"Striking the Balance: Lawyers' Collective Advocates for Judicial Integrity, Merit, and Seniority

In response to allegations made by the Sports Minister regarding the President of the Court of Appeal's alleged abuse of judicial office, the self-proclaimed 'Lawyers' Collective (LC)' has issued a thought-provoking statement. Acknowledging the seriousness of any such allegation against a Superior Court judge, the LC raises concerns about undermining court orders under the guise of parliamentary privileges—a valid point that underscores the delicate balance between accountability and respect for legal processes.

The LC, deeply committed to safeguarding the integrity and independence of the judiciary, proposes the establishment of an 'internal regulatory system' within the Superior Courts to address ethics and discipline. This call for self-regulation and the implementation of a binding code of conduct and ethics for judges reflects a commitment to fostering transparency and accountability within the judiciary.

One noteworthy aspect of the statement is the insistence that appointments to the Superior Courts should prioritize merit and integrity over seniority. This raises essential questions about how 'merit' and 'integrity' are to be assessed in the context of judicial appointments. While advocating for a credible investigation of allegations related to conflict of interest, dereliction of duty, or misconduct, the LC confronts the challenging task of defining and evaluating these abstract qualities.

The statement indirectly suggests concerns about the potential existence of dereliction of duty, misconduct, unethical behavior, and conflicts of interest within the judiciary. The call for a thorough investigation and the emphasis on merit and integrity in appointments underscore the LC's commitment to upholding the highest standards in the legal profession.

As the discourse unfolds, the legal community and the public await clarity on how 'merit' will be assessed in the realm of judicial conduct. The challenges of balancing accountability, integrity, and merit in the judiciary will undoubtedly spark further conversations and deliberations within legal circles."

"Navigating the Judicial Conundrum: Lawyers' Collective Delves Deeper

The lingering question of 'who, though?' echoes through the discourse initiated by the Lawyers' Collective (LC), sparking reflections on the complexities of assessing integrity, competence, and merit within the realm of superior courts. The term, familiar to those in the legal circles who have experienced the nuances of internal mechanisms, beckons a critical examination of the proposed solutions.

The LC's suggestion of an 'internal regulatory system' prompts queries about the practicality and objectivity of such a mechanism. Is the envisioned assessment of judges' integrity to be a routine matter, conducted internally or externally, to preemptively address concerns before the emergence of allegations? The absence of a clear mechanism raises concerns about the potential subjectivity and arbitrary nature of evaluations, leaving room for the 'whim and fancy' of determining authorities.

In the absence of allegations, the issue of seniority emerges as a default criterion for consideration. However, the text prompts a crucial question: How does one assess competence in the judiciary, and who holds the authority to make such determinations? The potential impact of Higher Courts overturning decisions on the records of lower Court judges introduces the complex interplay between accountability and professional advancement.

The proposal for regular and rigorous auditing of judges as a means of assessing integrity adds another layer to the discussion. The LC, in addressing justifiable concerns about political interference, underscores the importance of maintaining clear lines between the judiciary, legislature, and executive spheres of the state.

The text raises thought-provoking questions for the LC, delving into the intricacies of the legal landscape. From scrutinizing the career paths of Supreme Court appointees to examining the performance of judges in high-profile cases, the call for transparency and accountability reverberates. The exploration of systemic adjustments, such as the separation of roles between representing clients and hearing representations, and the consideration of adversarial and inquisitorial systems of justice, adds depth to the conversation.

As the legal community contemplates these questions, the LC's call for options and a comprehensive examination of the judicial system suggests a commitment to addressing the complexities inherent in the pursuit of justice. The ensuing dialogue on these issues is crucial for shaping a judiciary that not only upholds integrity and competence but also navigates the evolving landscape of legal practice and procedure."

"Unveiling the Legal Arena: Lawyers' Collective Sounds Alarm on Justice

In the current legal landscape, a trial is underway, not within the courtroom but on the very foundations of the justice system. While the Lawyers' Collective (LC) refrains from the dramatic shouts reminiscent of Arthur Kirkland in '...And Justice for All,' their message resounds with a clear declaration—the trial is out of order. It's not a genuine pursuit of justice; instead, it's a spectacle, a 'Let's make a deal' scenario unfolding before our eyes.

Signatories to the LC's statement, a formidable lineup including Upul Jayasuriya, Dr. Jayampathy Wickramaratne, Geoffrey Alagaratnam, M.A. Sumanthiran, Dinal Phillips, S.T. Jayanaga, M.M. Zuhair, along with Presidents Counsels Prof. Savitri Goonesekere, Prof. Deepika Udagama, and Upul Kumarapperuma, bring a wealth of legal expertise and experience. This impressive group, comprising two professors, two former Presidents of the Bar Association of Sri Lanka, one Member of Parliament, and one former Member of Parliament, holds esteemed titles that signify their prowess in the legal realm.

The challenge now lies in demonstrating not only the merits of their titles but also their commitment to integrity by addressing the pressing questions raised. The LC's call for transparency and accountability within the justice system carries weight, and their response to the complexities outlined will undoubtedly shape the ongoing trial that extends beyond the courtroom.

As the legal community grapples with these crucial questions, the LC's stand invites a broader conversation on the state of justice, ethics, and accountability in the legal arena. The ball is now in the court of those holding esteemed titles to showcase the integrity that is fundamental to upholding the principles of justice they have sworn to defend.

For inquiries and further discussion, the LC can be reached at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or through www.malindawords.blogspot.com."

"In conclusion, the Lawyers' Collective (LC) has unfurled a compelling narrative questioning the integrity and efficacy of the justice system. As the legal arena undergoes a trial of its own, the call for transparency and accountability resonates through the voices of esteemed legal figures who make up the LC. The signatories, including seasoned legal professionals, professors, and former Bar Association leaders, now face the challenge of not only showcasing the merits of their titles but also proving their commitment to integrity.

The concluding call for the legal community to grapple with these crucial questions echoes beyond the courtroom, inviting a broader conversation on the principles that underpin the pursuit of justice. The LC's assertion that the trial is out of order serves as a rallying cry for a reevaluation of the justice system's foundations. As the legal community and the public await responses to the raised concerns, the outcome of this metaphorical trial will undoubtedly leave a lasting impact on the perception of justice, ethics, and accountability in the legal landscape.

The ball is now firmly in the court of those holding esteemed titles, urging them to engage in a thoughtful and transparent dialogue that addresses the complexities outlined by the LC. In doing so, they have an opportunity to not only uphold the principles of justice but also contribute to the ongoing evolution of the legal system in the pursuit of a more transparent, accountable, and fair legal practice."