Opposition group urge CJ to action against President for allegedly undermining judiciary, contempt of court

The joint Opposition group held a press conference yesterday to share their views on President Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s May Day remarks concerning ongoing corruption cases being heard in courts and their letter to the Chief Justice – Pic by Lasantha Kumara

A group of Opposition politicians and lawyers has written to Chief Justice Preethi Padman Surasena seeking intervention over remarks made by President Anura Kumara Dissanayake on a pending court case, alleging the comments amounted to an attempt to influence the judiciary and could constitute contempt of court.

In the letter, the group urged the Chief Justice to take “such action as you may consider appropriate” after raising concerns over statements made by the President during his May Day rally in Maharagama.

According to the letter, the President had referred to a case heard the previous day, stated that judgment would be delivered on 25 May, and urged supporters to prepare to welcome the ruling with applause.

The signatories said the remarks raised serious concerns regarding judicial independence and the separation of powers, which they described as cornerstones of the Constitution.

“The President purports to have previous knowledge of a judgment yet to be delivered,” the letter stated.

The group argued that once hearings conclude, a judge’s duty is to evaluate the evidence independently and arrive at a decision guided solely by law and conscience, warning that any suggestion of outside influence risked undermining confidence in the judicial system.

“There appears to us no doubt that this preposterous statement represents a contempt of court,” the letter said.

The signatories further described the remarks as “a despicable attempt to bring pressure to bear on a judge” and said the alleged pressure was particularly grave given that it emanated from the Executive President.

The letter was signed by former President Ranil Wickremesinghe, former MP M.A. Sumanthiran, former MPs Asath Sally, G.L. Peiris, Premnath C. Dolawatte, Anura Priyadarshana Yapa, Nimal Siripala de Silva and Rohitha Abeygunawardena, along with Rajith Keerthi Tennakoon of Free Lawyers and Peshala Serasinghe of the LSSSP.

The letter states:

“We wish to bring to your notice a very serious development relating to the independence of the judiciary.

“During his May Day speech in Maharagama, His Excellency Anura Kumara Dissanayake stated, with regard to a pending case, that the hearing had taken place on the previous day and that judgment was to be delivered on 25 May. He exhorted his listeners to be prepared to greet the judgment with warm applause.

“We are aghast at this statement which has the most significant implications for the integrity of the judiciary and the separation of powers which are cornerstones of the Constitution of our country.

“Many issues arise. The President purports to have previous knowledge of a judgment yet to be delivered. It is a fundamental principle of our constitutional system that justice must not only be done, but must manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done.

“Once the hearing is concluded, the duty of the judge is to assess the evidence and to arrive at his conclusion in accordance with the law. His conscience is his only guide. It would be preposterous for the judge to discuss his judgment, prior to delivery, with any third party. “Whether the judgment would have the effect of pleasing a third party to the extent of inducing him to urge reception of the judgment with applause is a totally irrelevant, and indeed grossly improper, consideration. This has the clear potential to undermine public confidence in the judicial system, a matter fraught with the most far-reaching consequences. There appears to us no doubt that this preposterous statement represents a contempt of court.

“To put it at its lowest, this is a despicable attempt to bring pressure to bear on a judge in relation to a case being heard before him. The gravity of the situation is enhanced by the fact that the pressure emanates from no less than the Executive President of the Republic. It seems to us intolerably unfair to submit a judge to pressure of this intensity, exercised at this level, in respect of the performance of his official duties. It cynically erodes the foundations of our legal culture and values.

One of the few institutions in our country still enjoying the esteem of the public at large is the Judiciary. It is our firm resolve to do all in our power, collectively and within the framework of a functioning democracy, to protect the Judiciary from vicious assaults of this kind.

We wish to bring these circumstances, with due deference, to Your Lordship’s notice for action which you may consider appropriate in respect of this distressing situation.”