-By Legal Correspondent
(Lanka-e-News -01.April.2025, 11.00 PM) Puttalam High Court has recently provided an unexpected spectacle, proving once again that the law, much like a courtroom drama, sometimes blurs the line between justice and absurdity. The main act? A contempt of court charge issued by none other than High Court Judge Nadee Aparna Suhandurugoda, whose courtroom etiquette demands appear to rival that of an 18th-century royal court.
Attorney Priyanka Udayangani Samarathunga, a seasoned legal professional, entered the Puttalam High Court on March 28, likely expecting a robust legal debate. Instead, she found herself the latest victim of what some are calling “judicial theatrics.” Her alleged crime? Not showing proper respect while entering the courtroom. No grand bow, no poetic pleasantries, no theatrical display of deference—just a lawyer doing her job.
And that, dear readers, was enough to set off courtroom fireworks. In a move that left many in the legal fraternity bewildered, Judge Suhandurugoda declared Samarathunga’s conduct contemptuous.
Now, one might assume that contempt of court charges typically involve disrupting proceedings, disobeying lawful orders, or showing outright defiance. But in this case, the contempt appeared to stem from the attorney’s failure to provide the requisite verbal and physical adulation expected by the bench.
In response to the apparent insult, the judge initially granted bail but imposed conditions so stringent that even an accused mastermind of a financial crime might struggle to meet them—two local sureties, an asset certificate of Rs. 2.5 million, and residence verification. The timing? Conveniently late on a Friday, ensuring that compliance within court hours was all but impossible.
As expected, the Sri Lanka Bar Association (BASL) was having none of it. President Rajeev Amarasuriya, backed by legal heavyweights including President Counsel Saliya Peiris and Faisz Mustapha, swiftly moved to challenge the ruling in the Court of Appeal. The legal fraternity, outraged by what they saw as a blatant misuse of judicial power, questioned whether the judge was upholding the law or simply making up rules as she went along.
A two-judge bench, consisting of Justice Mohamed Lafar Taheer and Justice Priyantha Fernando, wasted no time in stepping in. In an interim order issued on appeal, they directed the prison authorities to immediately release Samarathunga, effectively overturning the Puttalam High Court’s ruling and restoring some semblance of sanity to the legal process.
The entire episode raises a fundamental question: are courts meant to administer justice, or are they turning into platforms for judicial theatrics? Some have drawn amusing comparisons between the situation and a well-organized circus—except, of course, in a circus, everyone knows who the ringmaster is.
This ruling, which smacks of judicial high-handedness, has set off alarm bells within the legal community. If an attorney with years of practice can be jailed for not bowing low enough, what does that mean for ordinary citizens appearing before the court? Must litigants now carry a thesaurus of compliments when addressing the bench? Should legal training now include courses on curtsies and royal salutations?
This case isn’t just about one attorney’s unfortunate run-in with an old-school judge; it’s about the broader implications for judicial accountability. If a high court judge can arbitrarily jail an attorney over courtroom etiquette, what’s stopping similar abuses of power in the future?
The BASL’s swift action is a reminder that the legal profession is built on mutual respect—respect for the law, respect for legal practitioners, and respect for fundamental fairness. Judges are entrusted with great power, but that power is meant to serve justice, not personal ego.
As the dust settles on this legal fiasco, one can only hope that future courtroom proceedings in Puttalam will focus more on law and less on personal reverence. After all, justice is blind—but it shouldn’t be deaf to reason.
-By Legal Correspondent
---------------------------
by (2025-04-01 17:54:02)
Read 8568 Times
Leave a Reply
0 discussion on this news