news
SJB disrupts sittings over convict Premalal taking oaths as MP
A section of the protesting SBJ lawmakers in parliament yesterday.
By Saman Indrajith
SLPP Ratnapura District MP Premalal Jayasekera, convicted of murder and sentenced to death, was sworn in as an MP amidst protests from the SJB in Parliament, yesterday.
At the commencement of sittings, Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena announced that Jayasekera could take his oath as an MP.
As the announcement came, SJB Kandy District MP and Chief Opposition Whip Lakshman Kiriella protested against the swearing in. He was joined by SJB MPs wearing black shawls around their necks.
Leader of the House Minister Dinesh Gunawardena pointed out that as per the Standing Orders, the MPs could not raise points of order when the Speaker was making an announcement.
SJB MPs Harin Fernando, Nalin Bandara and Kiriella shouted that it was illegal for Jayasekera to take oaths as an MP.
Amidst the din, Serjeant-at-Arms Narendra Fernando accompanied Jayasekera to the Speaker’s Chair and he was sworn in.
MP Jayasekera was congratulated by SLPP members Vijitha Berugoda, Janaka Wakkumbura and front row members of the government side.
Thereafter the Speaker permitted the Opposition to raise their points of order.
Chief Opposition Whip Kiriella: “Today, a person who has been sentenced to death by a High Court took oaths as an MP before the Speaker (shouting from the government ranks). In 2010, when Sarath Fonseka was elected to this House but could not come to take oath as he was in the prison. We raised the issue asked the Chair to permit him to take his oath. But Prof GL Peiris raised objections, citing the provisions of the Section 89 of the Constitution and informed the House that the MP elect could not take oaths if he or she had been convicted by a court. As per Prof Peiris, the MP elect would lose his seat the moment he was convicted by a High Court. In addition Prof Peiris told this very same House that a person sentenced to death could not become an MP. He said that in such a situation the Speaker’s ruling had no power above the court’s conviction. Prof. Peiris said that it was clearly outlined in the Constitution.
Leader of the House Minister Dinesh Gunawardena: A new MP who had been elected by his people now has taken his oaths. Thereafter, there is no room for others to raise points of order against it. As per Standing Order, anyone who is sworn in before the Speaker as an MP has rights and privileges of an MP.
SJB Gampaha District MP Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka: The Constitution states that a person sentenced to death cannot become an MP and is not even entitled to cast his vote. That was the reason given when I was incarcerated in 2010. That was not at least by a court of law but an outfit which had exercised the powers of a court. I was taken into custody by the orders of the then President. As per the rules, I could not have been arrested by an officer junior to me. But they did so. I was given a 30-year sentence after I took an oath as an MP. Today, one took oaths after he had been sentenced to death.
SJB MP Harin Fernando: This is not something personal against Premalal Jayasekera. I will read the judgment to the House. The Speaker permitting this swearing in is setting a wrong precedent. I request that all those sentenced to death should be given an opportunity to visit their homes once a week.
Thereafter, the Speaker moved the House to proceed with the day’s business. The SJB MPs got up and shouted. Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa and SJB MPs threw their black shawls to the well of the House and left the chamber in protest.
However, none of the TNA or NPP members joined the protest. After several minutes passed SJB MPs Lakshman Kiriella and Eran Wickremaratne were seen returning to their seats.
Newly sworn in MP Jayasekera took a seat in the back row of the government ranks.
Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa arrived in the chamber several minutes after the new MP taken his oaths.
- News Advertiesment
See Kapruka’s top selling online shopping categories such as Toys, Grocery, Flowers, Birthday Cakes, Fruits, Chocolates, Clothing and Electronics. Also see Kapruka’s unique online services such as Money Remittence,News, Courier/Delivery, Food Delivery and over 700 top brands. Also get products from Amazon & Ebay via Kapruka Gloabal Shop into Sri Lanka.
news
Test post
sdfsdf sdf sf sf sdf sf sdf
news
AG not bound by its recommendations, yet to receive report
PCoI on Easter Sunday attacks:
By Shamindra Ferdinando
Attorney General Dappula de Livera, PC is not bound by recommendations made by the Presidential Commission of Inquiry (P CoI) into the 2019 Easter Sunday carnage, or presidential directives in that regard, according to authoritative sources.
They said that the AG couldn’t under any circumstances initiate legal proceedings until he had received the full PCoI report.
President Gotabaya Rajapaksa received the PCoI report on Feb 1. The President’s Office delivered a set of PCoI reports to Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena on Feb 23, a day after the report was presented to the cabinet of ministers. The Island raised the matter with relevant authorities in the wake of a section of the media reporting the PCoI recommending punitive measures against former President Maithripala Sirisena, Defence Secretary Hemasiri Fernando, IGP Pujitha Jayasundera, Chief of State Intelligence Senior DIG Nilantha Jayawardena, Chief of National Intelligence retired DIG Sisira Mendis and All Ceylon Makkal Congress (ACMC) leader and Samagi Jana Balavegaya MP Rishad Bathiudeen et al over the Easter Sunday carnage.
