FINANCIAL CHRONICLE™
Dear Reader,

Registration with the Sri Lanka FINANCIAL CHRONICLE™️ would enable you to enjoy an array of other services such as Member Rankings, User Groups, Own Posts & Profile, Exclusive Research, Live Chat Box etc..

All information contained in this forum is subject to Disclaimer Notice published.


Thank You
FINANCIAL CHRONICLE™️
www.srilankachronicle.com


Join the forum, it's quick and easy

FINANCIAL CHRONICLE™
Dear Reader,

Registration with the Sri Lanka FINANCIAL CHRONICLE™️ would enable you to enjoy an array of other services such as Member Rankings, User Groups, Own Posts & Profile, Exclusive Research, Live Chat Box etc..

All information contained in this forum is subject to Disclaimer Notice published.


Thank You
FINANCIAL CHRONICLE™️
www.srilankachronicle.com
FINANCIAL CHRONICLE™
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.
FINANCIAL CHRONICLE™

Encyclopedia of Latest news, reviews, discussions and analysis of stock market and investment opportunities in Sri Lanka

LISTED COMPANIES

Submit Post

Poll

Can there be another Covid-19 wave in Sri Lanka?

 
 
 

View results

STOCK MARKET TRAINING
ශ්‍රී ලංකා මූල්‍ය වංශකථාව - සිංහල
Submit Post


CONATCT US


Send your suggestions and comments

* - required fields

Read FINANCIAL CHRONICLE™ Disclaimer



Latest topics

» Shares to Buy
by abey Today at 6:47 pm

» Boga unusual Collection....
by Wickyz Today at 1:14 pm

» MILLENNIUM HOUSING DEVELOPERS PLC (MHDL.N0000)
by jehan008 Today at 1:11 pm

» EXPOLANKA HOLDINGS PLC Interim Financial Statements quarter ended 30th June 2021
by mah2903 Today at 12:42 pm

» Sri Lanka FOB prices for black tea highest in the world
by samaritan Today at 12:18 pm

» DPL Take over
by Vishwanarth Today at 12:12 pm

» HVA FOODS PLC (HVA.N0000)
by samaritan Today at 11:02 am

» INDUSTRIAL ASPHALTS (CEYLON) PLC (ASPH.N0000)
by dayandacool Today at 10:09 am

» CITIZENS DEVELOPMENT BUSINESS FINANCE PLC(CDB.N0000)
by engineer Today at 7:06 am

» LANKA ALUMINIUM INDUSTRIES PLC (LALU.N0000)
by Jana Today at 3:36 am

» RENUKA CAPITAL PLC . KZOO.N
by Pbv Today at 12:22 am

» What will happen to AMF¿??????
by Tissa Yesterday at 11:46 pm

» Expert view on AMF??
by Tissa Yesterday at 10:12 pm

» Top Foreign Trading today
by SAGA Yesterday at 9:26 pm

» Sell EXPO Buy EDEN sentiment changed to Exit EXPO Enter EDEN
by Bakkabwoi Yesterday at 8:57 pm

» What are the short term profit stocks you are planning to buy on this Monday? (Only honest ppl please)
by Hope123 Yesterday at 7:04 pm

» Discussion on mechanism to aid investors, Conducted BY Hon Finance Minister
by D.G.Dayaratne Yesterday at 6:57 pm

» LANKEM DEVELOPMENTS PLC (LDEV.N0000)
by kadik Yesterday at 6:15 pm

» FIRST CAPITAL HOLDINGS PLC (CFVF.N0000)
by dayandacool Yesterday at 5:54 pm

» Top crossings today
by SAGA Yesterday at 3:36 pm

EXPERT CHRONICLE™

MARKET CHAT


CHRONICLE™ ANALYTICS


ECONOMIC CHRONICLE

GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT (GDP)


CHRONICLE™ YouTube

LATEST TWEETS

You are not connected. Please login or register

FINANCIAL CHRONICLE™ » DAILY CHRONICLE™ » PSC has no authority to probe CJ - Court of Appeal

PSC has no authority to probe CJ - Court of Appeal

+11
sahan8896
bullrun
traderathome
Chinwi
sriranga
D.G.Dayaratne
worthiness
wiki
K.Haputantri
Whitebull
Redbulls
15 posters

Go to page : 1, 2, 3  Next

Go down  Message [Page 2 of 3]

Whitebull


Assistant Vice President - Equity Analytics
Assistant Vice President - Equity Analytics
There is no room for another inquiry.Parliamentary commettee had been established according to the Constitution and Standing Orders for that inquiry.When things were not in favour of CJ, CJ walked away from the commettee.
So why there would be another commettee ? What if CJ walk away even from that commettee when things are not in favour of CJ ? Then another so called impartial commettee ? Laughing Laughing Laughing

Chinwi


Associate Director - Equity Analytics
Associate Director - Equity Analytics
(5) The Judge whose alleged misbehaviour or incapacity is the subject of the investigation by a Select Committee appointed under paragraph (2) of this Order shall have the right to appear before it ..... in disproof of the allegations made against him

CJ participated in the proceedings of this illegal select committee !.

(6) At the conclusion of the investigation made by it, a Select Committee appointed under paragraph (2) ....... ... report its findings together with the minutes of evidence taken before
it to Parliament and may make a special report of any matters which it may think fit to bring to the notice of Parliament;

Even the court decided the PSC is not acceptable and has no right to investigate and decide, it has acted as per the given procedures in the constitution and done its duty by reporting what they have found.

Now it is the matter of the Parliament to act according to the text in the constitution and execute its power.

Yes, PSC has no right to give a judgement. Its duty is to report what they have found. No need to have judiciary power for doing this.


(2) Where a resolution referred to the paragraph (1) of this Order is placed on the Order Paper of Parliament, the Speaker shall appoint a Select Committee of Parliament consisting of not less than seven members to investigate and report to Parliament on the allegations of misbehaviour or incapacity set out in such resolution.

