Blockade on Verma’s visit proves Govt. lacks faith in its own impeachment process: BASL Presidential

By Dharisha Bastians

If the Government had faith in its own impeachment process, it should have not blocked the entry of an International Bar Association (IBA) delegation to the country, Bar Association of Sri Lanka presidential aspirant, Attorney-at-Law Upul Jayasuriya said yesterday.  

Jayasuriya told the Daily FT that an International Bar Association delegation visited Sri Lanka on a fact-finding mission during the impeachment of Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva in 2001, and the Government of President Chandrika Kumaratunga completely facilitated the visit.

“This blockade only proves all the allegations against the Government about this impeachment process,” he said. Jayasuriya said that although the Kumaratunga regime was intent on safeguarding its Chief Justice, the IBA delegation was permitted to arrive in Sri Lanka and conduct inquiries. “They spoke with lawyers, serving judges, removed judges, retired judges, and even victimised judges and handed in a report,” Jayasuriya said, adding that even this delegation had arrived in the country on a tourist visa.

He said the 2001 IBA delegation had comprised IBA Councillor, Lord Daniel Brennan, former Chief Justice of Karnataka and Kerala, V.S. Malimath and the President of the Bar Council of Malaysia at the time.

The Sri Lankan Government last week revoked the visas of a four-member IBA delegation that was to arrive in Colombo on 1 February to undertake a fact-finding mission in the aftermath of the Bandaranayake impeachment. The delegation was to be led by respected international Jurist and former Chief Justice of India J.S. Verma.

The External Affairs Ministry claimed that they were forced to withdraw the visas upon discovery that the applications had violated visa rules. “It may be noted that the Business Visa category which had been applied for in the case of three persons were issued on the basis of the purpose of the visit being reflected as Conferences, Workshops and Seminars, while the fourth person had been issued a gratis visa and the purpose of the visit being cited as Private,” the statement said.

However, Jayasuriya reacted to this claim saying that it was clear no one at the Ministry had ever filled a Sri Lankan visa application. “There are no such specific categories. And there is nothing prohibiting a business visitor from going on pilgrimage in Sri Lanka after arrival or vice verse. At this rate, Sri Lanka will have to issue travel advisories saying that no traveller shall be permitted to engage in activities outside the visa’s stated purpose of travel,” he said.

Sri Lanka’s Electronic Travel System under which three visas were applied for in the UK for three members of the delegation, comprises only three travel categories, namely tourism, business and transit.

The senior lawyer said that for the Government to expect every visitor to Sri Lanka to ask for permission to talk to people meant the country was exhibiting all the signs of a police state. “In a democracy, you facilitate such independent studies,” he said.

Jayasuriya said that it was a grave matter that the visa of an eminent person such as the former Indian Chief Justice was revoked. “In India, unlike in Sri Lanka when a Chief Justice retires, it is not treated like a regime change,” he said, saying that the country treated its retired Chief Justices with the same respect they would a sitting senior judicial officer.