this structure and the CDB became less effective but it is used for anti-terrorist activities. It must be noted that unlike in the CID, where a DIG is above the director, in the CDB the superior most officer is the director, who at present, by the grace of Ms. Kumaratunga, is Bandula (Show) Wickramasinghe.

After the arrest, and as things were settling down, it was important to compliment Show Wickremasinghe, a brave Police Officer who had many interesting episodes with the public, and about whose conduct many things have been said by the Supreme Court.

Naturally the government desires to promote him. As there may not be many posts of DIG vacant, the government apparently does the next best thing. It appoints him as the CDB director.

The government could not care less for the Bar or for that matter the judiciary. The resolutions of the Bar Association sent to the President, may have found their way to the waste paper basket.

The appointment of Mr. Wickremasinghe as the CDB director came on the eve of the decision of the Court of Appeal President, Justice Ameer Ismail, to appoint a three-judge bench to go into the matter of contempt of court allegedly committed by Mr. Wickremasinghe.

Court of Appeal judges except Justice Nihal Jayasinghe agreed that rule would lie to charge Mr. Wickremasinghe with contempt.

It was heartening to note that the Court of Appeal has taken action against Lake House over an article in the Sunday Observer and Silumina which was highly critical of High Court judges.

The High Court judges resolved that no judge of the High Court ever dined with any politico, who had a case before them as published in these newspapers. This was the first attempt to bring into disrepute the High Court judges perhaps, mainly due to the fact that Mr. Tillekeratna gave a judgment acquitting Rajitha Senaratna.

We informed the readers as soon as this was published and when authorities found that it was false, the CID or the NIB was allegedly used to prepare false entries to show that the matters discussed in the publication were true.

It would be revealing to find out how the CID would inquire into an allegation against the editors of two important newspapers published by the government.

The basic fact is that every judge of the high court has dismissed this story. The government would use all the methods known to the police to prove that the publication is true.

Or it would drag the inquiry until the whole episode is forgotten. What is needed as postulated by the President of the Bar is immediate action before the public lose confidence in the only institution that has stood the test of time.

What amazes me is the vain effort by some members of the Executive Committee of the Bar Association to soft pedal the whole issue. When our sister paper Midweek Mirror contacted them one important person has said: “the Committee did not decide to take stronger action as it was unclear if the appointment was a promotion or whether it was made by the President.

The President is the Minister of Defence. I believe the members of the Executive Committee know that. The Police is under the Ministry of Defence. The spokesman of the Bar could not be oblivious to it. Certainly ‘Show’ Wickremasinghe was not demoted. And as was demanded by the Bar was not interdicted.”

With consternation we recognize the disrespect of the judicial orders of this country, where the fundamental principle of justice and fair play is ignored and the errant officials are safeguarded.

The reason for this grave situation culminated from the fierce judicial independence displayed by judges of this country. When the Supreme Court made strictures in fundamental rights application, the politicians growled, groaned and castigated the decisions.

They most meekly used Parliament and under the cover of privileges, not following the Standing Orders castigated the judiciary. Both the government and the opposition are responsible for this outrage.

Then the government filed cases against two of the most virulent critics of the government. Rajitha Senaratna and Sarath Kongahage. Dr. Senaratna’s case was clear fabrication. Mr. Kongahahge’s case appears to be even worse. It is about a forgery on a power of attorney.

The complainant not only used the alleged forged document in a civil case, but swore an affidavit and based a claim for civil damages on the strength of the Power of Attorney in the District Court of Mt Lavinia. Yet the Attorney-General’s Department thinks it fit to send down an indictment against Mr. Kongahage. The free media join the more progressive lawyers of treachery by the law enforcement agencies.

The President of the Bar Association Romesh De Silva must be commended for having accepted in principle the concept ‘Friends of the Chair’, where all past presidents were to meet to stave off the crisis situation, the profession and the Judiciary are facing today.

Victor Ivan, the editor of Ravaya, then discloses some details about abuse of power relating to Mr. Sarath Silva, which if proved, may show that Mr. Silva as a court of appeal judge abused his power. It was the allegations made by Mr. Ivan that prompted the Bar Association to convene a meeting of its past presidents.