This clearly says PSC is set to investigate and report to the parliament on the allegations of misbehaviour or incapacity set out in such resolution.

PSC is an investigative and reporting body to the parliament about the allegations set out in the resolution. It is not a court to inquire and give judgments against anybody.
IMO, today's verdict talk about a high powered body to give judgements.

Chinwi


Associate Director - Equity Analytics
Associate Director - Equity Analytics
@D.G.Dayaratne wrote:It is already accepted by average intelligent people

If necessary pl do a independent survey.

If we can have Independent general or Presidential election you can see very soon

Hi,
we can have different ideas and interpretations about the text in books and respect each other.

Somehow I cannot see any logic in the following statement at the moment: If we can have Independent general or Presidential election you can see very soon

K.Haputantri


Co-Admin
පාර්ලිමේන්තුව අධිකරණය හා ගැටෙයි
අවසාන යාවත්කාලීන කිරීම : 2013 ජනවාරි 3 බ්‍රහස්පතින්දා - 16:38 GMT

අග්‍ර විනිශ්චයකාර වරියට එරෙහි චෝදනා විභාග කිරීමට ශ්‍රී ලංකාවේ පාර්ලිමේන්තුවට බලයක් නැතැයි ශ්‍රී ලංකාවේ ඉහළම අධිකරණය දුන් නියෝගය පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේ බලධාරීන් විසින් ප්‍රතික්ෂේප කැරුණි.

ශ්‍රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණ තීන්දුව පිළිගැනීමට පාර්ලිමේන්තුව බැඳී නැති බවයි නියෝජ්‍ය කතානායක වරයා ප්‍රකාශ කරන්නේ.
සබැඳි තේමා

මානව හිමිකම්

බීබීසී සංදේශය හා කතා කරමින් නියෝජ්‍ය කතානායක නීතිඥ චන්දිම වීරක්කොඩි කියා සිටියේ පාර්ලිමේන්තුව සතු බලය සම්බන්ධව තීරණ දීමට වෙනත් ආයතනවලට බලයක් නැති බවයි.

විනිසුරුවරුන් ඉවත් කිරීම සඳහා ගත යුතු පියවර සම්බන්ධ බලය ඇත්තේ පාර්ලිමේන්තුවට බව කියා සිටි නියෝජ්‍ය කතානායක වරයා 'ඒ බලය අපි ක්‍රියාත්මක කරනවා,' යැයි ප්‍රකාශ කර සිටී.

අභියාචනාධිකරණය විසින් බ්‍රහස්පතින්දා දුන් තීන්දුවෙන් කියවුනේ පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේ ස්ථාවර නියෝග පොදු නීතියක් නොවන හෙයින් ඒ යටතේ පිහිටුවා ගන්නා ලද විශේෂ කාරක සභාවට අග විනිසුරු ශිරාණි බණ්ඩාරනායක ට විරුද්ධ දෝෂාභියෝග චෝදනා විභාග කිරීමේ නීතිමය බලයක් නොමැති බවයි.

ඓතිහාසික නිගමනයක්

මෙම තීන්දුව ශත වර්ෂ දෙකක ශ්‍රී ලංකා අධිකරණ ඉතිහාසයේ දී එළැඹි ඓතිහාසික නිගමනයක් ලෙසින් පැසසුමට ලක් කරන ආසියානු මානව හිමිකම් කොමිසම එමගින් අග විනිසුරුවරියට එරෙහි පාර්ලිමේන්තු දෝෂාභියෝග ක්‍රියාදාමය නිෂ්ප්‍රභ කැරෙන බව නිවේදනයකින් කියා සිටී.

දෝෂාභියෝග ක්‍රියාදාමය ට එරෙහි පෙත්සම් කරුවන් වෙනුවෙන් පෙනී සිටි අධිනීතිඥ ක්‍රිෂ්මාල් වර්ණසුරිය තීන්දුවෙන් අනතුරුව බීබීසී සංදේශයේ කේ එස් උදයකුමාර් හට විශේෂ ප්‍රකාශයක් කරමින් කියා සිටියේ අග විනිසුරුවරුන්ට එරෙහි චෝදනා විභාග කිරීමේ ව්‍යවස්ථානුකූල යාන්ත්‍රණයක් සකසා ගත යුතුය යන්න ශ්‍රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණයේ නිර්දේශය වූ බවයි.

නඩු තීන්දුව විසින් 'ශ්‍රී ලංකාවේ ව්‍යවස්තාවට ගරු කළ යුතු බව,' සහතික කොට ඇතැයිද අධිනීතිඥ වර්ණසුරිය ප්‍රකාශ කළේය.

රට ‘අරාජික භාවයට’

අගවිනිසුරු දෝෂාභියෝගයට එරෙහිව දිගින් දිගට විරෝධතා

මේ අතර කොළඹදී ජනමාධ්‍යවේදීන් ඇමතූ නීතිඥ සංගම් නායකයන් රජයෙන් ඉල්ලා සිටියේ අභියාචනාධිකරණ තීන්දුවට හිස නමන ලෙසයි.

එසේ නොකළොත් රට අරාජික භාවයට ඇද වැටීමේ අවදානමක් ඇතැයි ප්‍රජාතන්ත්‍රවාදය උදෙසා නීතිවේදීන්ගේ සංගමය අනතුරු ඇඟවීය.

එහි සම කැඳවුම්කරු ජේ සී වැලිඅමුණ කියා සිටියේ එම තත්වය උදා නොකිරීමේ වගකීම 'පාර්ලිමේන්තුව ඇතුළු සියලුම ආයතන වලට,' තිබෙන බවයි.

