Hordes at courts
06 March 2017
All it takes to destroy a democracy is a chronic erosion of public
confidence in vital state institutions. Worryingly, not even the
self-proclaimed messiahs on a mission to salvage the Sri Lankan
democracy have cared to remove the canker of public distrust, which is
eating into the vitals of the three branches of government mercilessly.
The less said about the legislature and the executive, the better.
They are beyond redemption. Only the judiciary has shown some
resilience in the face of attacks on its dignity and credibility and
everything possible needs to be done to protect it lest rising public
resentment should pave the way for anarchy.
The law does not
permit even the tooting of horns near courts in session. There have
been instances where people were thrown behind bars for letting out
ostentatious yawns while court proceedings were on. But, strangely,
this law does not seem to apply to everybody equally.
Members
of the black-coated fraternity go berserk with impunity in court
houses, where ordinary people dare not even make small talk in hushed
tones. Last year, lawyers clashed with police while the Meethotamulla
garbage dump case was being heard, causing the court concerned to
adjourn. All of them should have been thrown behind bars en masse for
causing an affront to the dignity of court. But, sadly, nothing of the
sort happened. Some lawyers heaped abuse on the High Court judges who
found Sarath Fonseka guilty in the White Flag case in 2011 and smashed
up court furniture in protest. They got away with that serious offence
which would have caused an ordinary person to be sentenced to prison
for years. A supporter of Joint Opposition firebrand Wimal Weerawansa
has been jailed for shouting in a court. The JRJ government had the
houses of Supreme Court judges who refused to toe its line stoned. Some
of the ministers who defended the attack at that time are currently in
power, championing judicial independence. (Telephones of independent
judges are tapped by the ‘Gestapo’.)
As if growing
indiscipline among lawyers and sinister attempts by politicians to
reduce judges to mere puppets on strings were not enough, the kith and
kin of suspects have begun to invade court premises in protest. The
despicable practice of mobs surrounding police stations when lawbreakers
are arrested has apparently come to be taken for granted. Police are,
therefore, wary of taking some suspects into custody. Emboldened by
their success, the backers of lawbreakers are apparently employing the
same modus operandi in a bid to intimidate the judiciary as well.
Last
Thursday, when 20 suspects, arrested in connection with two small
firearms and ammunition found in the Mt. Lavinia court premises, were
remanded, all hell broke loose. Their family members and relatives
staged a protest near the court, claiming that they were innocent and
blaming police for not taking action against a powerful underworld
figure. Most of the protesters were women. Emotions easily get the
better of mothers, sisters and wives and it is only natural that they
do everything in their power to protect their loved ones. If they
believe police are at fault their complaints must be looked into and
justice done. But, on no grounds, must noisy protests near courts be
countenanced. Police who unflinching descend on Opposition politicians
and students engaged in protests were seen persuading instead of
ordering the protesters to disperse on Thursday!
The
problem of mobs invading court premises would not have arisen if stern
action had been taken against those who started the bad practice of
smashing coconuts at Hulftsdorp purportedly to seek justice through
divine intervention. There have also been silent protests on either
side of roads leading to courts in recent times. Innocent as such
actions may seem they are, in fact, aimed at bringing pressure to bear
on the judiciary.
It is imperative that action be taken to
prevent protests in the vicinity of courts in all parts of the country.
Anyone who does not agree with a judicial decision can make use of the
appellate procedure.
No comments:
Post a Comment