Mohan Peiris sworn in as new chief justice

UKboy wrote:But what matter most is why government did want to get rid of her? Was it only because of her unethical behaviour? Or was it because of the drama behind Divinaguma? If she had said Yes to divinaguma, things would have been so different.

I do not know whether her dicision on divinaguma is constitutional or not.But we all know this provincial councils are white elephant which was forcibly put on us by former Indian Prime-minister.There is no point of giving further strength to provincial council on any matter.

UKboy wrote:If someone can investigates what happened to Tsunami funds then surely former CJ’s (so called unethical) actions were just peanuts.

On the otherhand තමන්ගේ කිල්ලෝටයෙත් හුණු ඩිංගක් හරි තියෙන විත්තිය දන්නවනම් that person should know how to act if that person wants to keep her states.(Anyone can not say my peanut is smaller than ur any other nut so that I should not be punished before you.)

UKboy wrote:Government 100% correctly followed the constitution to get rid of former CJ. That's not the point we all are making.

I do not know what you have meant by the word WE as almost all the supporters of her cry about procedure but not about the accusations.

kas wrote: CJ has ultimate powers to control judges

Can you enlighten us all about this Please?

Also don't you see where the ultimate power is here and majority of the members of the select committee members were "Boot licker" of the ultimate power.

The power wants to see her back for obvious reasons.

Can we expect a fair decision from them either then?

Whitebull wrote:

UKboy wrote:If someone can investigates what happened to Tsunami funds then surely former CJ’s (so called unethical) actions were just peanuts.

On the otherhand තමන්ගේ කිල්ලෝටයෙත් හුණු ඩිංගක් හරි තියෙන විත්තිය දන්නවනම් that person should know how to act if that person wants to keep her states.(Anyone can not say my peanut is smaller than ur any other nut so that I should not be punished before you.)

Then the majority of the MPs should be punished n send home? Do you still think because of her accusations, this government decided to get rid of her? Hell noooo.
I would be an extremely proud Sri Lankan if it really happened in that way.

Whitebull wrote:

UKboy wrote:Government 100% correctly followed the constitution to get rid of former CJ. That's not the point we all are making.

I do not know what you have meant by the word WE as almost all the supporters of her cry about procedure but not about the accusations.

As you recognise many supporter of her believe that the government breeched the rules in the constitution to remove her but I don’t think so.
Sadly some critics of her strongly believe that because of her accusations, she was impeached.

Of course this government did liberate the country but just sake of that I’m not too sure we have to say Yes to things like this impeachment as well as expropriation law.

I do not know why some people can not understand the simple English written in the Constitution.I have mentioned almost all the relevant articles from the Constitution in another thread. An average intelligent person can understand whether this committee is legal or not.( WHITEBULL}

Interpretation of constitution and various Act of parliament is an accepted practice in any democratic System.If is not a problem of English or any other Language

How Mr Sarath Siva interpret written Law and gave judgement in various
instances I think written law is very clear about MPP who act against
party detectives.Bur Mr Sarath Silva has given different interpretation andAll accepted

Anyway our friend has selected suitable name to identify himself !

D.G.Dayaratne wrote:I do not know why some people can not understand the simple English written in the Constitution.I have mentioned almost all the relevant articles from the Constitution in another thread. An average intelligent person can understand whether this committee is legal or not.( WHITEBULL}

Interpretation of constitution and various Act of parliament is an accepted practice in any democratic System.If is not a problem of English or any other Language

How Mr Sarath Siva interpret written Law and gave judgement in various
instances I think written law is very clear about MPP who act against
party detectives.Bur Mr Sarath Silva has given different interpretation andAll accepted

Anyway our friend has selected suitable name to identify himself !