අග විනිසුරුවරියට එරෙහි දෝෂාභියෝගය විභාග කළ කමිටුවේ නිර්දේශ සැලසුම් කොට ඇති පරිදි ලබන සතියේ විවාදයට ගැනීමෙන් වලකින ලෙසයි

"දැවැන්ත මහජන විරෝධයක්‌"

අධිකරණය සුරැකීමේ එකමුතුව පාර්ලිමේන්තුවෙන් ඉල්ලා සිටියේ.

ජනතාවගේ පරමාධිපත්‍යය

එය විවාදයට ගතහොත් 'දැවැන්ත මහජන විරෝධයක්‌,' ඇතිවීම වලක්වනු නො හැකි බවයි එකමුතුවේ නීතිඥ ඒ එස් එම් පෙරේරා ප්‍රකාශ කළේ.

ජනතා නීතිඥ සංගමයේ උප සභාපති සුනිල් වටගල ශ්‍රේෂ්ටාධිකරණ තීන්දුව හැඳින්වුයේ 'අධිකරණයේ ස්වාධීනත්වයත් ජනතාවගේ පරමාධිපත්‍යයත් සහතික කිරීමක්,' ලෙසින්.

මේ අතර දෝෂාභියෝග පරීක්ෂණ වාර්තාව පදනම් කොටගෙන ඉදිරි ක්‍රියා මාර්ග ගැනීම තහනම් කරන්නැ'යි ශිරාණි බණ්ඩාරනායක අග විනිසුරුවරිය කළ ඉල්ලීම විභාග කිරීම ශ්‍රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණය ලබන සඳුදාට කල් දැමීය.

අගවිනිසුරු ශිරාණි බණ්ඩාරනායක දෝෂාභියෝග චෝදනා සම්බන්ධයෙන් වැරදිකාරිය කරමින් පාර්ලිමේන්තු තේරීම් කාරක සභාව දුන් නිගමනය පරීක්ෂා කිරීමට තවත් කමිටුවක් පත් කරන බව ජනාධිපතිවරයා මීට ඉහතදී පවසා තිබුණි.

අවසාන යාවත්කාලීන කිරීම : 2013 ජනවාරි 3 බ්‍රහස්පතින්දා - 16:38 GMT
BBC Sandeshaya

අග්‍ර විනිශ්චයකාර වරියට එරෙහි චෝදනා විභාග කිරීමට ශ්‍රී ලංකාවේ පාර්ලිමේන්තුවට බලයක් නැතැයි ශ්‍රී ලංකාවේ ඉහළම අධිකරණය දුන් නියෝගය පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේ බලධාරීන් විසින් ප්‍රතික්ෂේප කැරුණි.

ශ්‍රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණ තීන්දුව පිළිගැනීමට පාර්ලිමේන්තුව බැඳී නැති බවයි නියෝජ්‍ය කතානායක වරයා ප්‍රකාශ කරන්නේ.
සබැඳි තේමා

මානව හිමිකම්

බීබීසී සංදේශය හා කතා කරමින් නියෝජ්‍ය කතානායක නීතිඥ චන්දිම වීරක්කොඩි කියා සිටියේ පාර්ලිමේන්තුව සතු බලය සම්බන්ධව තීරණ දීමට වෙනත් ආයතනවලට බලයක් නැති බවයි.

විනිසුරුවරුන් ඉවත් කිරීම සඳහා ගත යුතු පියවර සම්බන්ධ බලය ඇත්තේ පාර්ලිමේන්තුවට බව කියා සිටි නියෝජ්‍ය කතානායක වරයා 'ඒ බලය අපි ක්‍රියාත්මක කරනවා,' යැයි ප්‍රකාශ කර සිටී.

අභියාචනාධිකරණය විසින් බ්‍රහස්පතින්දා දුන් තීන්දුවෙන් කියවුනේ පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේ ස්ථාවර නියෝග පොදු නීතියක් නොවන හෙයින් ඒ යටතේ පිහිටුවා ගන්නා ලද විශේෂ කාරක සභාවට අග විනිසුරු ශිරාණි බණ්ඩාරනායක ට විරුද්ධ දෝෂාභියෝග චෝදනා විභාග කිරීමේ නීතිමය බලයක් නොමැති බවයි.

ඓතිහාසික නිගමනයක්

මෙම තීන්දුව ශත වර්ෂ දෙකක ශ්‍රී ලංකා අධිකරණ ඉතිහාසයේ දී එළැඹි ඓතිහාසික නිගමනයක් ලෙසින් පැසසුමට ලක් කරන ආසියානු මානව හිමිකම් කොමිසම එමගින් අග විනිසුරුවරියට එරෙහි පාර්ලිමේන්තු දෝෂාභියෝග ක්‍රියාදාමය නිෂ්ප්‍රභ කැරෙන බව නිවේදනයකින් කියා සිටී.

දෝෂාභියෝග ක්‍රියාදාමය ට එරෙහි පෙත්සම් කරුවන් වෙනුවෙන් පෙනී සිටි අධිනීතිඥ ක්‍රිෂ්මාල් වර්ණසුරිය තීන්දුවෙන් අනතුරුව බීබීසී සංදේශයේ කේ එස් උදයකුමාර් හට විශේෂ ප්‍රකාශයක් කරමින් කියා සිටියේ අග විනිසුරුවරුන්ට එරෙහි චෝදනා විභාග කිරීමේ ව්‍යවස්ථානුකූල යාන්ත්‍රණයක් සකසා ගත යුතුය යන්න ශ්‍රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණයේ නිර්දේශය වූ බවයි.

නඩු තීන්දුව විසින් 'ශ්‍රී ලංකාවේ ව්‍යවස්තාවට ගරු කළ යුතු බව,' සහතික කොට ඇතැයිද අධිනීතිඥ වර්ණසුරිය ප්‍රකාශ කළේය.