The meeting was held on Thursday at President’s Counsel H.L. De Silva’s residence. Mr. De Silva was joined by Desmond Fernando P.C., Ranjit Abeysuriya P.C., Abeyakoon, Romesh De Silva and W. Dayaratne (Convenor).

Eardley Perera P.C. was absent as he had to attend an important prize giving where his son was a recipient, his brother Herman J. C. Perera was ill and could not attend the meeting. When the meeting started everyone showed concern and anxiety regarding what was said by ‘Ravaya’ about the conduct of three judges - Sarath N Silva, Upali Abeyratna, Lenin Ratnayake.

N.R. M. Daluwatte P.C. who arrived late said Mr. Ivan had met Sarath Silva at the AG’s office and the matters had been amicably settled. He indicated that Mr. Ivan had agreed to drop the matter. Mr. H.L de Silva when he was the President of the Bar had earlier confronted Mr. Daluwatte when he made submissions on many varied matters when he was a member of the Executive Committee of the Bar Associatrion. He said that this was not a personal matter between Mr. Ivan and Mr. Sarath Silva and it was a matter which had far reaching implications in the country, the Bar and more importantly the judiciary.

At the meeting it was decided that BASL president Romesh De Silva should meet the Chief Justice and the other members of the commission, and impress upon the commissioners to inquire into the Ravaya allegations against Mr. Upali Abeyratne District Judge of Gampaha. Then if the allegations are proved, to decide what action should be taken against the Attorney-General.

We do not know how Mr. Daluwatte got this idea that the matter has been settled between the editor of Ravaya and Sarath Silva. From what Mr. Ivan has written in this weeks Ravaya about his meeting with the AG the matter has certainly not been droped by Ravaya.

As R. K. W. Goonesekera pointed out one of the gravest indictment on the legal profession as alleged by Ravaya was that Mr. Jayasekera could not retain a lawyer of any repute, from Colombo and had to go to Kandy to retain a lawyer to appear for him.

Mudliyar’s musings

Amaradasa Fernando writes:

Sometimes it so happens that one buys a newspaper because there is a regularly weekly special column. One waits for it eagerly. It becomes like opium, looking forward to it every weekend.

One such is the Sunday Times Legal Correspondent’s “Mudliyar” which is compulsory reading for me. I look forward to reading his column, although I do not see eye to eye with Mudliyar, because of his sometimes, political slant, tilting the scales of justice which he professes to uphold. I still like him, because he is fearless in his criticisms and exposures. He does not descend to the level of the “private eye”, a legal paparazzi.

Another reason for my liking his caustic pen is because “Mudliyar” is a good raconteur. In a recent column he recalled an incident where he was present when that great lawyer Dr. Colvin R. De Silva, always given to high drama, having listened to his colleagues, suddenly put his head on the table and appeared to go into a deep slumber for almost half an hour. With equal suddenness he woke up from his reverie. In his gravel voice, he gave his opinion to a stunned audience. Colvin said, “lets get to first principles and read the C.P.C.” which he would have known backwards and forwards. He gave a new interpretation, which helped to amend the Law of Defamation as he had done in many case laws helping to enrich legal enactments of Sri Lanka. After Colvin had spoken like Sir Oracle, in the silence of the night, one could not hear even a dog bark!

Mudliyar, from the babel of voices emanating from the warrens of Hulftsdorp Hill, knows his legal onions, pungent yet not offensive. I think it be a great service that Mudliyar would be doing not only to the legal fraternity but to the lay reader, if he could include in his column an anecdote about well known lawyers. For example, the great HV who reading a brief prepared by his junior would dot the i’s and dash the r’s only with a green pen. My friend Lakshman Kadirgamar once did an opinion for me on life insurance with regard to the avoidance of estate duty. It was a 12 page document with a lot of case law from the U.K.

Lakshman told me that he would get HV also to set his hand on the document to give it added prestige. HV because of his great regard for his junior did not take a fee for it. I told Lakshman that since HV was such a busy man he would have relied on him and signed only after a cursory glance. Lakshman said “what nonsence! HV would never do such a thing. See on page 11 he has added a comma in green ink!” Hallmark of a gentleman! I hope Mudliyar will take my suggestion seriously. More strength to his legal elbow.

Outside Politics

Editorial/Opinion Contents