The Supreme Court in its decision made on 1 January 2013 finally put the debate on the issue of the impeachment of the Chief Justice to rest by providing the following answer to the question referred to it by the Court of Appeal.
“It is mandatory under Article 107(3) of the Constitution for the Parliament to provide by law the matters relating to the forum before which the allegations are to be proved, the mode of proof, burden of proof and the standard of proof or any alleged misbehaviour or incapacity and the Judge’s right to appear and to be heard in person or by representative in addition to matter relating to the investigation of the alleged misbehaviour or incapacity.”
The Supreme Court has now interpreted the law for the nation. If the Government now proceeds in any manner contrary to the interpretation given by the country’s apex court this would be a final and irrevocable assault on the rule of law. Therefore the future debate on this matter needs to be on the core issue as to whether Sri Lanka will remain within the framework of the rule of law or not. To decide that it will not remain within the framework of the rule of law is a momentous decision that would deprive the Government of any claim of democracy – Asian Human Rights Commission.
If the government does not respect the rule of law, Why should the corporates do so? Why should the citizens do so? Why should we pay our taxes? Why should we repay bank loans? Why should we obey traffic rules? Why? Oh why? It will be like the jungles? Is that what is called a Banana Republic? Hope the educated public will take note.