රට ‘අරාජික භාවයට’

අගවිනිසුරු දෝෂාභියෝගයට එරෙහිව දිගින් දිගට විරෝධතා

මේ අතර කොළඹදී ජනමාධ්‍යවේදීන් ඇමතූ නීතිඥ සංගම් නායකයන් රජයෙන් ඉල්ලා සිටියේ අභියාචනාධිකරණ තීන්දුවට හිස නමන ලෙසයි.

එසේ නොකළොත් රට අරාජික භාවයට ඇද වැටීමේ අවදානමක් ඇතැයි ප්‍රජාතන්ත්‍රවාදය උදෙසා නීතිවේදීන්ගේ සංගමය අනතුරු ඇඟවීය.

එහි සම කැඳවුම්කරු ජේ සී වැලිඅමුණ කියා සිටියේ එම තත්වය උදා නොකිරීමේ වගකීම 'පාර්ලිමේන්තුව ඇතුළු සියලුම ආයතන වලට,' තිබෙන බවයි.

අග විනිසුරුවරියට එරෙහි දෝෂාභියෝගය විභාග කළ කමිටුවේ නිර්දේශ සැලසුම් කොට ඇති පරිදි ලබන සතියේ විවාදයට ගැනීමෙන් වලකින ලෙසයි

"දැවැන්ත මහජන විරෝධයක්‌"

අධිකරණය සුරැකීමේ එකමුතුව පාර්ලිමේන්තුවෙන් ඉල්ලා සිටියේ.

ජනතාවගේ පරමාධිපත්‍යය

එය විවාදයට ගතහොත් 'දැවැන්ත මහජන විරෝධයක්‌,' ඇතිවීම වලක්වනු නො හැකි බවයි එකමුතුවේ නීතිඥ ඒ එස් එම් පෙරේරා ප්‍රකාශ කළේ.

ජනතා නීතිඥ සංගමයේ උප සභාපති සුනිල් වටගල ශ්‍රේෂ්ටාධිකරණ තීන්දුව හැඳින්වුයේ 'අධිකරණයේ ස්වාධීනත්වයත් ජනතාවගේ පරමාධිපත්‍යයත් සහතික කිරීමක්,' ලෙසින්.

මේ අතර දෝෂාභියෝග පරීක්ෂණ වාර්තාව පදනම් කොටගෙන ඉදිරි ක්‍රියා මාර්ග ගැනීම තහනම් කරන්නැ'යි ශිරාණි බණ්ඩාරනායක අග විනිසුරුවරිය කළ ඉල්ලීම විභාග කිරීම ශ්‍රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණය ලබන සඳුදාට කල් දැමීය.

අගවිනිසුරු ශිරාණි බණ්ඩාරනායක දෝෂාභියෝග චෝදනා සම්බන්ධයෙන් වැරදිකාරිය කරමින් පාර්ලිමේන්තු තේරීම් කාරක සභාව දුන් නිගමනය පරීක්ෂා කිරීමට තවත් කමිටුවක් පත් කරන බව ජනාධිපතිවරයා මීට ඉහතදී පවසා තිබුණි.

Whitebull


Assistant Vice President - Equity Analytics
Assistant Vice President - Equity Analytics
There is another interesting point to mention. I have quoted this from Sriranga's post,
The Court of Appeal has today read out the interpretation of the Supreme Court that “The PSC has no legal power or authority to find a Judge guilty because Standing Order 78A is not a law.”
According to this this is the opinion of the Supreme Court and the Appeal Court has just read out the opinion of the Supreme Court.
When I read this I remember a nice Sinhala Idiom.......

D.G.Dayaratne


Senior Vice President - Equity Analytics
Senior Vice President - Equity Analytics
"Somehow I cannot see any logic in the following statement at the moment: If we can have Independent general or Presidential election you can see very soon"

The purpose of above statement is to warn the govt

I know very well What genuine supporter of govt say






Points: 1882
Join date: 2010-06-08
Location: Asia

View user profile Send private message

Back to top



Last edited by D.G.Dayaratne on Fri Jan 04, 2013 9:32 am; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : T correct mistake)

traderathome

traderathome
Senior Vice President - Equity Analytics
Senior Vice President - Equity Analytics
CJ will be impeached successfully with UNP abstaining or with voting in favour.....in the parliament and no doubt this is as per the constitution.

illan kana wedak wei madam ta.

TAH

traderathome

traderathome
Senior Vice President - Equity Analytics
Senior Vice President - Equity Analytics
@D.G.Dayaratne wrote:Govt can hang CJ after an impartial inquiry

That was the
most acceptable statement made an eminent lawyer at the forum committee of OPA held to day evening

CJ also requesting only for an independent Inquiry

Why the govt can't give this
whether she like it o not she will be given the send off through parliament.....it is like unp crying foul after loosing an election.....after election Rolling Eyes

D.G.Dayaratne


Senior Vice President - Equity Analytics
Senior Vice President - Equity Analytics


"whether she like it o not she will be given the send off through parliament.....it is like unp crying foul after loosing an election.....after election "

Do you think it is a VICTORY

It will be a defeat in the long run

All genuine Supporters of govt must give correct advice
This is not a personal ego problem
Grave Problem related to future generation

bullrun

bullrun
Assistant Vice President - Equity Analytics
Assistant Vice President - Equity Analytics
Whitebull

I off my hat to you!
Others please remove your colored glasses and see the facts. Though your heart beat high let your brain to take decision.
I don’t want to say what Government is OK in every aspect. But they have worked systematically. See even main opposition rejected the order of the court. Court has no power over the parliament. Whether the members of parliament are right or wrong is a separate matter but it is the supreme body. If anybody does not want to recognize the fact that the parliament is the supreme body, then we are talking about anarchy or dictatorship! Then the law means what he or she is thinking only.
Don’t measure the superiority of the parliament merely looking at the members of parliament! You and I have sent all those guys to the supreme place. You and I could have sent brilliant people like Dr.Colvin, NM, Kenaman etc. But we did not do it. Now it has become a den of thieves and it is a separate story!