Sources pointed out that due to the inordinate delay in sharing the PCoI report with the AG, the department hadn’t been able to take preliminary measures required to initiate the proceedings. Sources said that a team of officers would take at least six weeks or more to examine the report before tangible measures could be taken.
With the AG scheduled to retire on May 24, 2021, even if the AG Department received the P CoI it would be quite a tough task to initiate proceedings ahead of retirement, sources said. However, in terms of the 20th Amendment to the Constitution enacted in last October, both the AG and the IGP could receive extensions beyond 60 at the President’s discretion.
Dappula de Livera received an Acting appointment as the AG a week after the Easter Sunday carnage whereas his predecessor Jayantha Jayasuriya, PC, was elevated to Chief Justice.
Responding to another query, sources said that the Attorney General two weeks ago requested Secretary to the President for a copy of the P CoI. However, the AG was yet to receive one, sources said. In spite of the AG not receiving a P CoI copy, the AG had instructed the IGP to obtain a copy of the report when he requested the police to complete investigations into the Easter Sunday carnage. The AG issued specific instructions after having examined police files pertaining to the investigations.
The IGP, too, hadn’t received a copy so far though some sections of the report were in the public domain.
Agriculture Minister Mahindananda Aluthgamage displayed at a live political programme on Derana a copy of the P CoI report he received at the cabinet meeting earlier in the day.
Sources said that the Attorney General’s Department couldn’t decide on a course of action in respect of the Easter carnage on the basis of a section of the report. In terms of the Commission of Inquiry Act (Section 24), the AG enjoyed significant powers/authority in respect of investigations; sources said adding that the Department urgently required both the P CoI report and police investigations report. The Attorney General’s Department has raised the delay in receiving a P CoI report amidst the Catholic Church attacking the government over the same issue.
Sources said that ministerial committee appointed to study the P CoI report couldn’t decide on how to proceed with the recommendations and the matter was entirely in the hands of the AG. Sources pointed out that the delay on the part of the government to release the report had received the attention of sections of the international media, including the New York Times. Public Security Minister retired Rear Admiral Sarath Weerasekera having met Malcolm Cardinal Ranjith at the Bishop’s House on Dec 8, 2020 said that the AG would get a copy of the P CoI report once the President received it. Minister Weerasekera said that the CID had handed over the relevant files after having completed investigations into eight blasts. Referring to the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) report on the Easter Sunday carnage, the former Navy Chief of Staff said that all such documents would have to be brought to one place and considered before initiating legal proceedings. Acknowledging that there could be delays, lawmaker Weerasekera said that on the instructions of the Attorney General a 12-member team of lawyers was working on the case. The minister vowed to expose the mastermind behind the Easter Sunday attacks. Investigations continued while some of those wanted were overseas, the minister said.
The minister acknowledged that the Attorney General couldn’t proceed without the P CoI report. Minister Weerasekera reiterated that once the President received the P CoI report, it would be sent to the Attorney General. The minister said that there were documents two to three feet high that needed scrutiny. The minister assured comprehensive investigation. The minister said that investigations pertaining to eight blasts had been completed and the reports handed over to the AG. However, the Attorney General had found shortcomings in those investigations.
news
JVP picks holes in PCoI report
By Saman Indrajith
The Presidential Commission of Inquiry on the Easter Sunday bombings had failed to identify the mastermind of , the JVP said yesterday.
Addressing the media at the party headquarters in Pelawatte, JVP Propaganda Secretary MP Vijitha Herath said that the PCoI report had levelled accusations against former President Maithripala Sirisena, former IGP and head of intelligence for their dereliction of duty, shirking of responsibilities and not taking action to prevent the attacks and negligence. There were reference to the causes of the terror attacks and actions to be taken to avoid such attacks and the influence of extremist organisations. “However, there is no mention of the mastermind of the attacks, the handlers of the attackers and those whose interests the carnage served. It is also not mentioned whether there has been any foreign or local organisation behind those attacks. As per the PCoI report the attack took place as a result of culmination of extremism.
“According to the PCoI the extremist activities were a result of the prevailing political situation then. The entire nation was waiting to see who was responsible and who masterminded those attacks. The PCoI has failed to identify the true culprits responsible for the terror attacks. The report says that the leader of the suicide cadres killed himself in the attacks and it was a puzzle. That means those who are actually responsible for the attacks are still at large. The report does not provide exact details of the sources of the attacks. The PCoI had sittings for one year and five months. It summoned various persons and got their statements but it has failed to shed any light on the terror attacks. Everybody knows that the top leaders of the government and heads of security and intelligence establishments failed in their duties. Ranil Wickremesinghe was the second in command and he too is bound by the responsibility but the PCoI report fails to identify him as one of the persons against whom legal action should be instituted. The PCoI has treated Wickremesinghe and former President Maithripala Sirisena differently. We are not telling that this report is a total failure but we cannot accept this as a complete report. The PCoI handed over its report to the President on Feb 1. After 23 days it was sent to Parliament. Now, a copy of the report is there in the parliamentary library for the perusal of MPs.”
Herath said that the PCoI did not have powers to take punitive action. “It only has powers to name those responsible and recommend action to be taken against those named.