Save your words friend.Useless arguing with these " bath kana harak". What this guy do here is " denawa nokiya dena eka".

nimantha80 wrote:

D.G.Dayaratne wrote:I do not know why some people can not understand the simple English written in the Constitution.I have mentioned almost all the relevant articles from the Constitution in another thread. An average intelligent person can understand whether this committee is legal or not.( WHITEBULL}

Interpretation of constitution and various Act of parliament is an accepted practice in any democratic System.If is not a problem of English or any other Language

How Mr Sarath Siva interpret written Law and gave judgement in various
instances I think written law is very clear about MPP who act against
party detectives.Bur Mr Sarath Silva has given different interpretation andAll accepted

Anyway our friend has selected suitable name to identify himself !

Save your words friend.Useless arguing with these " bath kana harak". What this guy do here is " denawa nokiya dena eka".

Who is the බත් කන හරක් ? Time will prove it in future. This committee seems to be legal according to our constitution but way of removing former CJ was not ethical and all people know what was the immediate reason for this impeachment. If the government has fair and square objective to clean our country from bribery and corruptions it should start from Parliament.

nimantha80 wrote:

D.G.Dayaratne wrote:I do not know why some people can not understand the simple English written in the Constitution.I have mentioned almost all the relevant articles from the Constitution in another thread. An average intelligent person can understand whether this committee is legal or not.( WHITEBULL}

Interpretation of constitution and various Act of parliament is an accepted practice in any democratic System.If is not a problem of English or any other Language

How Mr Sarath Siva interpret written Law and gave judgement in various
instances I think written law is very clear about MPP who act against
party detectives.Bur Mr Sarath Silva has given different interpretation andAll accepted

Anyway our friend has selected suitable name to identify himself !

Save your words friend.Useless arguing with these " bath kana harak". What this guy do here is " denawa nokiya dena eka".

Ayi Malli ochchara kipenne....mama oyaata monawath kiyuwe nahane.....onna oyaa oyage wasikiliyeyi public forum ekakayi wenasa dannei naha kiyalaawath mama kiyuwanam ohoma kipena eka tikak hari saadaaranai...eth mama ehema kiyuweth nahanei....eka hinda dhanwath wadhagath widiyata liyanna kiyanna purudhu wennako....
ඇයි මල්ලි ඔච්චර කිපෙන්නේ......මම ඔයාට මොනවත් කියුවේ නැහැ නේ.....ඔන්න ඔයා ඔයාගේ වැසිකිලියෙයි, public forum එකකයි වෙනස දන්නේ නැහැ කියලවත් මම කියුවනම් ඔහොම කිපෙන එක ටිකක්වත් සාධාරණයි.....ඒත් මම එහෙම කියුවෙත් නැහැනේ....ඒක හින්දා දැන්වත් වැදගත් විදියට ලියන්න කියන්න පුරුදු වෙන්නකො.....

UKboy wrote:Then the majority of the MPs should be punished n send home? Do you still think because of her accusations, this government decided to get rid of her? Hell noooo.

No UKboy....I do not think that she was sacked because of her accusations because then she should have been sacked long before but the irony is people who asked to sack her then, now crying not to sack her.Anyway I personally beleave that atleast some of the accusations are pretty straight forward like Golden Key accusation, her husbands involvement in that controversial deal.
I am also 100% sure most of the MPs carry more serious accusations than her.But it does not justify her accusations.And also we all know most of the politicians are realy corrupted and we also do not expect much from them.But Person who is at the top chair of the Judicial System should not be a corrupted egostic person and people expect better character from such a person.Otherwise people would loose the faith on entire Judiciary System.And to worsen the matter Politicians are judged by the public every six yearly or less.(It is another question whether public use that oppurtunity in wise manner or not.) And regarding Judges we do not get such an oppurtunity not even to Judge but even to constructively critisize their decision as it might lead to contempt to the court.
And also althought the decision given to divinaguma may be the immediate cause for the impeachment there had been growing tention among CJ and the government.First the Z-Score problem,then she refused the President's request to make an speech on budget,then comes the divinaguma bill and her decision on that bill gave unnecessary strength to a white elephant-the provincial council.And do you expect any prudent government to keep person who goes againts the government egosticly at the top chair of the Judiciary System and there should not be such a growing tention among these three bodies,the executive,the parliament and the judiciary as ultimately it would badly affect the countries development.
And to worsen the matter, with introduction of the impeachment she reacted like කැත්තට පොල්ල and all the sinister forces against our country made good alliance with her as a result of which this turned out be a battle between patriotic Sri Lankans and sinister forces againt our country without giving much options to choose in between.So that when the matter came to such a level the government had no option expect to proceed with the impeachment.