bullrun

bullrun
Assistant Vice President - Equity Analytics
Assistant Vice President - Equity Analytics
@D.G.Dayaratne wrote: I would like to say again this impeachment is the biggest blunder of this govt

People around the HE and His Advisers are directly responsible for this unfortunate situation

Give independent inquiry and hang CJ if she is guilty

I think she is also asking for that

Hey, have you ever been to a court? Can you ask a different court if you do not satisfy with the proceeding? The only option you have is to make an appeal to a right place. No one can ask inquiring committee in the way they want. Have you ever work in any office? In a private or Government office? You are under impression boss, Just like a politico!

wiki


Assistant Vice President - Equity Analytics
Assistant Vice President - Equity Analytics
CJ was with them.. that is why she was appointed despite some allegations and her husband got the chairman seat of NSB.. but when she is not doing what they want..they wanted to get rid of her... so come the impeachment.. but prediction of the people who brought impeachment went wrong.. now all the lawyers are collectively supporting her because of the manner they conducted,impeachment, PSC and the state media...

I see some senior lawyers who were strong supporters of the gov are openly backing CJ...now there is international concerns on this matter .....some political parties have to think twice about the future actions...some people(esp educated) difficult to support government....previous PM told that it is wise to take a step back.. (similar incident happen with SF case but never learnt lesson)

Now CA has given a decision... legislature has another opinion.... so what is the end.. Now all are looking at this..

Now ball is in the gov court .... time to act prudently and to put the ego to the dustbin

Whitebull


Assistant Vice President - Equity Analytics
Assistant Vice President - Equity Analytics
@wiki wrote:now all the lawyers are collectively supporting her because of the manner they conducted,impeachment, PSC and the state media...
I do not think this statement is correct.We have right to express our opinion but we should not try to prove our idea with false infromations.

34PSC has no authority to probe CJ - Court of Appeal - Page 2 Empty SC ruling confirms UNP stand – Tissa A. Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:51 am

Redbulls

Redbulls
Director - Equity Analytics
Director - Equity Analytics
SC ruling has placed a blockade on the Rajapaksa regime’s dictatorial trends, the main Opposition United National Party charged yesterday, vowing to do everything in its power to stop the Government to passing the impeachment resolution in Parliament in violation of the Supreme Court ruling.

In a statement welcoming the Supreme Court interpretation of the Standing Orders governing the impeachment of a judge of the superior courts, UNP General Secretary Tissa Attanayake says that the Government must now seek to frame laws in adherence to the Commonwealth’s Latimer House principles on the removal of judges, before proceeding with the current impeachment process.

The UNP Members on the PSC did not appear before Court the impeachment was a parliamentary process and this position has been confirmed in the Supreme Court ruling which states that the impeachment is a parliamentary subject, Attanayake’s release said

“It is noted that the Petition filed before the Court of Appeal does not seek redress from the Opposition MPs on the PSC,” the statement added.

According to the UNP General Secretary, the historic ruling by the Supreme Court has reinforced the legal position taken by the UNP from the very outset. “Our position has always been that is that while the impeachment process is a subject falling under the purview of Parliament, the laws pertaining to the process are not sufficient and further laws need to be enacted to clarify and legitimize the process,” Attanayake said. (DB)
http://www.ft.lk/2013/01/05/sc-ruling-confirms-unp-stand-tissa-a/

worthiness


Senior Vice President - Equity Analytics
Senior Vice President - Equity Analytics
We talk of superiority of parliament because of the constitution. Practically it is the place where den of thieves thriving. It is too late now as they have been voted in selection process.
I would like to know that any single, honest politician seated in PSC? Some of them might have been summoned before the court & verdict had been given against them. Cope report locked & sealed may include many politicians. If some them include in the PSC, what is the validity of PSC & its decision?

Redbulls

Redbulls
Director - Equity Analytics
Director - Equity Analytics
The Supreme Court when making its decision, had not taken any notice of “by Standing Orders” in Article 107-3 of the Constitution which reads, “Parliament shall by law or by Standing Orders provide for all matters relating to an impeachment”, said former Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva.

He alluded that in 1984 Parliament had decided to act according to Standing Orders and held that no Court could direct Parliament to make laws.

According to the Constitution, the Supreme Court has jurisdiction only to determine whether a gazetted draft law is consistent or not with the provisions of the Constitution.

The former Chief Justice said that enacting laws is vested solely in Parliament which enjoys the people’s legislative power. The people could, however, exercise such powers at a referendum. If we were to enact laws as such Standing Orders would have to be done away with, he said.

The Constitution has stipulated that it is “by laws or by Standing Orders” and as such it is for Parliament to decide whether to abolish Standing Orders, if it so desires, he said.

“Had due regard been paid to Section 107-3, orders could not have been issued likewise. The discretionary powers of enacting laws are vested in Parliament and the judiciary cannot intervene. The judiciary cannot exceed parliamentary authority. According to Section 125 (1) of the 1978 Constitution, the Supreme Court has the jurisdiction only to interpret the Constitution. It is the exclusive right of Parliament to act according to its Standing Orders, former Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva said.
http://www.sundayobserver.lk/2013/01/06/new01.asp

D.G.Dayaratne


Senior Vice President - Equity Analytics
Senior Vice President - Equity Analytics
You all know who is Mr Sarath Silvo

sahan8896


Assistant Vice President - Equity Analytics
Assistant Vice President - Equity Analytics
Better stop this thread because we all no the final result.Time to focus on market fellows.

