Next in line UPFA candidate Piyasena cries foul at Geetha Kumarasinghe

By S.S. Selvanayagam

UPFA next-in-line candidate Piyasena Gamage intervened in the appeal filed by Galle District UPFA Parliamentarian Geetha Kumarasinghe, who challenged the Court of Appeal judgment.

 He filed intervenient papers crying foul at her for the failure to name him as a respondent whereas he should have been named to the appeal application.

 He alleged that she had been guilty of fraudulently suppressing material facts from the Court. He is among others seeking the Court to dismiss her appeal in limine and to vacate the Interim Order granted by the Supreme Court staying the judgment of the Court of Appeal.

The bench comprising Chief Justice Priyasath Dep, Justices Eva Wanasundera and Upaly Abeyrathne fixed this matter for 7 July to be taken up with Kumasinghe’s appeal.

 Intervenient-Petitioner Piyasena states at the August 2015 General Election he received the seventh highest number of preferential votes received by candidates on the list of the UPFA in the Galle District.

He states Kumarasinghe received the fifth highest number of preferential votes and thus secured a seat.

He states the Court of Appeal on 3 May 2017 issued a Writ of Quo Warranto against her and that she was thus disqualified from continuing to hold office.

He states that on 4 May 2017, he was informed by the Secretary of the UPFA that he would be appointed as the MP to fill the said seat that had fallen vacant.

He claims that if a seat of one of the MPs elected fell vacant, the candidate receiving the next highest number would be entitled to be elected to fill the vacancy.

He cited the Supreme Court Rules wherein there shall be named a respondent, the party or parties in whose favour the judgment or order complained against was delivered or adversely to whom such application is preferred, and the names and present addresses of all such respondents shall be set out in full.

He contends that he is a party whose interest may be adversely affected by the success of the appeal, and he should thus have been named as a respondent in accordance with the terms of Supreme Court rules.

He impugns the failure to do so is a clear violation of the Supreme Court rules, due procedure and natural justice and warrants the vacating and/or setting aside the Interim Order issued and the dismissal of the appeal.

He alleges Kumarasinghe has been guilty of fraudulently suppressing the material facts, thus disentitling her from applying for or obtaining any equitable or interim relief.

 The Supreme Court on 15 May 2017 granted special leave to appeal the application filed by Galle District UPFA Parliamentarian Kumarasinghe seeking to set aside the judgment of the Court of Appeal which disqualified her as a Member of Parliament on her impugned dual citizenship.

In the majority decision of the bench comprising Justices Eva Wanasundera, Upaly Abeyrathne and Anil Gooneratne, the Court extended the Interim Order staying till the final determination of the operation of the Court of Appeal judgment. The hearing is fixed for 25 September.

Kumarasinghe filed an appeal in the Supreme Court against the judgment of the Court of Appeal annulling her Parliamentarianship over her dual citizenship.

Romesh de Silva PC with Sugath Caldera appeared for the Respondent-Appellant Kumarasinghe.

J.C. Welamuna appeared for the Petitioner- Respondents W.W.E. Buweneka, J.K. Amarawardhana, A.C. Gunasekera, J.K. Wijesinghe and Prasanna Deepthilal.

The Court of Appeal on 5 May ruled that she is not entitled to hold the post of a Member of Parliament as she had contested the election while being a dual citizen.

 Justice Preethi Padman Surasena with Justice Vijith Malalgoda (CA President) agreeing also directed the State to recover the cost from her as the debt to the State for the each day she sat in the Parliament knowing that she was being a dual citizen and being disqualified to be a Member of Parliament.

The Attorney General had informed the Court of Appeal that Kumarasinghe was still a citizen of Switzerland and according to the 19th Amendment to the Constitution, a person who has dual citizenship cannot be a Member of Parliament.

Senior Deputy Solicitor General Janak De Silva had also informed Court of Appeal that, according to clause 91(1) of the Constitution, she was not entitled to parliamentary privileges and could not be a Member of Parliament.

The Appeal Court held that Galle District UPFA MP Kumarasinghe could no longer function as a Member of Parliament as she had contested the general election while bearing dual citizenship.

The former actress-turned politician Kumarasinghe holds dual citizenship in Sri Lanka and Switzerland.

 Under the constitution of Sri Lanka, no person can be elected to the Parliament if they hold dual citizenship.

Five voters of the Galle district had filed the Writ petition in the Court of Appeal requesting court to declare Kumarasinghe is ineligible to remain as a parliamentarian while holding a dual citizenship.

Court held that under the 19th Amendment to the Constitution, a dual citizen is not eligible to contest for parliamentary membership and therefore, Kumarasinghe no longer can function as a parliamentarian.

Petitioners in their writ application challenge her appointment and/or election as the Member of Parliament on her dual citizenship.

The petitioners had accused the appointment/election of Kumarasinghe to office of Member of Parliament contending that she is not de jure (legally) entitled to such appointment and/or election and holding the said office without authority.

Petitioners had stated that Kumarasinghe is a holder of dual citizenship namely Sri Lanka and Switzerland and she had contested the 2015 Parliamentary Election without divulging her dual citizenship at the time of submitting her nomination.

They had claimed she by virtue of the Constitution is not qualified to be elected as a Member of Parliament and charged that she is thus a usurper of the authority of a Member of Parliament.

She had been declared as a Member of Parliament representing UPFA from the Galle District, they had stated.

They had sought the Court of Appeal to issue a prerogative Writ Order requiring her to show by what authority she  claims to hold office as a Member of Parliament and an another order declaring that she is disqualified to be a Member of Parliament and thus not entitled to hold office as Member of Parliament.

 Suren Fernando appeared for the Intervenient Petitioner Gamage Piyasena. Romesh de Silva PC appeared for Kumarasighe. Faisz Musthapha PC appeared for UPFA Secretary Prof. Vishwa Warnapala. Senior Deputy Solicitor General Janak de Silva with Senior State Counsel Suren Gnanaraj appeared for the respondent-respondents the Controller of Immigration and Emigration and the Attorney General. Shanthaka Jayasundera appeared for the Secretary General of Parliament. J.C.Weliamuna PC appeared for the Petitioner-Respondent- Respondents.