Posted: 13/01/2013 10:52
It's been frustrating to
watch the international reporting of the story of the impeachment of Sri
Lanka's top judge. Some reports have got bogged down in the issue of whether or
not she is guilty of corruption. That's not the issue at stake.
This is a story about
rule of law - about whether the country's politicians will heed the ruling of
the highest court in the land. If they don't, then there's little hope for the
future.
The Chief Justice is an
unlikely rebel. She interpreted the law in a way that challenged the growing
powers of the ruling family. Her persecution thereafter has been clearly
politically motivated.
An extraordinary Alice
in Wonderland process was put in motion to teach her a lesson - with
parliamentarians openly abusing the island's top judge as a mad woman and only
granting her lawyers access to the huge stack of papers indicting her the day
before the hearing.
Not surprisingly
international watchdogs condemned the entire process as unfair. The Appeal
Court and the Supreme Court in Sri Lanka also ruled that the impeachment
procedure illegal and void. Lawyers went on strike, issued statements and
unfurled black flags to mourn the passing away of justice.
The parliament which is
controlled by the ruling Rajapaksa family moved to rubber stamp the illegal
impeachment on Friday. Many of the MPs that made up the two-thirds majority had
been elected on a different ticket but had been induced to cross over to join
the ruling clique.
Soon Sri Lanka may
bizarrely have two Chief Justices. If the President appoints a replacement,
lawyers say he or she will be a usurper. Reports suggest the existing Chief
Justice is continuing to fill her diary as if it's business as usual.
Sri Lanka is not suddenly
on an anti corruption drive - far from it. This is an executive not brooking
any challenge - even from the Judiciary. It is the erosion of the checks and
balances integral to democracy.
Arcane and legalistic as
this story may seem to outsiders, the impeachment has become a turning point
for Sri Lankan civil society groups in the capital Colombo. Most opted for
engagement with the government after the brutal end to the civil war in 2009,
hoping victory against the Tamil Tiger rebels would give them some space to
improve human rights. Some even played down the war crimes and crimes against
humanity committed by their own army in 2009, preferring denial but calling it
pragmatism. UN reports revealed first 40,000 deaths and then possibly 70,000
deaths but inside the country the priorities were development, reconciliation,
land rights, rehabilitation, building roads - everything except truth and
justice the bedrock of the future.
The mistreatment of the
Chief Justice has brought home to Sri Lankans from the majority community that
even the most senior lawmaker in the land cannot be guaranteed a fair trial.
Suddenly the denial of justice seems closer to home. Unsurprisingly Tamils in
the diaspora are saying that now the majority Sinhalese community are beginning
to get a taste of their own medicine.
As an author of a book
of survivors' stories from the appallingly brutal climax of the war in 2009, I
wonder why there hasn't been equal alarm about the injustice then: deliberate
shelling of hospitals and food queues, summary executions of bound and naked
prisoners, gang rape in police custody, systematic torture in detention and
disappearance of people who were seen surrendering to the army. The treatment
of the Chief Justice is indeed a symbol of how bad things have got, but
hundreds of thousands of Tamils went through far worse injustice and no lawyer
or human rights activist unfurled black flags for them.
