Aiding a Moulavi to record Easter Sunday PCoI proceedings Lawyer gets eight-month suspension

By Lakmal Sooriyagoda  
The Supreme Court yesterday issued a rule suspending a lawyer from practicing as an Attorney-at- law for a period of eight months for professional misconduct. This is for aiding a Moulavi to record a part of the proceedings of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry (PCoI) into Easter Sunday attacks using a mobile phone, contrary to the rules of the procedure of the PCoI.  

• Moulavi Mullaffar had requested the lawyer to keep his mobile phone as he was not permitted to take it into the premises

The Supreme Court three-judge-bench comprising Justice Buwaneka Aluwihare, S. Thurairaja and Mahinda Samayawardhena ordered to suspend the respondent Attorney-at-Law Nizam Mohammad Shameem from the roll of attorneys for a period of eight months. The suspension of the lawyer from the practice will come into effect from January 1, 2024.  
The Chairman of the PCoI had referred this matter to the Supreme Court to consider whether the respondent was in breach of the rules relating to ‘Conduct of and Etiquette for Attorneys-at-Law.’  However, during the inquiry the respondent Attorney-at-Law pleaded guilty to the rule.  

The Respondent Attorney-at-Law engaged himself to represent the All Ceylon Jamiyyathul Ulama (ACJU) in the proceedings conducted on September 9, 2020 before the Presidential Commission of Inquiry into Easter Sunday attacks. Moulavi Murshid Marsa Mullaffar was attending the proceedings of the PCol on 9th September 2020 representing the ACJU in his capacity as the acting Secretary. The respondent lawyer is accused of conveying the mobile telephone of Moulavi Mullaffar into the venue of the proceedings and aiding Moulavi Mullaffar to record a part of the proceedings of PCoI when Ven. Galaboda Aththe Gnanasara Thero was giving evidence before 
the Commission  
It was revealed that Moulavi Mullaffar had requested the lawyer to keep his mobile phone as he was not permitted to take it into the premises. Only Attorneys-at-Law were allowed to take their mobile telephones into the premises.  
A rule had been issued against the respondent for breaching Rules 60 and 61 of the Supreme Court (Conduct of and Etiquette for Attorney-at-Law) Rules 1988.  
Faiz Musthapha PC with N.M. Shaheid PC and M.A. Zaid appeared for the respondent. Rohan Sahabandu PC with Chathurika Elvitigala appeared for the Bar Association of Sri Lanka. Deputy Solicitor General Ganga Wakishta Arachchi appeared for the Attorney General.