Skip links

Judge’s resignation highlights concerns over Sri Lanka’s Judicial Independence

On September 23, 2023, Mullaitivu District Court Judge Saravanarajah resigned from his position and fled the island due to threats to his life stemming from his involvement in the Kurunthurmalai Vihara case. His participation in the case subjected him to immense pressure to alter his judgment, raising serious questions about the independence of the judiciary in Sri Lanka. The judiciary possesses sole authority to determine the appropriateness of cases submitted for decision, exercising jurisdiction over all matters of a judicial nature. It is crucial that the judicial process remains free from improper or unjustifiable interference, with court judgments immune from review. It should be noted that this principle does not preclude judicial review or the mitigation or remission of sentences imposed by the judiciary in accordance with the law by relevant authorities.

The United Nations Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary emphasize that “it is the duty of all governmental and other institutions to respect and observe the independence of the judiciary” and prohibit any “inappropriate or unwarranted interference with the judicial process,” ensuring that judicial decisions remain unalterable.

As a Constitutional Democracy, Sri Lankan Republic’s constitution, in Article 111C, states the following:

– Every judge, presiding officer, public official, or other person designated by law with judicial powers or functions, or with similar functions under any law enacted by Parliament, shall exercise and perform such powers and functions without being subject to any direction or other interference from any person, except for a superior court, tribunal, institution, or other person authorized by law to direct or supervise such powers or functions.

– Anyone who, without authorization, obstructs or attempts to obstruct any judge, presiding officer, public official, or other person mentioned in paragraph (1) of this Article 111C, shall be guilty of an offense punishable by the High Court upon conviction after a trial without a jury, with either a term of imprisonment of up to one year or a fine.

Additionally, they may be barred for a maximum of seven years following the date of such conviction from being a voter, casting a ballot at a referendum, holding a public office, and working as a public officer.

The incident amounts to a gross violation of Sri Lankan constitution, ultimately raising doubts about the ability to seek justice at the grassroots level. This incident is not an isolated occurrence but may be part of a sequence of events shrouded in a political veil.

On August 22, 2023, a former Minister and Member of Parliament delivered an inflammatory speech with racist undertones in Parliament, repeatedly referring to T. Saravanaraja, the Mullaitivu Court’s Magistrate, as “a mentally ill person.” The parliamentarian criticized a court order issued by Judge Saravanaraja, who had upheld the right of Hindu devotees to worship at a Hindu shrine on Kurunthurmalai, a contested religious site in the North of the country. In addition, the parliamentarian emphasized that Sri Lanka is a Buddhist nation, warning of the limits of Sinhala Buddhists’ patience and suggesting that the judge and Tamil politicians should bear the burden if any racial violence were to occur. All these statements were made under the privilege of the parliament. Despite the considerable questioning of such statements regarding the independence of the judiciary, there is a growing tendency to engage in rhetoric that undermines the independence of the court under the guise of parliamentary privilege. This sets a risky precedent, making it the opportune time to discuss judicial security as a major concern for the country.

Kathirtharsini Parameswaran

(Kathirtharsini Parameswaran has completed Master of International Law from the Department of Legal Studies, South Asian University, Delhi ,India and  LLB (Hons) from University of Jaffna Sri Lanka and now, she is lecturing in public international law at the Open University of Sri Lanka. She participated in moot courts such as  Jessup and Hendry Dunant. Her significant interest in International Sea law led her to do her thesis based on the ship registration standards an Exclusive flag state jurisdiction and port state jurisdiction under the UNCLOS: a critical analysis. Kathirtharsini has presented four research papers at International Conferences. She worked in AALCO as a research intern for the  the special study on  sharing of resources BBNJ. )

Leave a comment

Explore
Drag