Much of the interest in politics this week moved to the courts, with important decisions being taken in the judiciary on issues that have been the subject of public interest and political rivalry. The matter that stood out was the petitioners in the Local Government Polls case, the subject of heavy and angry political debate, deciding to withdraw their petitions, which will enable the proposed Local Government to be held with no further delay.
This was a key political issue with allegations that the petitions were filed by six supporters of leading SLFP members in government, and it was a ruse adopted by the SLFPers to postpone the LG polls, now nearly two years late. The situation has led to two motions of No Confidence in the Minister of Local Government & Provincial Councils, Faiszer Musthapha, being submitted in Parliament by the Joint Opposition (JO) and the JVP.
 Provincial Councils and Local Government Minister Faiszer Musthapha |
The petitions filed in the Court of Appeal (CA) requested the gazette notification issued by the Minister of Provincial Councils and Local Government, on recommendations of the demarcation of wards in certain local bodies, to be considered as illegal, and declared null and void through a writ of mandamus. Minister Faiszer Musthapha came in for heavy criticism on this matter, from both the Opposition and Government benches, including the JO, JVP, UNP backbenchers, with many allegations that these petitions were a move to further delay the local polls, due to be held in early 2018.
There was much relief for Minister Musthapha when able to inform Parliament that discussions held with the petitioners, after the intervention of the Prime Minister and other party leaders; they had agreed to withdraw the petitions. The Minister said the complaints and the concerns of the petitions would be addressed in the best possible manner. Earlier the CA had issued a stay order on implementing the provisions of the related Gazette notification, and had observed the action taken in issuing the Gazette had been ultra vires. The CA had also decided against taking up the writ petition on November 30, as requested by the Attorney General the previous day (29th), as a matter of urgency, instead of the earlier scheduled date of December 4, 2017.
Meanwhile, the Elections Commission Chairman Mahinda Deshapriya, had already made arrangements to hold the election to 133 local bodies, not covered by the subject of the petitions in court. The situation is now clear for elections to be held to all local bodies.
The path seems clear, for the LG polls to be held in January next year, which would see the rivalries between the UNP, SLFP, and the JO and Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) seek the support of voters. This remains a matter of much political debate and disagreement, with moves still being made to arrive at some understanding between the SLFP led by President Maithripala Sirisena and the SLPP informally led by former President Mahinda Rajapaksa. The likelihood of a good understanding being reached is now most unlikely, with Mahinda Rajapaksa’s demand that the SLFP give up all relations with the UNP. But the stuff of politics is such, and the possibility of unprincipled arrangements is not ruled out, and the politics of the gallery remains a strong reality.
Gotabhaya and Medamulana Museum
The Courts came into focus again with the CA upholding the petition filed by former Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa seeking an interim order preventing the police from acting against him under the Public Property Act. The CA did giver an interim order effective till December 06, preventing the Police from acting under the Public Property Act against Gotabhaya Rajapaksa, related to a Magisterial Inquiry with regard to a complaint relating to the D. A. Rajapaksa Museum and Memorial at Medamulana, Hambantota. DA Rajapaksa was the father of Gotabhaya Rajapaksa.
The CA upheld petitioner Rajapaksa’s position that the charge of any offences against the Public Property Act is ultra vires or a violation of his legitimate expectations.
The Additional Solicitor General Dilrukshi Dias Wickremasinghe, who appeared on behalf of the Attorney General, did raise objections to the ex parte order by the CA, stating that no notice had been given to the respondents, prior to delivering an interim order. She said she was appearing in court only after reading a report on the case, and the Attorney General would make submissions on the next date, seeking a vacation of this interim order.
The case echoes a matter of much public interest, with Rajapaksa seeking to avoid arrest on the alleged charges relating to the DA Rajapaksa Museum, possibly seeking to show an alleged involvement in money laundering, stating that there is no related offence whatever.
The interim order of the CA, which is certainly beneficial to the petitioner Gotabhaya Rajapaksa, raises other matters outside the Court, which have been the subject of much political interest in recent weeks. This goes back to the discussions that a group of the Sangha had with President Sirisena about a possible arrest of Rajapaksa, and opposing it.
It also related to the statement by Ven Prof Medagoda Abhayatissa Thera that they had urged President Sirisena to settle the case in Court without resorting to wholly unnecessary exercise meant to harass one of those who had served the country risking his life, in the battle to defeat the LTTE. The Thera was speaking at an Eliya meeting addressing the media held at the National Library and Documentation Services Board, Colombo. The Ven Thera said Gotabhaya Rajapaksa was being hounded for building a memorial to his father, whereas the government was turning a blind eye to the LTTE celebrations in the North. The Thera warned the government of dire consequences if it demoralized the armed forces.
There have also been other warnings by members of the Sangha that they would launch a protest if any move is made to arrest Gotabhaya Rajapaksa. Also, there is a new organisation of leading personnel of the military involved in the battle against the LTTE has been formed, which also opposes any move to arrest Gotabhaya Rajapaksa. This is the politics of the Rajapaksa Drive, a new political initiative that has the support of intellectuals, former military personnel, and the Sangha, moving towards a new opposition to the goals in a new constitution.
What is important in the Interim Order of the Court of Appeal in the Gotabhaya Rajapaksa petition is that there is hardly any need for a major public protest or threat of action against any move to arrest this Rajapaksa; because the matter could very well be resolved in the Courts, on the basis of legality. This shows there is a definite improvement in the independence of the judiciary as seen in the past two years, and it would be best for the progress of society in the legal process being adhered to, rather than threats of varying types. There was also another group that said the President should pardon Gotabhaya Rajapaksa for any mistakes he made. Very good. But a pardon requires being found guilty first, which is a legal process.
Namal case
While the two above matters were taken up at the Court of Appeal, the Colombo High Court also saw an important case taken up, with the case against Namal Rajapaksa and five others for their alleged involvement in laundering Rs. 30 million through Gowers Corporate Services being fixed for trial on December 13.
The Attorney General had filed indictments against Namal Rajapaksa, Indika Karunajeewa, Sujani Bogollagama, Iresha Silva, Nithya Senani Samaranayake and Gower Corporate Services on 11 counts under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, for their alleged involvement in money laundering amounting to Rs. 30 million in Gowers Corporate Services Pvt. Ltd, owned by Namal Rajapaksa, between 2013 and 2014. It was reported that Gowers Corporate Services provided coordination services to Sri Lankan Airlines. The complaint in this regard alleged that Namal Rajapaksa an MP, had bought shares of a company named Hello Corp and later set up Gowers Corporate Services, while being an MP, from Rs. 125 million earned through illegal means.
This is a case that has been investigated by the FCID and is among several matters that were highlighted in the early days of the UNP-SLFP coalition, and is now coming up for judicial action, in what is believed to be the coming to reality of the pledge to fight corruption of the Rajapaksa Regime, which was a key policy of President Sirisena’s campaign for election.
It is certainly welcome to see such matters come before the courts, with the anticipation that the setting up of three new High Courts to hear the lined up cases of fraud and corruption, would lead to a welcome change in the government’s implementing of the pledges to fight corruption, both then and now.
Add new comment