UKboy wrote:I would be an extremely proud Sri Lankan if it really happened in that way.

My friend if you wait that to happen to be a proud Sri Lankan I do not think you might get a chance in this life time

UKboy wrote:Of course this government did liberate the country but just sake of that I’m not too sure we have to say Yes to things like this impeachment as well as expropriation law.

Yes friend we should not say Yes to everything eventhough this government did liberate country.But let me explain this matter furthur,
Let's say that this government is not act prudently now.Then what option do we have ?
1.Sack this government and make a new government.
2.Try to correct this government with constructive criticism.
3.Make alliance with the government and make personal benefits without thinking about the country.:-
Eventhough I mentioned as an option I do not discuss this as an option but if truly speaking that is what the most doing.
If we select the first option we should have a better option.Do we have a better option ? According to the most of the public as well as me we do not have a better option.Therefore only option we left with is option No.2.So we should constructively critisize the government but when it comes to the critical matter like this impeachment we should try to protect this government.It might lead to mudslings and insulting towards us but if our intention is good there is no need to think about it much.

(b) provision for such matters as are necessary of expedient for the exercise,
performance and discharge of the powers, duties and functions of the
commission.


(4) The Commission may by Order published in the Gazette delegate to the
Secretary to the Commission the power to make transfers in respect of scheduled public
officers, other than transfers involving increase of salary, or to make acting appointments in
such cases and subject to such limitations as may be specified in the Order.[/justify]

http://www.jsc.gov.lk/pdf/Constitution_JCSC.pdf
http://www.priu.gov.lk/Cons/1978Constitution/Chapter_15_Amd.html

Kithsiri wrote: Can we expect a fair decision from them either then?

Answer is we cant, that's why i told in my comment governments are corrupted by default in countries like ours. However the judiciary system was able to keep their value and status until this incident happened, but due to this incident they have also fallen in to the level of politicians which is bad to the country that's the most worrying part for me.

One more thing, constitution is like a vehicle where HE,MPs, and the Judiciary can drive towards the betterment or for the destruction of the country, impeachment process is a fine vehicle in our constitutions as per my opinion, no need for big changes only problem is with the drivers of the vehicle (HE,MPs, and the Judiciary). Ultimately we, the mass majority are the "බත් කන හරක් " who selects the crazy drivers from time to time

"You’ve probably seen the headlines expressing our Government’s concern over the impeachment of Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake. Actions that undermine an independent judiciary in Sri Lanka may also undermine Sri Lanka’s ability to attract foreign investment. It’s no secret that foreign investors assess the state of rule of law in a country as a factor when making investment decisions. "
Speech made American Ambassadress at Matara

UKboy wrote:Government 100% correctly followed the constitution to get rid of former CJ. That's not the point we all are making.

But what matter most is why government did want to get rid of her? Was it only because of her unethical behaviour? Or was it because of the drama behind Divinaguma? If she had said Yes to divinaguma, things would have been so different.

If someone can investigates what happened to Tsunami funds then surely former CJ’s (so called unethical) actions were just peanuts.

U received a good comment for the latter part I believe

Well apparently the crimes committed at a higher magnitude which is a concern to the common person doesn't matter but what matters most to the govt gets prominent attention in SL. Ppl say govt. followed the correct procedure but then Judiciary pros say the felonies are false accusations..

To me, this verdict has the same impact as what happened to S.F. The only difference is, CJ is home today but S.F was imprisoned. And I do not understand whether a fair chance was given to the accused.

