Expulsion case filed by Deputy Minister Ahamed Bhaila :

Petitioner could not be ousted from UNP or SLMC - Wijedasa Rajapakse (PC)
 

by Wasantha Ramanayake

Neither the Sri Lanka Muslim Congress nor the UNP could expel the petitioner from the respective parties since he was not a member of either the SLMC or the UNP although the petitioner was nominated under the UNP national list, submitted President's Counsel Wijedasa Rajapakse before the Supreme Court hearing the expulsion case filed by Deputy Minister Hussein Ahamed Bhaila.

The Bench comprised Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva PC and Justices Nihal Jayasinghe, N. K. Udalagama, N. E. Dissanayake and Raja Fernando.

President's Counsel Wijedasa Rajapakse for petitioner Bhaila submitted that although the private parties could enter into private agreements such agreements, should not supersede the Constitution. He submitted that the electoral agreement entered into by the SLMC and UNP with regard to the election circumvents the specific provisions of the Constitution.

The counsel submitted that there were two prerequisites to be a Member of Parliament they are: He should be a member of a certain recognised political party and his name should appear in the nomination list of the particular party.

The counsel submitted that the amalgamation of the UNP with SLMC had no legal basis. In the absence of such a legal alliance, the two parties faced with stalemate situation with regard to the expulsion of its Members of Parliament.

Respondents amended the electoral agreement to overcome this situation. In terms of the amended agreement, a member of the SLMC would become a UNP member once he was elected as a Member of Parliament under the UNP nomination list.

The counsel contended that there was clear violation of the rights of the MPs. He also argued that the amended agreement was not in existence until the petitioner filed the application in the court.

The counsel submitted that his client had been a member of the SLMC, later resigned and his resignation was accepted by the SLMC General Secretary. He submitted that the letter of acceptance was not a forged document as alleged by the third respondent SLMC General Secretary. The counsel queried as to why the third respondent did not want the Police to inquire into the incident if the petitioner had done so.

He also submitted that the certain documents filed by the third respondent had not been certified.

President's Counsel Romesh de Silva for SLMC and its leader Rauff Hakeem contended that the petitioner was a member of the SLMC and had never resigned from the party. He contended that despite his claim that the petitioner resigned from the SLMC in October 22, 2003, he had attended the several politburo meetings of the party held thereafter.

The counsel submitted that the petitioner did want to show cause and avail himself for the inquiry; therefore, the petitioner could not allege of any breach of Natural Justice.

The counsel argued that the expulsion could be justified on the basis that he had joined the government ranks from the opposition and had accepted a portfolio. President's Counsel Ikram Mohamed made submissions on behalf of the third respondent SLMC General Secretary.

President's Counsel K. N. Choksy would make further submissions when the case is resumed on Friday (3). Three applications filed by the Rehabilitation and Vanni Development Minister Rishard Baduideen, Rehabilitation and Batticaloa District Development Minister M. S. Ameen Ali and Rehabilitation and Trincomalee Development Minister Najeeb A. Majeed would also be taken up thereafter.

Petitioner Hussein Ahamed Bhaila cited the SLMC, its leader Rauff Hakeem, its Secretary General, United National Party, its leader Ranil Wickremesinghe, Secretary General of the UNP, the Elections Commissioner, and the Parliamentary Secretary General as respondents.

The petitioner stated that he crossed over from the Opposition to the Government ranks on May 18, 2004. Consequently, he was purportedly expelled from the SLMC.

He had subsequently challenged the expulsion in the Supreme Court and the court in its judgement dated August 22, 2004, determined that the purported expulsion was invalid. The petitioner stated that later the President appointed him as the Deputy Minister of Small and Medium Enterprise Development.

He stated that the third respondent, SLMC General Secretary by a letter dated March 22, 2005, informed him the decision of the SLMC's High Command that he had been expelled from the party. He has also received a letter from the sixth respondent, UNP General Secretary dated April 5, enclosing an even dated letter of the sixth respondent addressed to the eighth respondent Parliamentary General Secretary stating that the petitioner had been ceased to be a member of the UNP.

The petitioner stated that the Supreme Court judgement dated August 24, 2004, the 1-6 respondents were debarred in law from taking any action which would affect his membership in Parliament, he had not been a member of the UNP and in terms of the Provisions of the Article 99 (A) and the Parliamentary Elections Act there was no such requirement that the candidates qualified to be elected as Members of Parliament to be members of recognised political parties.

The petitioner sought to determine the expulsion to be null and void and to set aside the same. He also sought a declaration that he had not been ceased to be a Member of Parliament.

President's Counsel Wijedasa Rajapakse with Kapila Liyanagamage appeared for petitioner.

Romesh de Silva PC with Harsha Amarasekera instructed by G. G. Arulpragasam appeared for first and second respondents SLMC and its leader Rauff Hakeem.

Ikram Mohamed PC with A. A. M. Illiyas, M. Nayan Kariapper and Padma Bandara instructed by G. G. Arulpragasam appeared for third respondent SLMC General Secretary M. T. Hussein Ali.

K. N. Choksy PC, L. C. Seneviratne PC, Daya Pelpola and Ronald Perera instructed by Samararatne Associates appeared for the UNP, its leader Ranil Wickremesinghe, and its General Secretary.

Senior State Counsel Indika Demuni de Silva appeared for the Elections Commissioner and the Parliamentary General Secretary.

The hearing resumes on Friday.