Re-rising about our Sad Dreams
Rizana Nafeek
January 08, 2013 was one of the most fateful days in the history of the judiciary in this country. Over 3,200 lawyers, who assembled for a general meeting of the entire membership of the Bar Association, resolved not to accept the impeachment motion. Never in its history has the Bar been more united, without any force or coercion, against government machinery which was unleashed to stifle the meeting. An Independent Judiciary and not a kept judiciary, is the sine qua non of a vibrant democracy and a free society. The right to genuinely pursue happiness is one of the core values of democracy. Though there may be those who have reservations that the means and the manner by which a country seeks protect its people from foreign intrusion and ensure their right to pursue happiness, could cause unhappiness to other states,
everyone cherishes the goal to be free. An independent judiciary is the corner stone of a people’s freedom and happiness.
Therefore, anyone who strives to suppress independent judges and have in their place puppets will soon find themselves facing grave danger as such puppet judges will some day become puppets of another regime.
With its attendant weaknesses, the only solution man, who had sent rockets to the moon, has is that which came from Greece, the most civilised nation in history, going back 3000 years. Thus, it is expected that Democracy would deliver happiness to the majority of the people. One of the foremost pillars of such a democracy is a firmly enshrined Judiciary established on terra-firma, without being shaken or shackled by the other two limbs, the Executive or the legislature. It is paradoxical and foreboding that on this very day, one of the organs, established by the people to express their democratic rights, was, discussing and debating how to behead the other organ of democracy.
It was paradoxical that the Minister of Foreign Employment, who was a member of the Committee, which found the Chief Justice of Sri Lanka guilty, had made an announcement, with a degree of jubilation and to the applause of the other members of the House, that Rizana Nafeek, a 17-year old housemaid, was to be pardoned and that she would soon arrive in Sri Lanka, when in fact, at the time the announcement was made, Rizana Nafeek had already been beheaded two hours earlier.
In a country like India, where 80 per cent of the people are illiterate, on hearing this news, which made the whole world, including Ban ki-Moon, condemn the act, which was akin to a society in which Barbarism was the political philosophy, the people would have staged massive impromptu protests like that of two weeks ago, when thousands protested against a medical student being gang raped in a bus. Similarly, one would have thought that we would have assembled even in larger numbers against the barbarous inhuman beheading of a child, by the Saudi authorities and further demanded the immediate removal of the Minister who made a misdealing statement in Parliament. But, in Sri Lanka, the reverse is true. Over ninety per cent of the people are literate, according to statistics, but are so self-seeking that they would put the interest of self before the country and would only murmur in silence without any sign of protest.
Instead, after the beheading of our Lady of Justice, some of the Golden Key depositors, lit fire crackers and ate kiribath in celebration. It will be interesting to follow the chain of events of the post impeachment scenario involving Golden Key depositors. It has been said that Sakvithi had defrauded the public, but in comparison it was minuscule to the amount defrauded by Lalith Kotelawala. Sakvithi is still languishing in jail without bail, whereas Lalith Kotelawala, who has driven many depositors to suicide, is out on bail and is enjoying his retirement with the courtesy of the judiciary.
Be that as it may, It is a very well known fact that the Sri Lankan Government did not spend a dime as legal fees on Rizana, though the Ministry of Foreign Employment collected money from the poor workers, as fees from the likes of housemaids, who virtually slave for us to lead a comfortable life.
Under Saudi Arabian law, no one could question the confession obtained through such methods of torture. It was the Asian Human Rights Commission, headed by a Sri Lankan, by the name of Basil Fernando, who through his panel of lawyers and a legal firm named Tateb Fahad Al-Shammri, fought a legal battle to show that Rizana was 17 years old and her confession was obtained by torture. They also pointed out that as there was no other corroborative evidence, she should not be sentenced to death. The Asian Human Rights Council, not only bore the huge legal bill and also started a campaign where tens of thousands of people petitioned the King of Saudi Arabia to give her clemency.
It is a strange coincidence and an ill omen that during the debate to remove Anshumala, the Legislature had to observe two minutes silence in memory of the beheaded Rizana. The issue was whether the Judiciary or the parliament was supreme. Wimal Weerawansa was shouting himself hoarse, surrounded by Golden Key depositors, that parliament was supreme. In Sri Lanka we do not have a monarch, only a President. In Saudi Arabia there is a monarch. The King of Saudi Arabia is one of the richest and most powerful men in the world. No democracy is found in Saudi Arabia and no one would dare question the authority of the King. But, the statement released by the Saudi Arabian Government, relating to the death of Rizana, has made it clear that according to Sharia law, the only persons who can sanction pardon were the parents of the child allegedly killed by Rizana and it also well known that they refused to pardon her.
Through the intervention of the Asian Human Rights Commission, many Saudi Arabian citizens moved for a revocation of the death penalty imposed on Rizana Nafeek. They moved that the Supreme Council, which is the equivalent of the legislature and the King to pardon Rizana. But none of them wanted to personally intercede on behalf of Rizana, as they reckoned the Law of the Land was supreme and the death sentence given by Court could not be overturned. Thus, even in Saudi Arabia where there are draconian laws and democracy is not known. Yet they held, hold and will continue to hold, that the interpretation of the Law, as founded by a Court, first by the Magistrate’s Court, then by the Court of Appeal and finally by the Supreme Court, must be respected and cannot be overturned by king Abdulla Bin Abdl Azis al Saud.
The legislators, who stood in silence as a mark of respect for Rizana Nafeek, decided to overlook and refused to obey the interpretation by the Supreme Court, where the Constitution unequivocally states that the interpretation of the law is with no other authority than the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka.
Rizana Nafeek and Anshumala Bandaranayaka were beheaded one legally, by the authority of the Supreme Court of Saudi Arabia and the other, Anshumala Bandaranayaka, without the authority of the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka. All those who ate kavun and kiribath, applauded and cheered, would very soon rue the decision they took to rejoice the beheading of our ‘Lady of Justice’.
-Resh3neg Lanka News