The Hon. Bimal Rathnayake

¶ 01 Madam Deputy Chairperson of Committees, under an earlier Ruling, I seek a few minutes to clarify the basis on which Parliament may discuss judges, referring to Standing Order 83.

¶ 02 Standing Order 83(1) concerns judges’ personal conduct. In addition to Standing Orders, the House is also guided by Rulings of Speakers and Presiding Members. I wish to cite a foundational Ruling by then Prime Minister S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike in 1958 regarding discussion not of a judge’s private life, but his administrative conduct, and the subsequent Speaker’s Ruling.

¶ 03 Quoting Hansard of 19 August 1958, Mr. Bandaranaike said that grave allegations against the conduct of a magistrate were out of order under then Standing Order 89, and that proceedings must follow Standing Orders. The Speaker, H.S. Ismail, on 20 August 1958 (col. 896), ruled that the discussion directed at the magistrate’s conduct in relation to the administration of justice in his court was out of order, and regretted the irregularity.

¶ 04 Similarly, on 5 June 1997, when Hon. Rauff Hakeem was in the Chair, Hon. Richard Pathirana referred to a case; references regarding the Nalanda Ellawala murder case were ordered to be expunged. The Deputy Chair ruled that references to a Magistrate’s conduct must be expunged (cols. 345–347). Thus, per rulings, debate on a judge’s administrative conduct is not permitted, not just personal matters.

¶ 05 Thank you.