Jan 15, 2013 | News
The appointment of former Attorney General Mohan Peiris (photo) as Sri Lanka’s new Chief Justice raises serious concerns about the future of the Rule of Law and accountability in the country, the ICJ said today.
Mohan Peiris has served in a variety of high-level legal posts in the past decade, always playing a key role in defending the conduct of the Sri Lankan government.
He served as Sri Lanka’s Attorney-General from 2009 to 2011. Since then he has served as the legal adviser to President Mahinda Rajapakse and the Cabinet.
“During his tenure as Attorney-General and the government’s top legal advisor Mohan Peiris consistently blocked efforts to hold the government responsible for serious human rights violations and disregarded international law and standards,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Asia director.
“Mohan Peiris’ appointment as the new Chief Justice, after a politically compromised and procedurally flawed impeachment, adds serious insult to the gross injury already inflicted on Sri Lanka’s long suffering judiciary.”
The International Commission of Jurists, in its recent report on impunity in Sri Lanka, highlighted Mohan Peiris’ lack independence as Attorney-General, noting the alarming number of cases involving prominent politicians that were withdrawn during his tenure.
In November 2011, as Attorney General, Peiris told the UN Committee Against Torture in Geneva that political cartoonist Prageeth Ekneligoda, believed to have been subjected to enforced disappearance in January 2010, had actually left Sri Lanka. In June 2012, Peiris admitted to a court in Colombo that this claim was groundless.
“ICJ condemns this appointment as a further assault on the independence of the judiciary and calls on the Sri Lankan government to reinstate Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake. If there are grounds for questioning the Chief Justice’s actions, they should be pursued following due process and a proper impeachment process.”
CONTACT:
Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia-Pacific Regional Director, Bangkok, t:+66 807819002; email: sam.zarifi(at)icj.org
Sheila Varadan, ICJ Legal Advisor, South Asia Programme, Bangkok, t: +66 857200723; email: sheila.varadan(at)icj.org
NOTE:
In a statement today (see below), Justice Bandarayanake strongly denied all the charges against her and asserted her status as the legal Chief Justice of Sri Lanka’s supreme court. She said: “The accusations leveled against me are blatant lies. I am totally innocent of all charges…Since it now appears that there might be violence if I remain in my official residence or my chambers I am compelled to move…”
Sri Lanka-CJ final speech-2012 (full statement, in pdf)
Read also:
ICJ condemns impeachment of Sri Lanka’s Chief Justice
Sri Lanka’s Parliament should reject motion to impeach Chief Justice
Impeachment of Sri Lankan Chief Justice: Government must adhere to international standards of due process
Jan 11, 2013 | News
The ICJ condemned the decision of Sri Lanka’s parliament today to impeach the country’s Chief Justice, Shirani Bandaranayake (photo).
“Parliament’s impeachment motion has defied the rulings of the country’s Supreme Court and Court of Appeal, and thus thrown into chaos the entire system of checks and balances in the country,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Asia-Pacific director.
“Sri Lanka’s parliament and executive have effectively decapitated the country’s judiciary in pursuit of short term political gain. As an immediate matter, this has precipitated a legal and constitutional crisis of unprecedented dimensions; but just as worrying are the consequences of this action, which severely erodes accountability and the rule of law in a country already suffering from decades of impunity.”
The impeachment decision now goes to President Mahinda Rajapakse, who precipitated this crisis initially. Under Article 107 of the 1978 Constitution of Sri Lanka, a Chief Justice can only be removed by an order of the President after a motion supporting the removal is passed by a simple majority of Parliamentarians.
The impeachment process against Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake has been widely criticized for ignoring international standards and practice. On 6 December 2012, the Chief Justice and her team of lawyers walked out of the impeachment hearing in protest over the denial of a fair hearing. On 1 January 2013, the Supreme Court ruled that the impeachment procedure in Parliament was not constitutionally valid, finding that such procedures could only be established ‘by law’ enacted by Parliament.
The Bar Association of Sri Lanka has publically vowed that it will not welcome a new Chief Justice and the Lawyers Collective has called on the Supreme Court and the superior judiciary to not recognize the newly appointed Chief Justice.
“President Rajapakse should refuse to appoint a new Chief Justice, and instead call on Parliament to enact a new law – through a transparent and democratic process – to govern the impeachment process. Any such law must comport with international standards on judicial independence and guarantees of due process and fair trial,” Zarifi added.
