What a load of gibberish? And we seem to swallow it too!!

The President, at a breakfast meeting of the Editors yesterday, alluded to the fact that the UNP wanted the CJ impeached, due to her connections as the Spouse of a person directly involved in questionable dealings!

Actually the UNP did not want her appointed the CJ in the first place, as it was considered political for many reasons. That was at the time of appointment. There is no point using that same argument two years ago, to say that the UNP wanted her impeached and that is why they did it!! Further the NSB scandal warrants prosecution of 20+ President’s men before the CJ.

It was rightly felt that it was a political appointment and the “Independence of the Judiciary” was therefore compromised. It was under that basis that the appointment was considered suspect by the UNP. However the impeachment clearly is not under this premise, but under retribution for NOT giving the Divi Neguma Bill the seal of approval. So it is a question of MR not knowing the difference between apples and oranges. SO EDITORS Please say in your Headlines, “The President of Sri Lanka does not know the difference between apples and oranges!” If you value your integrity.

The President is wrong when he says that the normal procedures, as laid out in the constitution, have been followed, as here again as a lawyer he should know better about due process being followed. Yes I agree with him when he says that the proposals in the draft amendments made in 2000 for firing Judges of the Supreme Court are irrelevant, as that was what was suggested by the CJ’s lawyers. However more to the point, the speed of hearing, the inability to cross examine relevance and accuracy of details given by witnesses and even the constitution of characters of the PSC all amount to an inquisition, which is the way the intelligent man in the street sees this process.

Yes it was wrong of the President to appoint the husband of the CJ as the Chairman of the NSB, a political appointment for the CJ’s husband. Further if the CJ asked for this appointment she was WRONG, but then we must impeach the President before impeaching the CJ for that wrong. After all it can easily argued that by giving him the job, the President was assured of the FEALTY of the court for whatever he wished to do! However in the context of this impeachment, there was evidence long before the current impeachment, which was instigated for other causes as referred to above. This was grounds for impeachment of the President, but as the majority is with the President it is not practically possible.

So for Editors not being able to put the President in his place is because they are CUCKOLDS and are afraid to admit it! Shame on your profession.