|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
| Friday, 18 July 2003 |
 |
|
 |
News | |
| News Business Features Editorial Security Politics World Letters Sports Obituaries
|
by Wasantha Ramanayake The Supreme Court dismissed the motion of revision seeking to set aside the conviction of one year imprisonment of Emanuel Anthony Fernando for committing the contempt of court. The Bench comprised Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva PC, and Justices Asoka de Silva and T.B. Weerasuriya. Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva PC delivering the judgment observed that the petitioner's counsel supported the motion on two grounds i.e. that he was not read the charges before he was convicted for contempt of court and the sentence of one year imprisonment was excessive. The court held, among the other matters, that the summery punishment could be imposed on without charges being read out as in a criminal case. On the issue of the excessiveness of the sentence the court observed "When the cases were called the Petitioner walked up to the Bar table, placed his files on the lectern provided for the counsel and continued to address the Court in a loud voice not heeding the warning given. He thus determined to defy the authority of the court and to cause the maximum possible disturbance in the proceedings, certainly, not to seek a pacific settlement of the dispute he had with the YMCA which was not even named as a party to the respondents to the application. We are therefore of the view, that the sentence of one year was warranted in the circumstances of this case." The court further observed that it had been always inclined to mitigate the sentence provided he expressed regret and gave an undertaking not to disturb the proceedings at any stage in the future. "Petitioner had clearly refrained from expressing any regret even in the papers filed seeking review. Counsel was informed by the court that the hearing could be adjourned to enable him to obtain instructions from the petitioner on the matter of expressing regret and seeking a mitigation of the sentence on that basis. The Counsel specifically declined to take an adjournment for this purpose and concluded the submission." The court observed on that basis, there was no basis to consider a mitigation of the sentence that had been imposed on the petitioner. Petitioner-petitioner Anthony Emanuel Fernando cited the Attorney General, Chairman, Judicial Services Commission, Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva PC and Justices P. Edussuriya and H.S. Yapa as respondents. Petitioner-petitioner stated that he was found guilty of contempt of court and sentenced to one year's imprisonment when he was supporting a fundamental right application in person. He also stated that there was no order made by the court in respect of a motion dated February 5, filed by the petitioner, requesting a Bench sans the Chief Justice, who was a party to the said application. He alleged that the Chief Justice heard the application in contravention of the provisions of the Judicature Act and that the order made was without the jurisdiction. He alleged that he had been assaulted by prison officials while in prison. Petitioner-petitioner sought to revise the order and get released from custody. Elmore Perera appeared for the petitioner. |
|
News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security
Produced by Lake House |
