Judicial Depression

In a society made up of migrants social judgments often lead to breach of Equal Opportunity principles. In Northern Sri Lanka, the Justice system in relation to marriage and family - separated inheritance of the spouses from their acquisition after marriage.

by Gaja Lakshmi Paramasivam

(June 20, Melbourne, Sri Lanka Guardian) Last week we Australians learnt through the media that our “NSW MPs voted against sacking a Sydney magistrate accused of bullying and treating defendants unfairly, saying while the complaints against her were justified, removing her was not.” The Magistrate herself claimed that she was suffering from depression at the time of the events on the basis of which complaints were made against her to the Judicial Commission.

It is reported further than another member of the Judiciary will also go through this process and is liable to be dismissed from his position if both houses of parliament agree to the dismissal.

To me, to a large degree this is the return karma of the NSW Judiciary that punishes unjustly. If due to the judgments delivered by these judges, litigants have lost jobs and job opportunities (as happened to me) – then the above ruling by the NSW Parliament is unjust. But given that most victims of the Judiciary’s excessive powers empower themselves through lawyers rather than their own investment in the relevant laws, it seems just that the magistrate was not dismissed.

Magistrate Pat O’Shane who also confessed to suffering from bipolar disorder, sent me to prison for one year for Trespass and eventually had me listed as a mentally ill person. Even the prison authorities could not identify with that punishment. Many female officers who had to do the Magistrate’s bidding indicated that the Magistrate was demonstrating negative value in terms of Judicial leadership. I brought action against Magistrate Pat O’Shane – not through the Judicial Commission but through the Federal Courts – on the basis of Racial Discrimination. As expected the matter was dismissed. But I paid my dues as a citizen to the Legal system.

On Saturday, I read in a report by Susitha Fernando of Daily Mirror, sent to me by Jaya BT Email Services – that ‘A United States Federal Court has issued summons on President Mahinda Rajapaksa in connection with three civil cases filed under the Hague Convention claiming monetary damages under US Torture Victims Protection Act (TVPA) over alleged extra-judicial killings…… The three cases were filed by the relatives of student Ragihar Manoharan, Premas Anandarajah, a humanitarian aid worker for Action against Hunger and T. Thavaraja. The petitioners claimed the students were victims of the extra judicial killings in Sri Lanka. They have cited President Mahinda Rajapaksa who is the Commander–in-Chief of Sri Lankan armed forces as the respondent.

The petitioners have alleged multiple violations of the TVPA under Sri Lankan President Rajapaksa’s command responsibility for the extrajudicial killing of plaintiff Dr. Kasippillai Manoharan’s son Ragihar, plaintiff Kalaiselvi Lavan’s husband Premas Anandarajah, and four members of the Thevarajah family, who were relatives of plaintiff Jeyakumar Aiyathurai.Ragihar was one of the five students allegedly killed in January 2006 while Anandarajah was one of the 17 Action Against Hunger (ACF) staff members who were killed during the war in the East in June 2006. Jeyakumar's relatives were allegedly killed by an exploding shell that landed inside the safety bunker -- situated around the No Fire Zone demarcated by the government during the last phases of the war -- where the family was hiding from the artillery attacks by the Sri Lankan Army.

Under International Law, cases can be filed on the offences under war crimes, genocide, crimes against humanity and waging war against countries without reasonable cause.’

My legal complaints against Magistrate Pat O’Shane and before her against the then Prime Minister of Australia John Howard and before him the then Vice Chancellor of University of NSW Professor Rory Hume and more recently my complaint through the Australian Human Rights Commission against Dr. Palitha Kohona (Sri Lanka’s permanent representative to the UN) all preceded the above complaint in the USA.

I do not complain unless I feel hurt. Not when I think I am hurt or that I like/desire to look I am hurt. All those whose net effect (i.e. Feelings and thoughts) is feeling of pain, have the moral authority to complain at their real levels. When they do complain within those limits, the effect is not to ‘get’ compensation but to become even; not to ‘take’ revenge but to feel compensated. Recently a Tamil Diaspora leader expressed appreciation to another of his kind that I was on Prozac. The Truth known to me (which is the basis of my feelings) is that I went to prison for refusing to take the medication recommended by doctors associated with the Courts. The importance of the work done by those two leaders in the name of Tamils was drastically reduced in my mind. That to me was the ‘closure’ that saved me from real depression of the mind of the kind suffered by our judiciary. When we allocate in our minds a status higher than the one earned by a person – and that person’s judgment is in conflict with our own judgment of ourselves due to demotion of our status – it causes depression. If it is promotion of our status – we feel excited. Both – depression and excitement lead to mental instability when we do not keep it within limits that we could control on our own. Both upset our Peace. All those who draw higher than their earnings (money and status) eventually suffer from mental illness. Likewise all those who lose their earnings without knowing / feeling a higher purpose for it.