Jeremy

Jeremy
Assistant Vice President - Equity Analytics
Assistant Vice President - Equity Analytics
http://www.thesundayleader.lk/2011/08/21/sarath-n-silva-a-wolf-in-sheeps-clothing/


Sarath N. Silva – A Wolf In Sheep’s Clothing
Frederic Jansz
The origin of corruption is when someone thinks power is for him, his family and his henchmen, said former Chief Justice Sarath N. de Silva speaking last week at the launch of the website ‘Voice Against Corruption’
That Sarath Nanda Silva was a Chief Guest at this ceremony is not only ironical but laughable. It only personifies the ridiculous depths to which civil society will sink or choose willingly to adopt a comfortable state of amnesia.
That Sarath Nanda Silva was invited to launch a website which mandate will purportedly fight corruption speaks volumes for the ludicrous levels to which Sri Lankan civil society will stoop. But then these attitudes are so typical to our fabric.

http://www.thesundayleader.lk/2011/08/21/sarath-n-silva-a-wolf-in-sheeps-clothing/

40PSC has no authority to probe CJ - Court of Appeal - Page 2 Empty CJ’s petition to be heard today Sun Jan 06, 2013 11:48 pm

Redbulls

Redbulls
Director - Equity Analytics
Director - Equity Analytics
The writ applications filed by Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake, seeking to quash the findings of the arliamentary Select Committee probe and restraining the Speaker from taking any further action with regard to the impeachment process against her, will be taken up for hearing at the Court of Appeal today.

After delivering the Supreme Court ruling on the interpretation of Article 107 (3) of the Constitution the three judge bench of the Court of Appeal declared that as per the determination of the highest court, the PSC findings were prima facie void and set the date for hearing submissions on the Chief Justice’s petition for today.

Notice was also issued to all 11 members of the PSC to appear before the court and the Attorney General has also been asked to make submissions when the case is taken up today.

The three judge bench hearing Bandaranayake’s petition is led by President of the Court of Appeal S. Skandarajah and Justices Anil Gooneratne and A.W.A. Salaam. Appearing on behalf of Chief Justice Bandaranayake is President’s Counsel Romesh de Silva and his team, instructed by Neelakandan and Neelakandan, lawyers for the Chief Justice.

Meanwhile the seven writ applications filed by Chandra Jayaratne and others relevant to which the Supreme Court provided its ruling, will be taken up again at the Court of Appeal on 15 January.
http://www.ft.lk/2013/01/07/cjs-petition-to-be-heard-today/

traderathome

traderathome
Senior Vice President - Equity Analytics
Senior Vice President - Equity Analytics
........CJ will go home....thats the sad truth ...not for her but a scarce for the whole judiciary system if MR unseat her.....just saw the intepretation by former CJ Sarath Silva.......

the constitution is very clear about the process......

This is what happens...when you drag the whole system just to save the position.

its very evident CJ did not want to go through the allegations presented from the beginning......

i am with the parliament in this instance (i mean MR)......Jaya wewa......

Maha Rajata jayen pita jaya....

the govt must take special care to keep informed about our constitution inteprtation on this to the diplomatic community.....this bugger GL very inactive sometimes.....or is it most the time Very Happy

traderathome

traderathome
Senior Vice President - Equity Analytics
Senior Vice President - Equity Analytics
some oppositions opportunists say we mus not take the vote......on CJ......

what a cock and bull story...........this fellas muttering.....

janatha adipatya is supreme which is enshrined by the constitution....and protected.....

MR ta JAya,,,,,,,CSE ta Jaya....... Very Happy

This week will be jaya for all....... except UNP and JVP

Chinwi

Chinwi
Associate Director - Equity Analytics
Associate Director - Equity Analytics
රාජා හෝ මා හෝ ගංගා හෝ

සිංහල "හෝ" යන්නෙහි තේරුමට ඉංගිරිසි බසින් OR කියා යෙදේ .

හෝ / OR යන්නේ හේ තේරුම පහත දැක්වෙන පරිදි ය.
උදා 1:
පොරෝවේ හෝ කැත්තෙන් මේ ගස කැපිය හැක . = ගස කැපිය යුත්තේ පොරෝවෙන් මය.

සබන් හෝ ෂැම්පු යොදා හිස සෝදා ගන්න. = සබන් ම යොදා හිස සේදිය යුතුය.

ඔබ මෙතෙක් සිතා සිටියේ දෙකින් එකක් හැඳින්වීමට "හෝ" යෙදෙනවා කියා නම් එය වැරදි බවත් එසේ තව දුරටත් භාවිත කලොත් අපහාස කිරීමේ වරදට දඬුවම් ලැබීමට ඉඩ ඇති බවත් සැලකුව මනා ය.

අපේ රටේ ආණ්ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථාවේ මෙසේ සඳහන් වේ
Parliament shall by law or by Standing Orders provide for all matters relating to the presentation of such an address, including the procedure for passing of such resolution, the investigation and proof of the alleged misbehaviour or incapacity and the right of such judge to appear and to be heard in person or by representative.

මෑතක දී දුන් තින්දුවක මෙසේ සඳහන් වේ

The Court of Appeal today delivering the judgement says standing order is not law. Parliament Select Committee (PSC) has no legal authority ...
Court pointed out that to conduct such a probe,Parliament needed to appoint a committee empowered with legal authority.


රාජා හෝ මා හෝ හෝහෝ

Hanoifortune

Hanoifortune
Senior Manager - Equity Analytics
Senior Manager - Equity Analytics
"what ever go up have to come down one day"

K.Haputantri

K.Haputantri
Co-Admin
@Chinwi wrote:රාජා හෝ මා හෝ ගංගා හෝ

සිංහල "හෝ" යන්නෙහි තේරුමට ඉංගිරිසි බසින් OR කියා යෙදේ .

හෝ / OR යන්නේ හේ තේරුම පහත දැක්වෙන පරිදි ය.
උදා 1:
පොරෝවේ හෝ කැත්තෙන් මේ ගස කැපිය හැක . = ගස කැපිය යුත්තේ පොරෝවෙන් මය.

සබන් හෝ ෂැම්පු යොදා හිස සෝදා ගන්න. = සබන් ම යොදා හිස සේදිය යුතුය.

