The Hon. Dayasiri Jayasekara, Attorney-at-Law

¶ 01 Hon. Presiding Member, we thank the Government for bringing this important Bill. It has been discussed for years, but action lagged; I am pleased this Government is acting. However, we must always consider both sides. We have seen videos on YouTube of students hurling abuse at teachers while teachers watch on. We must consider the teachers’ side too. I am not saying to beat children; I say we must understand both sides.

¶ 02 Next, let me raise several matters, especially on judicial independence and the rule of law. In Opposition for years, we campaigned against injustices. We recall how Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake was brought here, “tried,” and removed—an utter injustice to a woman who served as Chief Justice for years. Because she would not support a politicized impeachment, she was destroyed.

¶ 03 Judges have no forum to complain about wrongs in appointments or transfers. They cannot appeal anywhere; they must accept transfers quietly, accept or be silent on promotions. If this Government is acting even worse today, what then? We heard of the Felix Dias Bandaranaike era (1970–77), when he would go to court and stare down judges—such pressure existed. That must not recur. Yet governments have always tried to place pliant judges where they want; messages went through certain lawyers and MPs to the President. Even today such things happen. Bench-fixing has occurred historically, and we see similar patterns now.

¶ 04 There is a Judicial Service Officers’ Association (JSOA) of judges—comprised not of the most senior, but of lower cadres—long independent. During the 2022 aragalaya, they aligned politically with this Government and its party; they became known as the “I agree” group—if ten of them banged the table, that was that. Now what? The immediate past JSOA President is Governor of the North Central Province; another former JSOA President, Champa Janaki Wijeratne, is Governor of Sabaragamuwa; another former President is Director General of the CIABOC; the present Secretary of the Judicial Service Commission is also a former JSOA President. Thus, appointments raise concerns.

¶ 05 Under Article 110(2) of the Constitution:

¶ 06 “No Judge of the Supreme Court or Court of Appeal shall hold any other office (whether paid or unpaid) or accept any other position carrying emoluments or benefits, except as provided by the Constitution or by written law, or with the written consent of the President.”

¶ 07 Why is that? To protect independence. If a Supreme Court Judge or Chief Justice, or a Court of Appeal Judge, on retirement is immediately appointed to a government post, independence is jeopardized. Consider India. As The Hindu of 5 June 2025 reported:

¶ 08 “Chief Justice of India BR Gavai has said that he and his colleagues in the Supreme Court have publicly pledged to not undermine the public’s trust in judicial integrity by accepting post-retirement roles or positions from the government.”

¶ 09 Yet here, the former Chief Justice—well known to us—appeared to support postponement of elections, and later was involved in that process, and now has been appointed as Sri Lanka’s UN Representative. Does this not raise doubts? We asked when the President signed the letter under Article 110 authorizing such appointment. Under the Right to Information Act we asked the Presidential Secretariat; they say no such letter exists. If the Constitution requires a presidential letter, where is it?

¶ 10 Further, former Chief Justices K. Sripavan, as well as Eva Wanasundera, Dehideniya, and Malalgoda, have also been appointed to various positions post-retirement. Our Hon. Watagala said there were 114 signatures demanding action against Justice Bandula Karunarathna; under President Ranil Wickremesinghe he was not appointed to the Supreme Court, was sent on compulsory leave, kept at home for months. If he was wrong, where is that motion now? He was neither found guilty nor appointed—this Government interfered. Is that rule of law or judicial independence?

¶ 11 On transfers: ordinarily these are posted on the web. Not this time. Preferred placements were made quietly. Senior judges were sent far away. For example, Chaturika de Silva, assigned to Mount Lavinia, was moved within less than a year to Kesbewa, though the norm is three years—because she heard the case concerning Minister Wasantha Samarasinghe and ordered that he be arrested and produced in court; police did not act; within two weeks she was transferred.

¶ 12 Mount Lavinia is an A-Grade court, usually staffed by senior officers. I will not name names here, but even in Colombo Chief Magistrate’s Court No. 4 and 2, two judges senior to the selected appointees were sent to Embilipitiya and Weligama respectively. A judge’s first posting should be at such key courts.