The Hon. Arjuna Sujeewa Senasinghe, Attorney-at-Law

¶ 01 I am aware of your family’s legal background and values. Despite political differences, I expect you to safeguard the legal profession and judicial independence. Our legal system is developing; yet it is of high standard, and we must protect it.

¶ 02 We recall how during the tenures of Sarath N. Silva and Mohan Peiris, the judiciary was politicized, and opposition politicians and citizens suffered. Despite my battles against the Rajapaksas and attempts to detain me unlawfully, I still obtained relief from the Supreme Court—though the profession eroded in ways.

¶ 03 I raise a current concern: many Supreme Court practitioners say FR (fundamental rights) matters are being curtailed. Leave to proceed is often refused swiftly; some matters are dismissed within minutes, undermining what is the people’s ultimate remedy. Filing is expensive and arduous; yet cases are sometimes dismissed perfunctorily, while others are properly heard by different benches.

¶ 04 There are reports that about 40 judges’ work has been suspended without proper preliminary inquiry or disciplinary proceedings; they must be given fair opportunity if allegations exist. Politicization and religious entanglements must not touch judges—they must be independent and above political or religious ties. I recall Justice Dheeraratne—once on the Bench, he avoided all private affiliations; judges must live like ascetics in preserving dignity.

¶ 05 I have seen a video of a judge engaging in a religious practice at which an accused in a serious case, Gayyan Siri Manna (name per video), was present. If judges have such affiliations—religious or political—they should not continue on the Bench. Promotions tied to political decisions, bail decisions, or tenure extensions risk corrupting independence. Proposals to extend superior court retirement ages risk becoming inducements.

¶ 06 I therefore ask:

¶ 07 1. For 2021–2026, how many human rights/fundamental rights cases were filed each year? 2. How many were refused leave at the outset each year? 3. How many were granted leave to proceed each year?