Ranil in his element

The fact that the crisis between the Executive and the Judiciary culminated in the Government bringing a motion of impeachment against the Chief Justice is, as far as most members of the public are concerned, a step too far. For many it is proof long sought that the political trajectory of the country is taking a definite turn for the worse.

One man however, appears to be delighted about the turn of events. Whether that is a result of a grudge he harbours against the Judiciary in general and Shirani Bandaranayake in particular, specifically for allowing the passage of the 18th Amendment, or as some analysts say sinister proof that the opposition leader is in fact hand-in-glove with the ruling administration is not yet clear.

What is becoming clearer everyday is that when it comes to Parliamentary procedure, Ranil Wickremesinghe possesses knowledge and clarity literally unsurpassed, thanks to his 35-year-long career in the Sri Lankan Parliament and his love of British Parliamentary tradition.

Since the Government’s intent to impeach the Chief Justice was announced, Wickremesinghe maintained radio silence and continues to receive huge criticism keeping mum on the critical issue.

Always a poor communicator, Wickremesinghe has responded to questions regarding his silence about the intimidation of the judiciary with characteristically snide remarks like “ask the editors to write editorials” and “ask the lawyers to protest”. These responses are seen largely as attempts by the Wickremesinghe to once again abscond responsibility as the Leader of the Opposition.

But things became clearer after UNP General Secretary Tissa Attanayake released a statement last week, clearly drafted by Wickremesinghe or someone else with a thorough knowledge of commonwealth parliamentary tradition and procedure.

The statement lays out procedure for setting up of the Parliamentary Select Committee to probe impeachment and says from the moment of appointment of the select committee, parliament acts in a judicial capacity. To show bias and political motivation, therefore, renders MPs unfit to sit in judgment of the impeachment motion in the Parliamentary Select Committee.

“One Member of Parliament, Jayaratne Herath, Deputy Minister of Industry and Commerce, quoted an anonymous letter pertaining to the Chief Justice during a recent Adjournment debate in Parliament. This makes him unfit to sit in Parliament if a Resolution to remove the Chief Justice is debated in the House.

This is why the Leader of the UNP has directed the UNP Members of Parliament to refrain from making any comments on this issue,” the meticulously-worded statement says.

This practice already renders several Government and Opposition members unsuitable to sit in the Parliamentary Select Committee or in Parliament during a debate on the impeachment. Notably, Minister G.L. Peiris, who the Government would have likely called upon to sit on the Committee, is disqualified by the UNP Leader’s argument because he has already noted in the House that the appointment of JSC Secretary Manjula Tilakaratne was unconstitutional – the sixth charge in the motion.

Since it would be a travesty of justice for the complainant to adjudicate on the same issue, Minister Peiris, Jayaratne Herath, Keheliya Rambukwella, and several others would not be eligible to sit in the Committee.

However, Wickremesinghe’s critics continue to argue that although he did not have to comment on whether the charges against the Chief Justice had merit or not; he could have taken the position that the Government was not bringing the impeachment motion in good faith but because the Supreme Court decisions have been unfavourable to the regime.

This would not only have proved politically expedient but also stemmed the condemnation heaped upon the Opposition Leader on account of his silence when the Judiciary was under grave threat from the Executive.