A Response to K.N. Choksy
| by Nihal Sri Ameresekere
( November 10, 2012, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) I was shocked and amused on your views titled ‘Mechanism and Process for the Impeachment
of the Chief Justice’ / ‘Making the Judiciary Accountable’, in the media – and
the duplicity of your comment – ‘There is
an accountability process in every sphere of public service in its broad sense’,
and that Judges must be like “Caesar’s wife” i.e. beyond any suspicion
whatsoever’.
It would appear that you have suddenly woken,
oblivious of your own deeds:
1.
Whilst
you being a Member of Parliament accountable to the people, did you not try
very hard to obstruct my prosecution of the fraud on the construction of the
Hilton Hotel ?
Thus were not, inter-alia, the following observations
of the District Judge in issuing interim injunctions upheld by the Supreme
Court, an indictment, among others, specifically on you ?
# the other Defendants, [i.e .the
Directors], as persons having connections concerning the said Hotel business,
having intervened therein in such matter, acting to obtain the said monies, had
not readily acted to conduct a correct examination …… they having prevented
such correct examination, were attempting to, howsoever, effect the payment of
monies.
# they are exercising the influence, that they
have gained in society, acting together with the Company, to prevent the
raising of the questions concerning the matters of the work in connection with
the Contracts, the Prospectus ...... they
were acting through such collaboration, in a manner amounting to defeat the
interests of the Shareholders of the Company.
# The significance, that is shown herein, is that generally, the Company
which has to pay money, would be raising questions, in respect of such
situation, and would not allow other parties to act arbitrarily...If the
position, that explains this is correct, then this actually, is an instance of
acting in fraudulent collusion".
2.
Though
a Defendant, with your wrong-doings adduced before Court, you having been unable
to file Objections in the District Court, did you not questionably appear
through Counsel in the Court of Appeal, adducing the frivolous argument, that I
had no right and status to have instituted such an action in my own country ? Did
not the Supreme Court consequently refuse to hear you, and uphold my action as
a serious prima-facie case of fraud,
with every prospect of being successfully proven ?
3.
Your
wrong-doings, vis-à-vis, these frauds
were well and truly set out in the Written Submissions tendered to the Supreme
Court, settled by President’s Counsel by Messrs H.L. de Silva P.C., and K.
Kanag-Isvaran, P.C.
4.
Did
you not endeavour to abuse your power and position as a Member of Parliament
and later as a Minister, to influence President Premadasa and President D.B. Wijetunga,
in whose presence you were proven by me to have uttered falsehoods ?
5.
Were
you not served with a Charge Sheet under Section 9 of the Special Presidential
Commission of Inquiry Law by Supreme Court Judge P.R.P. Perera and Appeal Court
Judges H.S. Yapa and F.N.D. Jayasuriya, after investigations having been conducted
by Officers of the CID assisted by Solicitor General, Mr. Douglas Premaratne
P.C., and having recorded the evidence of 24 Witnesses and obtained a Report of
a Panel of 3 Chartered Architects, inter-alia,
stating thus ?
"…….. acts of commission and/or omission on your part were
fraudulent and were detrimental to the interests of the said Company and/or the
Government of Sri Lanka, in its capacity as the major Shareholder, causing
financial loss and damage to the said Company and/or the Government of Sri
Lanka" ….. you are hereby required to show cause as to why you should not
be found guilty of misuse or abuse of power and/or corruption and/or commission
of fraudulent acts in terms of Section 9 of the Special Presidential Commission
of Inquiry Law No.7 of 1978, as amended"
6.
Did
not the Special Presidential Commission make a ruling on your Written
Submission, inter-alia, as follows ?
"We are of the unanimous view that in this respect he (reference
being to Mr. K.N. Choksy P.C., M.P.) has stated untrue, erroneous and false
facts, which necessarily has the tendency to mislead and deceive the public in
general, and the members of this Commission …..… In these circumstances, it
surprises and startles this Commission how Mr. Choksy with a conscience and
consistent with his duties as Counsel to the Commission, making submissions to
the effect that the Supreme Court refused to adopt the English law as laid down
in these two English Cases and held that the English law did not coincide with
the law of Sri Lanka."
and after which
you deliberately abandoned appearing before the said Commission to evade being held accountable ?
7.
Would
you disclose to the public, as to the circumstances under which, President
Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga did not extend the Warrant of the Special
Presidential Commission ?
8.
Were
not the perverse amnesties in the guise of an Income Tax Amnesty presented by
you to Parliament, as the Minister of Finance, pronounced by the Supreme Court
to be, inter-alia, inimical to the rule of law, violative of the
‘Universal Declaration of Human Rights and International Covenant on Civil
& Political Rights’, and that it had defrauded public revenue, causing
extensive loss to the State, resulting in the ouster of the then Government and the said perverse Legislation
being repealed ?
9.
Is
it because that the present Chief Justice Dr. Shirani A. Bandaranayake had been
a Member of the 5 Judge Bench of the Supreme Court, which made the aforesaid
pronouncement condemning your Statute, that prompted you to make your aforesaid
statement to the media concerning Her Ladyship the Chief Justice ?
10. Was it not
disclosed in the Supreme Court in a Golden Key Case that you had been a very
large depositor, and subsequent to disclosure by the Directors to Court, that a
property alienated by you, had been agreed to be returned (SC (FR) No. 317/2009
and MC No. B7773/1/2009) ?
In the context of the foregoing, could
you explain to the public your pontification that – ‘There is an accountability
process in every sphere of public service in its broad sense’ ?
You refer to international precedent and
legislation in other domains, such as the US and Australia. What would the
consequences have been on your aforesaid conduct and actions in those foreign
domains ?
 I was shocked and amused ...){kind=link}