Impeachment, the correct procedure - Choksy
K.N. Choksy PC said the impeachment mechanism is the only
accountability mechanism for the Higher Judiciary. As far as Judges of
the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal are concerned, it is the only
method by which they are made answerable for their conduct in office.
Where the minor Judiciary is concerned, the Judicial Service
Commission, which is headed by the Chief Justice, has its own
accountability and disciplinary procedure. Regarding the President, the
Constitution provides an impeachment procedure by Parliament.
The President is also made responsible to Parliament for his actions.
He also has to face the hustings and the people every six years.
Members of Parliament can be expelled by the political party which
have nominated them and lose their seats in the House.
Regarding public servants, there is a mechanism where the Public
Service Commission exercises disciplinary control.
Thus, there is an accountability process in every sphere of public
service in its broad sense. Choksy said that when one looks back on the
impeachment of Superior Court Judges there is precedence. This is not
the first occasion on which impeachment proceedings have been commenced
against a Chief Justice. During the stewardship of President J.R.
Jayewardene, in the case of Chief Justice Neville Samarakoon too, the
process of impeachment was put in motion.
A Select Committee of Parliament headed by Mr. Premadasa was
appointed to look into certain preliminary questions. However, the
matter came to a natural end before culmination as Chief Justice
Samarakoon reached his age of retirement and thereby ceased to hold
judicial office.
There is also international precedence for this procedure of
impeachment by the legislature in other domains such as the United
States of America and Australia.
"Sri Lanka is a democratic nation and accordingly the process and
procedure is not without safeguards. There is a due process to be
followed prior to impeachment. A petition has to be presented to the
Speaker with not less than one third of the total number of Members of
Parliament, signing it. (In the present case, 117 Members have signed
it, i.e. more than half). Once the Petition is presented to the Speaker,
the Speaker has to appoint a Select Committee of Parliament, which
comprises Members of Parliament, both from the Government and the
Opposition to inquire into and report to Parliament on the allegations
in the Petition.
"At the Select Committee which inquires into the matter, the Chief
Justice has the right to be represented by Counsel, by a representative
or to appear in person. Thereafter, the findings of the Select Committee
are tabled in the House, and Parliament debates the issue. If the Report
of the Select Committee is passed by a simple majority in Parliament, an
Address is sent to the President by Parliament for the removal of the
judge, in this case the Chief Justice. The President acts on this
Address of Parliament."
Therefore, Choksy noted, that there is a balanced mechanism and
Constitutional process where the Chief Justice has a right to be heard
and the due process of the Law is followed. The Parliament thus acts on
the lines of a judicial body.Choksy noted that it is not a Kangaroo
Court as there is a Constitutional process mechanism.
To ensure that justice and fair play prevail, Parliament refers the
matter to a Select Committee of Parliament. This enables a finding to
come in a rational and non-partisan manner in fairness to the judge
concerned and the institution of the Courts. Choksy said that the
Constitution mandates that the Chief Justice shall not be removed other
than for "proved misbehaviour", proved to the satisfaction of
Parliament. Parliament scrutinises and debates the findings of the
Select Committee.
The words "proved misbehaviour" are of wide importance. They bring
within their sweep both misbehaviour in the exercise of their official
duties, and also personal conduct; and this for a good reason, namely,
that judges must be like 'Caesara's wife' i.e. beyond any suspicion
whatever. He noted that the impeachment proceedings of the Chief Justice
are entirely in the hands of the Legislature. The Judiciary does not
come into the scene at all in keeping with the rule that none shall be a
judge in his own cause."Nevertheless, Parliament has to be satisfied
that there is proved misbehaviour. Since the Courts do not come into the
picture, the proof has to be to the satisfaction of Parliament.
The appointment of a Supreme Court Judge is made by the President
under the Constitution, but the President is not empowered to remove
such a judge. For the purpose of protecting the institution of the
higher Judiciary, a wider process is envisaged with Parliament being
brought into the mechanism.
"Normally, the appointing authority has the power to remove, but in
the larger interest of the protection of the administration of justice,
a wider body, namely, Parliament is involved. The President cannot
remove a Supreme Court Judge or in this case the Chief Justice except
upon an address of Parliament." Choksy, President's Counsel, who is an
expert on Constitutional Law, had been the first Minister of
Constitutional and State Affairs under President D.B. Wijetunge from
1992-1994 and thereafter Minister of Finance from 2002-2004 under
President Kumaratunga during the Premiership of Ranil
Wickremesinghe.Choksy has been a Member of Parliament for 21 years
having joined Parliament in the first National List, when it was
introduced under the stewardship of President R. Premadasa. Choksy was
appointed in the first batch of President's Counsels by President
Jayewardene.
|