Saturday Nov 16, 2024
Saturday Nov 16, 2024
Thursday, 7 November 2024 01:54 - - {{hitsCtrl.values.hits}}
The Court of Appeal yesterday ruled that the Director General of Sports must halt his efforts to change the Sri Lanka Rugby (SLR) Constitution before the long-awaited elections can take place.
The Court overruled preliminary objections in the Case CA/Write/438/24 until final determination of the matter. The case will be taken up on 3 December.
For the petitioners, President’s Counsel Faiszer Musthapha, along with attorneys Pulasthi Rupasinghe and Kavin Hettiarachchi, represented the case in court. Additional Solicitor General Sumathi Dharmawardane appeared on behalf of the respondents.
This decision comes amid growing frustration from provincial rugby unions and rugby professionals who are eager for the sport’s governance issues to be resolved.
Sources opined that the Court’s ruling supports the stance of regional rugby associations, who argued that any alteration to the SLR constitution requires the approval of stakeholders before the elections. They claimed that only a Special General Meeting (SGM) with an elected election committee — including two retired judges and a government official, can oversee such decisions. This mandate is seen as essential for transparency and to protect the interests of all involved in the sport.
Provincial rugby leaders and their legal team, led by President’s Council Faiszer Musthapha, claim that the Director General’s alignment with World Rugby is sidestepping local governance and diminishing the importance of Sri Lanka’s judiciary.
According to them, his approach risks side lining domestic rugby clubs, coaches, players, and referees who depend on the sport for their livelihoods. Despite the court’s decision, the Director General reportedly continues to push for constitutional changes, prompting rugby officials to question his motivations.
With yesterday’s ruling, stakeholders argue that the Director General must call an SGM to establish an election committee to oversee the process.
“This decision is crucial for rugby’s future in Sri Lanka,” remarked a representative from a prominent provincial rugby union. “Rugby is more than a sport — it’s a profession and a source of livelihood for many. By holding back the AGM, the Director General is stalling their right to earn a living.”
The legal representatives of the provincial unions assert that only the SLR Council and member clubs possess the authority to call for constitutional amendments, not the Director General, the Minister, nor World Rugby or Asia Rugby. PC Musthapha’s legal team highlighted this, arguing that Sri Lanka’s rugby governance should honour local laws and stakeholders above all else. Yesterday’s court decision marks the second time an interim order was placed on constitutional amendments, leaving the Director General under mounting pressure to prioritise the AGM.
Sri Lanka’s rugby community anxiously awaits further developments, with many hoping that this court decision will pave the way for stability and transparency in the sport’s governance.
