Supreme Court has engaged in judicial cannibalism - President

Seeks parliamentary committee to review determination on Gender Equality Bill

Says he did not challenge the Supreme Court but only raised a point

By Yohan Perera and Ajith Siriwardana  

President Ranil Wickremesinghe yesterday in Parliament criticized the Supreme Court saying that it is in a way engaged in judicial cannibalism.   

Making a statement in the House regarding the Supreme Court determination of the Gender Equality Bill, the President proposed to appoint a parliamentary select committee to review the determination.  

“There has been a national policy on women’s empowerment and gender equality since 2011. These are obligations of the Government under the Sustainable Development Goals 5 and a number of women’s conventions and agreements that we have signed.

 More than that, in the case of the Kamalawathi and other vs the Provincial Public Service Commission, SLR 1, the national policy was deemed within the domain of the Cabinet of Ministers and passed by the Supreme Court. It’s a parliament. It’s a political matter. The Supreme Court cannot in any way go and make any ruling on this. Then they are contravening and coming into our area. Secondly, there’s a large number of cases which have been given on the question of equality and equality of women. There are Ratnayaka Taranga, Lakmali versus Niroshan Abeykoon and the Inspector General of Police. It recognizes the dignity and well-being of people as a fundamental right. Then there are the ten-judge bench in Sarath Jayasinghe and others. We have the view that mere reliance on the text used in a constitution is not sufficient to ascertain the values that are embodied in a constitution or its amendments. Similarly, you have the case where Shirani Bandaranayake’s judgement in Karunathilaka and Jayalath de Silva and others, which says the basic principle governing the concept of equality is to remove unfairness. It is a profoundly forbidding action which denies equality and thereby discriminates. And finally, they have also ignored the special determination on the Penal Code Amendment, made by the Chief Justice. In this, we are talking of empowering women and ensuring equality for women. But according to the Goal 5 of Sustainable Development, even other minorities must get the government services without discrimination.   

 “So all these powers have been disregarded. In a sense, the court has set aside everything and saying that this makes room. So in a way, what they have done is all these have disappeared, as if this court has eaten it up, all the other judgements. So in a way, they are practicing judicial cannibalism and we are being asked then to accept it, which this House can’t. How can you overrule a ten-judge bench and how can you overrule the Chief Justice?” he asked.  

TNA MP M. A. Sumanthiran proposed that it is better to refer the Bill to the Supreme Courts for a re-determination. “It is better to refer the Bill for a re-determination rather than challenging the Supreme Court. It is not a healthy move to appoint select committees to look into each determination given by the Supreme Courts,” the MP said.   

The President who responded said he did not challenge the Supreme Court but only raised a point with regard to sovereignty of the people. “Sovereignty of the people is vested with Parliament. I only raised this point,” he said.