An unprecedented happening during the proceedings of the Presidential Bond Commission inquiry on November 3 received maximum publicity. One of the senior most law officers of the State Senior Additional Solicitor General De Livera was severely admonished by the two Supreme Court Judges on the Presidential Commission for disregarding an order of the Commission and arguing that it was made with no regard to law or facts.
The front page of one newspaper had the following headlines boxed in red, black and white:
“Commission denounces conduct of A S G De Livera says it’s deplorable.
Chairman, Justice Chitrasiri and Justice Jayawardena say that such conduct has been witnessed for the first time.
A heated argument erupts following the order by Commission on Statements given to CID by witnesses”.
Prestigious judicature
In the face of the arrogant recalcitrance of the A.S.G. some of the statements and comments that the two Supreme Court Judges had been compelled to make, quoted below, clearly show the depths to which professional conduct has plummeted in Sri Lanka’s once prestigious judicature. One wonders whether it will go the notorious way of our legislature!
“I have served thirty seven years as a judge, and I have never seen this happen after an order is made,” Chairman, Justice Chitrasiri.
Admonishing A S G De Livera who continued to make statements following the order given by the Commission, Justice Jayawardena stated he had never witnessed such behaviour in his entire legal career.
“Your behaviour is not fitting to a Senior Counsel. I warned you about your behaviour in the chambers as well and I have never seen such behaviour in my thirty years as your deplorable conduct”.
“This is not the first time you have behaved like this after the Commission made the order. Definitely, we are going to think about this behaviour”.
After these admonitions, ad nauseam by two of the country’s most respected judges A S G De Livera who for months had been pompously hogging the limelight must surely be hanging down his head in shame (reminding me of the miserable Tom Dooley).
Personally, having been involved as a witness in trials such as the Coup trial, several murder cases and election petition inquiries; and having faced lengthy cross-examinations by eminent Counsel of the calibre of George Chitty, G.G. Ponnambalam Snr, Guy Wickremanayake and A.C.M. Ameer in cases presided over by highly respected judges such as Justice Sansoni, Justice T.S. Fernando and Justice H.N.G. Fernando, this episode is indeed shocking, to say the least.
The legal greats of the past with whom I was fortunate to interact in the course of my official duties particularly in the sixties when I was still in my twenties were men to whom courtesy and politeness came naturally. The respect that Counsel had for judges was exemplary. Most importantly in keeping with traditions and high professional standards, they were aware of the role they had to play to sustain the dignity and decorum of courts of law. Disobeying orders of a presiding judge and adding insult to injury by arguing can cause irreparable cracks in this noble edifice.
Lack of knowledge of court procedure
Insulting and intimidation of witnesses by counsel more with the intention of impressing clients or gaining cheap publicity are not uncommon, particularly in the lower courts.
However, to disobey a court order without compunction can arise only out of lack of knowledge of court procedure, professional arrogance, an assumed state of self-importance or wittingly or unwittingly to insult court. Under such circumstances, recalcitrance with no signs of an apology to Court forthcoming, the deplorable conduct as referred to by Justice Jayawardena stands compounded. In my humble opinion, even Counsel assisting judicial proceedings are not exempt from the law of contempt. Corrective action in some form is definitely called for to prevent a recurrence of this nature.
When most organs of the State are reeking with inefficiency and corruption, the country can be proud not only of the content of the human resource of our judicature but very importantly the disciplined and dignified manner of judicial proceedings. Unquestionably, this flows from the authority and respect that judges command.
Even at the proceedings of a lowly Mediation Board in a remote rural area the authority of the chairman is always respected, never challenged.
To contemptuously disobey an order of the Presidential Bond Commission particularly by a person expected to know and understand the gravity of such act is a complex challenge to the entire judiciary. The nation is beholden to Justices Chitrasiri and Jayawardena for their intrepidity to remind a very senior law officer of the State the rules of the game. Not to argue with the umpires and willingly walk when given out will forever remain the cardinal lessons of Cricket.
Add new comment