CONTACT:
Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia-Pacific Regional Director, Bangkok. t:+66 807819002; email: sam.zarifi(at)icj.org
Sheila Varadan, ICJ Legal Advisor, South Asia Programme, Bangkok. t: +66 857200723; email: sheila.varadan(at)icj.org
See also previous ICJ press releases:
Sri Lanka’s Parliament should reject motion to impeach Chief Justice
Impeachment of Sri Lankan Chief Justice: Government must adhere to international standards of due process
Sri Lanka: new ICJ report documents ‘Crisis of Impunity’
Jan 10, 2013 | News
Like the ICJ, the Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) issued a statement strongly condemning the impeachment of Chief Justice Bandaranayake.
The BASL called on its members to refrain from attending Court or engaging in any professional duties on 10 and 11 January 2013 in protest of Parliament’s decision to move forward with the impeachment process. The statement is reproduced below:
The Bar Association of Sri Lanka strongly, unequivocally and with no reservations whatsoever condemns the decision to take up for debate the impeachment motion against her Ladyship the Chief Justice Dr. Shirani A. Bandaranayake based on the findings of the Parliamentary Select Committee which was quashed by the Court of Appeal and determined to be unlawful by the Supreme Court. The Bar Association has decided to call for all its members (in 78 Branch Associations) to refrain from attending to any Professional duty in protest on the 10th and 11th of January 2013 to express our deplorable condemnation.
The Bar Association of Sri Lanka further urges H. E. the President of the Republic, Hon. Speaker and the leaders of all political parties representing the Parliament to honour and respect the determination of the Supreme Court which in terms of the Constitution of our country is vested with the sole and the exclusive jurisdiction as regards to Constitutional Interpretation and Determinations.
The Bar Association of Sri Lanka is seriously concerned about the negative and eroding impact that any action of the legislative and executive organs of the government to disrespect and dishonour such determination would have on the Rule of Law in this Country.
Sanjaya Gamag
Secretary
Bar Association of Sri Lanka
On 10 November 2012, the BASL held a Special General Meeting and passed a resolution expressing ‘grave concern about the impeachment and the independence of the Judiciary’ urging the President and Speaker of Parliament to ‘reconsider’ the impeachment or alternatively to adopt a transparent and accountable procedure.
On 15 December 2012, the BASL passed a further three resolutions calling on the President of Sri Lanka to again reconsider the impeachment or alternatively enact a procedure for impeachment which guaranteed the right to a fair trial. The BASL warned that if the rule of law or fair trial rights were not observed in the impeachment process, the Sri Lankan Bar would not welcome a new Chief Justice.
On the same issue: Sri Lanka’s Parliament should reject motion to impeach Chief Justice
Dec 14, 2012
The ICJ today expresses its grave concern regarding the draft Constitution and the constitutional referendum to be held on 15 December 2012 and 22 December 2012.
The ICJ calls upon the Egyptian authorities to ensure the right of Egyptians to fully participate in the constitution-making process in pursuit of their democratic aspirations.
In a new legal briefing paper, the ICJ analyses key provisions of Egypt’s draft Constitution in light of international human rights and rule of law standards.
“The draft Constitution falls short of international standards, including those concerning the accountability of the armed forces, guaranteeing the independence of the judiciary, and recognizing universally accepted human rights,” said Said Benarbia, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser of the Middle East and North Africa Program. “Further, in the context of deep political instability, providing only two weeks for the public to consider the draft Constitution undermines the right of all Egyptians to make an informed decision about the basic framework of governance and law for their society.”
While the draft Constitution extends the language of Egypt’s 1971 Constitution on human rights, the definition and scope of several human rights are still inconsistent with Egypt’s obligations under international law, the ICJ says.
The draft continues to subject these rights to the limits of laws, without any reference to the content and scope of these limits and whether or not they are necessary in a democratic society.
Such limitations also undermine the constitutional guarantees for the independence of the High Judicial Council, the Constitutional Court and the office of the Public Prosecutor, the ICJ states.
In addition, the draft Constitution perpetuates the use of military courts to try civilians.
“In light of these shortcomings and the failure of the process to meet international standards of inclusive participation, the draft Constitution should be withdrawn, and sufficient time should be given for the drafting of a new constitution that fully represents the views of all Egyptians,” Benarbia added.