Oh yeah.. majority in the parliament are corrupted so we cant expect anything from them despite the parliament said to be ahead of judiciary system in SL but the head of the judiciary system should always come clean...

Hmmm.. I must learn to think like a pro patriot.

smallville wrote:

UKboy wrote:Government 100% correctly followed the constitution to get rid of former CJ. That's not the point we all are making.

But what matter most is why government did want to get rid of her? Was it only because of her unethical behaviour? Or was it because of the drama behind Divinaguma? If she had said Yes to divinaguma, things would have been so different.

If someone can investigates what happened to Tsunami funds then surely former CJ’s (so called unethical) actions were just peanuts.

U received a good comment for the latter part I believe

Well apparently the crimes committed at a higher magnitude which is a concern to the common person doesn't matter but what matters most to the govt gets prominent attention in SL. Ppl say govt. followed the correct procedure but then Judiciary pros say the felonies are false accusations..

To me, this verdict has the same impact as what happened to S.F. The only difference is, CJ is home today but S.F was imprisoned. And I do not understand whether a fair chance was given to the accused.

Oh yeah.. majority in the parliament are corrupted so we cant expect anything from them despite the parliament said to be ahead of judiciary system in SL but the head of the judiciary system should always come clean...

Hmmm.. I must learn to think like a pro patriot.

I do not think so.
Most of us thinking inside the box even in trading also.
Come out of the box and have a broader view.

Redbulls wrote:

smallville wrote:

UKboy wrote:Government 100% correctly followed the constitution to get rid of former CJ. That's not the point we all are making.

But what matter most is why government did want to get rid of her? Was it only because of her unethical behaviour? Or was it because of the drama behind Divinaguma? If she had said Yes to divinaguma, things would have been so different.

If someone can investigates what happened to Tsunami funds then surely former CJ’s (so called unethical) actions were just peanuts.

U received a good comment for the latter part I believe

Well apparently the crimes committed at a higher magnitude which is a concern to the common person doesn't matter but what matters most to the govt gets prominent attention in SL. Ppl say govt. followed the correct procedure but then Judiciary pros say the felonies are false accusations..

To me, this verdict has the same impact as what happened to S.F. The only difference is, CJ is home today but S.F was imprisoned. And I do not understand whether a fair chance was given to the accused.

Oh yeah.. majority in the parliament are corrupted so we cant expect anything from them despite the parliament said to be ahead of judiciary system in SL but the head of the judiciary system should always come clean...

Hmmm.. I must learn to think like a pro patriot.

I do not think so.
Most of us thinking inside the box even in trading also.
Come out of the box and have a broader view.

Take the last part as Irony

Redbulls wrote:

smallville wrote:

UKboy wrote:Government 100% correctly followed the constitution to get rid of former CJ. That's not the point we all are making.

But what matter most is why government did want to get rid of her? Was it only because of her unethical behaviour? Or was it because of the drama behind Divinaguma? If she had said Yes to divinaguma, things would have been so different.

If someone can investigates what happened to Tsunami funds then surely former CJ’s (so called unethical) actions were just peanuts.

U received a good comment for the latter part I believe

Well apparently the crimes committed at a higher magnitude which is a concern to the common person doesn't matter but what matters most to the govt gets prominent attention in SL. Ppl say govt. followed the correct procedure but then Judiciary pros say the felonies are false accusations..

To me, this verdict has the same impact as what happened to S.F. The only difference is, CJ is home today but S.F was imprisoned. And I do not understand whether a fair chance was given to the accused.

Oh yeah.. majority in the parliament are corrupted so we cant expect anything from them despite the parliament said to be ahead of judiciary system in SL but the head of the judiciary system should always come clean...

Hmmm.. I must learn to think like a pro patriot.

I do not think so.
Most of us thinking inside the box even in trading also.
Come out of the box and have a broader view.

What would be the broader view ?

Broder view means

D.G.Dayaratne wrote:Broder view means

Remove your own glasses is the meaning.