The Judiciary is perhaps the most important component in the State machinery, as it is the prime instrument that helps keep the Executive and the Legislature in check, apart from delivering justice on behalf of aggrieved citizens and meting out justice to anti-social elements. The independence and impartiality of the judiciary are essential factors for a democracy to sustain itself. When the Judiciary and the justice system of any country succumbs to external pressures and gives in to the whims and fancies of the powers that be, democracy suffers.
It was no secret that the Judiciary experienced some of its darkest days under the 2005-2015 Mahinda Rajapaksa administration. Here was an administration that did not respect the verdicts given by the Courts at all. A case in point was when the Supreme Court, under the then Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva, ruled that fuel prices should be brought down to Rs.100 per litre. All political parties and even some of the staunchest supporters of President Rajapaksa hailed this decision, but in the end he simply chose to ignore it. The consumer did not receive the benefit of reduced fuel prices in the world market as a result of his intransigence on this issue.
But this was just a blip on the radar compared to the fate that awaited former Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake. The Supreme Court delivered a verdict that was unfavourable to the Rajapaksas vis-à-vis Divi Neguma, which they saw as their family fiefdom. This resulted in a fast-track series of events that eventually saw the overnight impeachment of the Chief Justice. This was naturally the nadir for the independence of the Judiciary in recent memory. This ensured that for the rest of his term at least, the Judiciary would not ‘interfere’ with Rajapaksa-led projects.
However, the Government that came to power in January 2015 had campaigned on a platform of ensuring the independence of the Judiciary. This was one commitment kept, as a result of the strengthening of the Constitutional Council and the independent commissions.
It would not be incorrect to say that the events that followed the illegal appointment of Mahinda Rajapaksa as Prime Minister on October 26, 2018 would eventually test the true mettle of the Judiciary. While there no doubt was a supportive political movement behind the ousted Premier Ranil Wickremesinghe, it was the Courts that had the final word. By boldly ruling that the dissolution of Parliament by the President was illegal, they brought the whole false edifice down, paving the way for the restoration of the previous status quo.
A recent example of the independence of the Judiciary was observed when the controversial Buddhist monk Ven. Galagoda Aththe Gnanasara Thera of Bodu Bala Sena fame was jailed for six years after being found guilty of contempt of court over his conduct during a court hearing regarding the case of missing journalist Prageeth Ekneligoda. Ven. Gnanasara Thera, a firm supporter of the Rajapaksas, needs no introduction as he is believed to be one of the prime movers of the anti-Muslim riots in Aluthgama in 2014.
In 2016, Ven. Gnanasara Thera interrupted a court hearing over the abduction of journalist Prageeth Ekneligoda, in which military intelligence officials were accused. The Bhikkhu, disagreeing with the proceedings of the Court, shouted at the presiding Judge and lawyers as the accused suspects were refused bail. The same day, he also threatened the wife of the missing journalist, Sandhya Ekneligoda. Not many expected the Thera would receive this punishment as the nationalist brigade, which is influential was whipping up popular sentiment against the decision. Yet, the courts prevailed in the face of their covert and overt intimidation and delivered a verdict that once again proved that all are equal before the law.
But now, there are disturbing reports to the effect that a Pardon is being considered for Ven. Gnanasara Thera, probably on National Day (February 4), allegedly on the grounds of good conduct in prison. If there is any truth in these reports, the Government must desist from making any such move as it will be tantamount to a slap in the face of the Judiciary. It will legitimise his actions in Court and open the door for others to act in a similar manner. Moreover, it will send a negative signal to minority communities who were previously at the receiving end of his inflammatory rhetoric and intimidation and to the international community, which has lauded the Government’s efforts in the direction of ethnic and religious reconciliation.
It is imperative that the Government reassures the people that it will not engage in actions that appear to offer patronage to those who potentially imperil unity and reconciliation. The courts have dealt with Gnanasara Thera. It is best the Government considers the issue a closed chapter.