Unknown to the above mentioned leaders of Tamil Diaspora who said I was on Prozac, Ms Gwen Harrigan – who was then Manager Sports Medicine – University of NSW – and who was always there to support and comfort me and who came to court each time I was arrested, wrote as follows on receiving the article ‘Finding our own closures’ published by Sri Lanka Guardian:

“Dear Gaja,

Thank you deeply for sharing this with me. My utmost respect.

love

Gwen”

Gwen is part of my society that helped me find my own closure here in Australia. I now help others in Sri Lanka do likewise. If I had submitted to the Courts’ assessment of me – I would have ended up being depressed and a burden on this Australian society. It was my Truth that prevented me from becoming depressed. I identified with this Truth through my Spiritual Guru Sathya Sai Baba. Now I have the confidence to help others prevent depression. This includes many Australians including Tamils. I often just listen to them – as if I am a part of them. That is healing. Dr. David Garlick – Gwen’s professional and life partner also listened to me at the University of NSW and they both did what they could at their level to compensate. In terms of money this was not much. But in terms of humanitarian service this was huge. Likewise, Chancellor Dr. John Yu. They are the real examples that our Judiciary need to follow.

An independent examination of the Inclosed Lands Protection Act 1901 (NSW), would confirm that the Police arresting me was not legal but social. Only Magistrate Gilmour of Waverley Local Court heard the case against me on the basis of that legislation and even that Magistrate whilst dismissing the case included in her judgment words to the effect that I had mistakenly believed that I had the right to enter and remain in the University of NSW, without the approval of the Vice Chancellor and / or his administration. That Legislation is not relevant to the environment in which majority Australians live today. Yet, that is the legislation that was used – and that too in relation to a University. That is the gap between their reality and who they think they are.

In a society made up of migrants social judgments often lead to breach of Equal Opportunity principles. In Northern Sri Lanka, the Justice system in relation to marriage and family - separated inheritance of the spouses from their acquisition after marriage. The latter was divided equally at the end of the relationship. The inherited property from both sides is NOT divided equally but – the father’s wealth goes to sons and mother’s to daughters. To my mind, the reason for the equal distribution of acquired wealth, is the same as Equal Opportunity values in migrant communities – that we do not know the other and hence we need to take them as Equals until known otherwise. Through marriage we form new relationships and are likely to need time to know the merit of the other person in relation to ourselves. Hence the base is taken as Equal until known otherwise.

Most Senior Australians including the Judiciary – would tend to think that they are above others until known otherwise. At individual level they may very well be in that court. But unless they are conscious that the People are above themselves – they are likely to assess themselves at a higher level than the litigants. Often in courts – there is lack of balance between the People and the Legal Profession (Lawyers plus Judges) – resulting in legally biased decisions through collusion between judges and lawyers. A judge of a democratic court needs to – through her/himself maintain that equity/balance between the People and the Legal Profession especially when using discretionary powers.

Some issues – like the issue of inheritance – governance of inherited issues – do not suit a democratic court. They need to be treated separately in courts where majority are seniors whose investments in the hierarchical system is greater than their investment in democracy. 

It is reported at http://lawyerswithdepression.wordpress.com/2011/01/23/judges-and-depression/ that ‘According to psychologist Dr. Reena Sommer:

“Depression is a problem that often accompanies loneliness. In many cases, depressive symptoms such as withdrawal, anxiety, lack of motivation and sadness mimic and mask the symptoms of loneliness. In these cases, people are often treated for depression without considering the possibility that loneliness may be a contributing and sustaining factor in their condition.”

Being Physically alone need not mean loneliness. When we are content to live with our own Truth – we are full and stable in our mind. It was this stability that I was able to achieve due to my faith in God who came to me in the form of Sathya Sai Baba. As per Court reports - the stated reason why I was declared a mentally ill person was my following of Spiritual Gurus Sai Baba, Yoga Swami and Gandhi. I was isolated by my workmates who were also largely my social group at that time – and yet if I did not feel lonely – it was because of my faith in these leaders. If the legal profession is feeling lonely – it is because of their lack of faith in themselves and their elders. The need to ‘see’ to think they are not alone. In other words they are dependent on their higher status – mostly so they would not be questioned. If in our minds we keep reporting to a higher authority – we would not ‘avoid’ being questioned but facilitate lower level litigants and lawyers questioning us through Due Process.

Often when lay litigants represent themselves, this kind of ‘Due Process’ is not followed and hence respect is not shown for the higher wisdom of a judge and lawyers who have followed such processes to maintain common order. Due Processes help us regulate our minds and keep our minds healthy. They are to the mind as exercise is to the body. To my mind, where a judge is not able to identify with at least one party – the best avenue available to a judge is to deliver as per Due Process and no more. This discipline would prevent business minded lawyers using the judge to deliver judgment as per their own liking. To my mind, it is this kind of manipulation that has led to the chaos in the legal profession. Like with academics – such judgments are largely of theoretical value because the judges themselves do not practice those principles. Equal Opportunity principles are largely mere theory in Australia.

Living within our Truth is complete cure for all mental illnesses. Following Due Process without ‘seeing’ outcomes is healthy and helps us invest in common with others and to that extent we are not alone. If we cannot do either of the above – we need to submit ourselves to be led by someone else and therefore need to retire from leadership positions. It is the social duty of judges and politicians to assess themselves on this basis and do the right thing by themselves and the society they are a part of.