Contact:
Saïd Benarbia, Middle East & North Africa Senior Legal Adviser, ICJ, t +41 22 979 3817; e-mail: said.benarbia(at)icj.org
Egypt-Constitution reform process-Analysis brief-2012 (full text in pdf)
See also Egypt: a flawed constitutional reform process
Photo by Pan African News Wire
Dec 13, 2012 | Comunicados de prensa, Noticias
La CIJ condena los actos de los países de Centroamérica que afectan seriamente la independencia judicial. El ultimo acto de esta naturaleza ocurrió en Honduras.
La CIJ ante los últimos acontecimientos que afectan seriamente la independencia de los differentes poderes judiciales en países de la región centroamericana, expresa:
- Durante el año 2012, la CIJ ha constatado que los diferentes gobiernos y autoridades de los países de Centroamérica han realizado actos que afectan seriamente la independencia judicial. En Honduras, el miércoles 12 de diciembre, la Asamblea Legislativa procedió a destituir a cuatro magistrados de la Sala Constitucional de la Corte Suprema de Justicia, sin tener facultades o atribuciones para un acto de esta naturaleza. Esta destitución nos sitúa frente a un escenario similar al del Golpe de Estado de junio de 2009;
- En El Salvador, se han dado hechos similares; durante todo el año 2012, la Asamblea Legislativa y otros grupos del poder político, han pretendido desarticular la Sala Constitucional de la Corte Suprema de dicho país, debido al contenido de sus sentencias; en Costa Rica hace unas semanas, también la Asamblea Legislativa se negó a ratificar en su cargo a un magistrado de la Sala Constitucional de la Corte Suprema de Justicia, alegando que los fallos de dicha sala creaban una “situación de ingobernabilidad” y que ese acto era un “llamado de atención para el resto de los magistrados”, siendo la primera vez que el Organismo Legislativo se negó a ratificar en su cargo un nuevo mandato de un magistrado del alto Tribunal;
- En Guatemala, tanto el Presidente de la Cámara Penal de la Corte Suprema de Justicia como la Fiscal General, vienen siendo objeto de ataques a su independencia por parte de abogados defensores de las personas acusadas, por la función positiva que han cumplido en la lucha contra la impunidad en casos de graves violaciones a los derechos humanos cometidas durante el conflicto armado;
La CIJ considera que todos estos hechos constituyen injerencias y ataques a la independencia del Poder Judicial; tratándose de magistrados de diferentes Cortes Supremas y de una Fiscal General, estos actos evidencian por sí mismos, la precariedad de la garantía de independencia judicial en dichos países. A esta situación, hay que agregar que varios de los países mencionados, carecen de sistemas de carrera judicial y de mecanismos de protección adecuados para garantizar a los funcionarios el ejercicio independiente de la función jurisdiccional; además, en ellos existen fenómenos de impunidad generalizados y de cuerpos ilegales, aparatos clandestinos de seguridad y crimen organizado.
Frente a estos hechos, la CIJ recomienda:
- Que las autoridades estatales concernidas con los hechos arriba mencionados, se abstengan de interferir en el ámbito de la independencia de los poderes judiciales, ya que de lo contrario, estarían incumpliendo sus obligaciones internacionales sobre respeto a la independencia de poderes, establecidas en la Convención Americana sobre Derechos Humanos y en el Pacto Internacional de Derechos Civiles y Políticos;
- Que se tomen las medidas necesarias para asegurar la independencia de jueces, magistrados y fiscales como corresponde en un Estado de Derecho;
- Que los estados relacionados establezcan mecanismos de protección para jueces, magistrados, fiscales y demás operadores de justicia, a fin de salvaguardar su integridad y garantizar el ejercicio de la función jurisdiccional independiente;
- Que los estados concernidos impulsen procesos de creación o fortalecimiento de carreras judiciales de conformidad con los estándares internacionales;
- Que se fortalezcan los poderes judiciales y otras entidades del sector justicia, a fin de lograr la efectiva protección de los derechos humanos incluida la lucha contra la impunidad.
La CIJ continuará cumpliendo con su mandato de promover y garantizar la independencia de jueces, abogados y fiscales; en ese sentido, le dará seguimiento a estas situaciones y continuará observando y proponiendo soluciones a esta problemática.
Para mayor información :
Ramón Cadena Rámila, Director de la Comisión Internacional de Juristas para Centro América, t + 502 30441818
