COLOMBO, Nov 1: Members of parliament belonging to Sri Lanka’s governing alliance, the United Peoples’ Freedom Alliance (UPFA), submitted to the speaker on Thursday a motion to impeach the Supreme Court Chief Justice, Ms Shirani Bandaranayake, for violating the constitution by overstepping judicial limits.

The motion, submitted by 117 MPs of the 225-member house, was handed over by Arundika Fernando, L. Alagiyawanna and Shanth Bandara.

Briefing reporters, Media Minister Keheliya Rambukwella said the motion was in accordance with Article 107 of the constitution which had set the conditions for the appointment and removal of judges of the apex court. As per the constitution, signatures of 75 lawmakers were enough to set the process of impeachment moving. “But more had signed,” he pointed out.

All the constituent parties of the UPFA had gone along with what the spokesman described as the “government’s motion”.

The main charge

The spokesman refused to list the specific charges against the chief justice, saying the matter was before the speaker, and that it would not be proper to go into details before he had made up his mind on whether there was a prima facie case for impeachment.

While there were a number of charges, the basic one was that the CJ had overstepped the limits of the judiciary and acted against the constitutional principle that the judiciary, the executive and the legislature should function harmoniously and not step into each other’s preserve, except to protect the constitution.

Rambukwella denied that the action against the CJ stemmed from her uncooperative rulings on the controversial Divi Neguma (Upliftment of Life) Bill. The bill seeks to give the central government headed by President Mahinda Rajapaksa all powers over poverty alleviation and small-scale economic development programmes in the country, thus taking away powers devolved to the provinces under the 13th Amendment.

CJ Shirani Bandaranayake had ruled that the bill should be first sent to the provincial councils for approval. She sent her ruling not to the speaker, as she should have, but to the secretary general of parliament. This annoyed Speaker Chamal Rajapaksa, who made a statement in the house slamming the CJ for her impropriety.

The Tamil National Alliance (TNA) had challenged in the Supreme Court the Northern Province Governor’s bid to give assent to the bill, saying that he had no right to do so when the provincial council had not even been constituted.

The CJ had submitted her determination on this issue to the speaker on Wednesday. Observers believe that the CJ’s determination had gone against the government and that was the reason government MPs submitted the motion of impeachment on Thursday.

What next?

Asked what might follow the submission of the motion, Minister Rambukwella said that if the speaker felt that there was a prima facie case for impeachment, he could either appoint a parliamentary select committee (PSC) to go into the charges, or straightaway order a debate in the house and go for voting. The CJ could defend herself in the PSC, or the house could ask her to appear before it. A motion of impeachment can be carried only if more than 50 per cent of the total membership of the house votes for it.

Rambukwella said the whole process could take a month.

In the early 1980s, the J.R. Jayewardene’s government had tried to impeach the independent CJ, Neville Samarakoon, but the latter quit office before that could happen.