ඔබ මෙතෙක් සිතා සිටියේ දෙකින් එකක් හැඳින්වීමට "හෝ" යෙදෙනවා කියා නම් එය වැරදි බවත් එසේ තව දුරටත් භාවිත කලොත් අපහාස කිරීමේ වරදට දඬුවම් ලැබීමට ඉඩ ඇති බවත් සැලකුව මනා ය.

අපේ රටේ ආණ්ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථාවේ මෙසේ සඳහන් වේ
Parliament shall by law or by Standing Orders provide for all matters relating to the presentation of such an address, including the procedure for passing of such resolution, the investigation and proof of the alleged misbehaviour or incapacity and the right of such judge to appear and to be heard in person or by representative.

මෑතක දී දුන් තින්දුවක මෙසේ සඳහන් වේ

The Court of Appeal today delivering the judgement says standing order is not law. Parliament Select Committee (PSC) has no legal authority ...
Court pointed out that to conduct such a probe,Parliament needed to appoint a committee empowered with legal authority.


රාජා හෝ මා හෝ හෝහෝ

මා හිතන හැටියට මෙහිලා වැදගත් වන්නේ සිහල හෝ යන වචනය හෝ එහි ඉංග්‍රීසි වචනය හෝ නොව ව්‍යවස්ථාවේ ඔබ උපුටා දැක්වූ ජේදයේ සමස්ථ තේරැරමය.

ව්‍යවස්ථාවෙන් කිසියම් පරිපාටියක් සැකසියයුතු බව පැහැදිලිව කියවෙතත් අදාල කාරක සභාව ඉදිරියේ මෙම චෝදනා විභාග කිරීමේ නිශ්චිත පරිපාටියක් නොතිබුන බව කවුරැත් දනිති. කල යුතුව තිබුනේ එකී පරිපාටිය නීති සම්මතයකින් හෝ කාරක සභා නියෝග සංශොධනයකින් හෝ එකී පරිපාටිය සම්මත කොට විභාගය ඇරඹීමය.

විපක්ෂ සාමාජිකයන්ද චූදිතද ඇයගේ නීතිඥයන්ද පුන පුනා කියා සිටියේ චෝදනා ඔප්පු කිරීමට අනුගමනය කරන පරිපාටිය (එනම් සාක්ෂි ලැයිස්තුව හරස් ප්‍රශ්ණ ඇසීමේ ක්‍රමය ආදිය) මුලින්ම ඉදිරිපත් කරන ලෙසය.

ඔබ උපුටා දචැක්වූ ව්‍යවස්ථා ‍කොටසෙන් එවැනි පරිපාටියක් සැකසියයුතු බව කියවෙතත් එය මග හැරීමෙන් ව්‍යවස්ථාව අනුව ර්‍කියා කර නොමැත යන්න මෙම තීන්දුවේ හරය ලෙස ගත යුතු යයි හගිමි.

K.Haputantri

K.Haputantri
Co-Admin
Opposition reps walkout
January 7, 2013 12:54 pm
Adaderana

The opposition party representatives are reported to have walked out of the Party Leader’s meeting today in protest over the Government’s refusal to accept the Supreme Court’s determination on the impeachment.

traderathome

traderathome
Senior Vice President - Equity Analytics
Senior Vice President - Equity Analytics
@K.Haputantri wrote:Opposition reps walkout
January 7, 2013 12:54 pm
Adaderana

The opposition party representatives are reported to have walked out of the Party Leader’s meeting today in protest over the Government’s refusal to accept the Supreme Court’s determination on the impeachment.
playing for the Gallery Laughing

what an irresponsible opposition.... Shocked

TNA of course trying maximum publicity... Evil or Very Mad

K.Haputantri

K.Haputantri
Co-Admin
Vote on impeachment to be held on Jan 11
January 7, 2013 12:54 pm
Adaderana

Party leaders today decided to hold the parliament debate on the impeachment motion against the Chief Justice on January 10 and 11 while the vote will be taken at 6.30pm on January 11.

The decision was taken during a special meeting between the leaders of political parties held today (07) at the Parliament premises.

However, it was reported that opposition party representatives had walked out of the Party Leaders’ meeting in protest over the Government’s refusal to accept the Supreme Court’s determination on the impeachment.

The Parliamentary Select Committee has no legal authority to inquire into allegations on the Chief Justice, the Appeal Court on Thursday (03) said reading out the Supreme Court interpretation of the Sri Lankan constitution.

This was stated when two petitions filed challenging the impeachment of Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayaka were taken up at the Appeal Court.

The Appeal court further explained that allegations against a judge could only be investigated by an entity with judicial authority. If not the authority of the whole judiciary of the country could be threatened, the Court added.

The PSC was established under the standing order 78(A) and the aforementioned order is not a law, the Appeal Court observed.

Court hence stated that in order to inquire allegations the Chief Justice, Parliament needs to appoint and committee or an entity endowed with judicial authority.

Sri Lanka’s first female chief justice Shirani Bandaranayaka was found guilty on three counts on December 8 by a Parliamentary Select Committee.

“We have found her guilty of three charges out of the first five we have investigated,” Nimal Siripala de Silva, minister of irrigation and a member of the impeachment committee, told reporters on December 8.

He said the charges against Shirani Bandaranayake included financial irregularities, conflict of interest, and failure to declare her assets.

A lawyer for Bandaranayake said she had been framed, describing her as the victim of a “set-up job”.

Bandaranayake last year ruled against a bill proposing a budget of 80 billion rupees ($614 million) for development, saying it had to be approved by nine provincial councils.

The ruling angered the government and its backers, some of whom accused the judiciary of overstepping its authority.

Under impeachment proceedings launched last month, parliament speaker Chamal Rajapaksa, appointed a committee of 11 members, seven of them from the ruling party, to investigate 14 charges against Bandaranayake, ranging from not disclosing her wealth to professional misconduct.

