In September 2024, The incumbent President Anura Kumara Dissanayake won Sri Lanka’s presidential election after a historic second round of counting.
In November 2024, The NPP Government led by President Anura Kumara Dissanayake who promised voters good governance, independence of the judiciary and tough anticorruption measures won a two third majority in Parliament. President Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s National People’s Power party has pledged to end corruption and transform Sri Lanka’s political culture.
The recent call for the resignation of President of the Court of Appeal Justice Bandula Karunarathna by the administration of Sri Lanka’s President Anura Kumara Dissanayake has raised significant concerns about the independence of the judiciary in Sri Lanka.
This unprecedented move highlights the delicate balance between governmental authority and judicial autonomy, a cornerstone of democratic governance.
Justice Bandula Karunarathna started his career as a Judge and counts over 37 year’s experience in the judiciary, Justice Karunarathna held a variety of positions; firstly, as a Primary Court Judge, thereafter an Additional Magistrate, Magistrate, Additional District Judge, District Judge, High Court Judge, Civil Appellate High Court Judge and eventually as a Judge of Court of Appeal in February 2019.
Justice Bandula Karunarathna has been a prominent figure in Sri Lanka’s judiciary, holding the critical position of President of the Court of Appeal. This court plays a pivotal role in reviewing decisions from lower courts and ensuring that justice is administered fairly. The request for his resignation by the new administration has not been accompanied by a detailed explanation, which intensifies public skepticism about the motives behind this demand.
Judicial independence is a fundamental principle in any democracy, ensuring that the judiciary operates free from external pressures, whether political, economic, or social.
An independent judiciary acts as a check on the executive and legislative branches of government, safeguarding the rule of law and protecting citizens’ rights.
If the judiciary is subjected to political influence or coercion, its ability to make impartial decisions is compromised. This, in turn, erodes public trust in the legal system and can lead to a breakdown of democratic principles.
President Anura Kumara Dissanayake recently appointed four new justices to the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka: Justice Sobitha Rajakaruna, Justice Menaka Wijesundera, Justice Sampath Abaykoon, and Justice Sampath Wijeratne. However, this decision has drawn significant criticism as two highly senior and respected judges—Justice Bandula Karunarathna, the President of the Court of Appeal, and Justice Mohammed Laffar — were overlooked. This development raises pressing concerns about fairness, transparency, and adherence to the principle of judicial independence in Sri Lanka.
Justice Bandula Karunarathna and Justice Mohammed Laffar were the first and fourth most senior judges, respectively, in the Court of Appeal. Their extensive experience and seniority made them natural candidates for elevation to the Supreme Court. In judicial systems, seniority often serves as a critical factor in appointments to higher courts to ensure that seasoned judges with a proven track record of jurisprudence ascend to positions of greater authority.
Disregarding seniority disrupts long-established conventions within the judiciary. Such norms are essential for maintaining order, continuity, and respect within the legal profession. By bypassing the most senior judges, the government risks undermining these traditions and creating uncertainty about the criteria for judicial promotions.
Justice Mohammed Laffar’s omission to the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka also raises concerns about inclusivity in judicial appointments. As a member of a minority community, his elevation to the Supreme Court could have reinforced public trust in the judiciary’s commitment to representing all sections of society. Overlooking such a candidate risks alienating minority groups and fostering perceptions of bias.
The administration of President Anura Kumara Dissanayake has been accused of attempting to appoint loyalists to key judicial positions, including the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal. This approach not only undermines the principles of fairness and impartiality in judicial appointments but also poses a serious threat to the independence of the judiciary and the democratic foundations of Sri Lanka.
Reports indicate that a Deputy Minister in the Ministry of Public Security has been actively pressuring Justice Bandula Karunarathna, the President of the Court of Appeal of Sri Lanka, to resign from his position. This orchestrated report appears to be part of a broader political contract carried out by the administration of President Anura Kumara Dissanayake, aiming to exert control over the judiciary by removing key figures who may not align with the government’s interests. Such actions are deeply troubling and highlight the extent of political interference in judicial matters.
It is imperative for the administration of President Anura Kumara Dissanayake to respect the autonomy of the judiciary and address any concerns through established legal and constitutional mechanisms rather than resorting to coercive measures. Safeguarding judicial independence is not just a legal necessity but a moral obligation to ensure justice for all.
(Source: Republic World)
Leave a comment