Dangerous precedent for judicial integrity

LAST week, former Chief Justice Jayantha Jayasuriya presented his credentials as Sri Lanka’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations (PRUN) in New York representing not just a troubling development for the judicial system, but a step backward for the country’s democratic and legal institutions. Jayasuriya’s appointment sends a disturbing message to all serving judges who are meant to be independent of the executive: the price for serving the Government’s interests is not just political survival, it’s the promise of a cushy, high-profile post in retirement. In other words it is a bribe to the judiciary.

- 

It’s not merely the appointment itself that raises eyebrows but also what it symbolises about the nature of judicial independence. Jayasuriya’s new role is a glaring reminder of the perilous relationship between the judiciary and executive power in the country, where judges are seemingly rewarded for their political loyalty. This, sadly, is not a new phenomenon, but rather a disturbing trend that continues to undermine the integrity of the judicial system.

The parallels to the appointment of Mohan Peiris as the Permanent Representative to the UN in New York under former President Gotabaya Rajapaksa and subsequent administrations should not be lost on us. Peiris’s tenure, which followed his appointment as Chief Justice after the controversial impeachment of Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake, is now etched in the annals of Sri Lanka’s judicial history as one of the most egregious examples of judicial corruption. His appointment to the UN post was a reward for his acquiescence to the political interests of the Rajapaksa regime. The fact that the current administration has followed Peiris’s example is abhorrent.