The United States, the United Nations and the Commonwealth have raised concerns about the process and called on the government to ensure the independence of the judiciary.

The government which has more than a two-thirds majority, needs only 113 votes in the 225-member legislature to remove the chief justice from her post.

49PSC has no authority to probe CJ - Court of Appeal - Page 2 Empty Court quashes PSC report Mon Jan 07, 2013 6:41 pm

Redbulls

Redbulls
Director - Equity Analytics
Director - Equity Analytics
The Court of Appeal a short while ago issued a writ quashing the Parliamentary Select Committee report on the impeachment motion against Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayke and its findings.
http://www.dailymirror.lk/news/24812-court-quashes-psc-report.html

Redbulls

Redbulls
Director - Equity Analytics
Director - Equity Analytics
Contributors: Basil Fernando
January 7, 2013

A government's spokesman, Minister Vimal Weerawansa, was quoted in the BBC Sinhala Service today saying that the judges who have issued summons on the Parliamentary Select Committee will be called before the parliament to answer under the parliamentary privilege provisions of the constitution. He went on to say, "Now NGO fellows will catch Shirani Bandaranayake and try to bring contempt of court charges against us. We are not afraid of that. We will suggest as soon as these things is over (referring to impeachment) that all the judges who have been giving decisions against us should be called to the parliament under the parliamentary privileges. We should take the highest steps that can be taken against them under the parliamentary privileges. There is no judicial power to be raised against the parliamentary anywhere in the world. There is no power to obstruct the place (the parliament) which enjoys the people's sovereignty." He accused Shirani Bandaranayake, the Chief Justice, of using the Supreme Court for political purposes.

The threat of using parliamentary privileges against the judges of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal, who have issued summons and made decisions in cases which have been raised recently relating to the impeachment issue, marks a further step in the attacks against the independence of the judiciary in Sri Lanka.

The government's attack goes into a very basic questioning of democratic principles, upon which the separation of powers and the independence of the judiciary is based.

The government thinks that the people's sovereignty rests in the parliament and that the judiciary has no power to question anything that is done by the parliament. The assertion that the sovereignty of the people rests on the parliament alone is a deviation from the basic constitutional principle that the sovereignty of the people is expressed through all the three branches of government; the parliament, the executive and the judiciary.

The attempt is to treat the judiciary as if it is not a separate branch of the government but rather a subordinate institution to the parliament.

The comparison of judges, who have made some judgments against the impeachment methodology followed by the government, with terrorists is again an indication of the changes in the mentality of the government on the question of the separation of powers and the role of the judiciary. The judiciary's role in the interpretation of laws and its right to declare legislation or administrative action of the government as being in conflict with the constitution is being compared to terrorism.

This entire framework of thought, promoted by Minister Vimal Weerawansa and several other spokesmen for the government, is to relegate the judiciary into a position that is outside the government, even as an opposition to the government.

The debate that has developed in Sri Lanka is therefore a very fundamental debate relating to what the basic structure of the state in Sri Lanka should be. The government is quite earnestly pursuing claims that the executive acting through the parliament is the basic structure of the government, and that the judiciary is an external entity. The attempt is to turn the judiciary, through force if necessary, into a subordinate of the executive, rather than a separate branch of government.

Naturally, the judiciary (such as in the Supreme Court's judgment on the 1st of January, which was an interpretation of the constitution made at the request of the Court of Appeal) is asserting the basic principles on which democracy and the rule of law is based.

The government, in trying to assert that executive actions taken through the parliament are alone the state, are undermining the very foundations of the rule of law.

The government is attempting to give a basis to its power without reference to the notion of the supremacy of law. The government's claim is that it can define its own power structure without any reference to law or, in other words, the government is claiming that what it declares is law, and in making such a declaration it does not have to refer to the existing structure of the legal system as a whole.

What we have in Sri Lanka now is a fundamental crisis of rule of law itself. The implication of the government's interpretation of its power is that whatever position it takes is the 'law' and that in doing so it does not have to make any reference to the existing law.

The implication of the government's position is that their rule means making pragmatic arrangements in whatever way they wish and whenever they wish, irrespective of total structure defined by law within which the government has to function.

Through the attack on the judiciary, what is really being attacked is the idea of law itself. The government sees law as a series of pragmatic arrangements that do not have to relate to an overall legal structure and legal principles. Thus, the constitutional crisis that exists now is one that the executive has created for itself. It wants to bulldoze its way with the rogue 2/3 majority it has in parliament, irrespective of whatever conflicts it is creating with the overall structure of the legal system. The executive is behaving like a train driver that wants to run on or outside the railroad. That is how it has created these crises.

The government tried to blame the crises they have created for themselves on the judiciary. They cannot comprehend that all that the judiciary is doing is calling attention to the overall framework of the legal structure and pointing to where the government has derailed itself.

All this points to the fact that the total crisis that the government has created for themselves will not go away by the way they deal with the impeachment issue. In fact, the impeachment issue is only a small part of a much bigger and a complex crisis. All the propaganda that is created through the state media, making the Chief Justice, the other judges, lawyers and everyone who is calling for adherence to the rule of law into scapegoats, will in no way take the government outside the complex crisis that they are faced with.

The government's problem is not the Chief Justice or anyone else. In fact, the executive's crisis is itself. The end of the "war" has brought this crisis to the surface.

Instead of blaming the Chief Justice and others, the executive must looks itself in the mirror. It will see itself in chaos due to measures it has itself created.

The overall legal structure of Sri Lanka is not something that the executive will be able to get rid of easily. In every move it takes with that purpose, it will get itself far more deeply entangled with deeper problems and deeper conflicts.

If the executive does not look in the mirror, then no amount of blaming others will get the executive out of this mess.
http://www.humanrights.asia/news/ahrc-news/AHRC-ART-005-2013

Sponsored content


Back to top  Message [Page 2 of 3]

Go to page : 1, 2, 3  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum