Former MP Hirunika Premachandra yesterday withdrew the alleged contemptuous statement she made regarding the ongoing proceedings before the Mount Lavinia Magistrate’s Court, prompting the Court of Appeal to terminate the contempt of court proceedings against her.
Premachandra also gave an undertaking to Court not to make any further statements regarding the case in the Mount Lavinia Magistrate’s Court.
The Court of Appeal’s two-judge Bench, comprising Justices (President) Nissanka Bandula Karunaratne and Shashi Mahendran,
advised the respondent to refrain from making such statements against any person in the future. Court then permitted her to be discharged from the contempt of Court proceedings, and the matter was terminated accordingly.
The petitioner, Hisham Jamaldeen, the son of former Governor A.J.M.Muzammil, alleged that the respondent, Hirunika Premachandra, had made a statement to the media concerning the Magistrate’s order granting bail to him, despite the ongoing proceedings before the Mount Lavinia Magistrate’s Court.
According to the Complaint made by Jamaldeen, whilst there is an ongoing proceeding before the Magistrate’s Court of Mount Lavinia, Hirunika Premachandra made a statement in the media regarding the subject of the Magistrate Court proceeding and the order of the Magistrate in granting bail to Hisham Jamaldeen. It was the position of the complainant that this statement on an ongoing judicial proceeding was an attempt to create suspicions in the minds of the general public towards the administration of justice and for Hirunika Premachandra to be punished for the offense of Contempt of Court.
Counsel for the complainant Nishan Sydney Premathiratne informed Court that Hirunika Premachandra had informed that she is in agreement to withdraw the statement made in respect of the proceedings of the Mt. Lavinia Magistrate’s Court and also to undertake not to make any future statements in regard to the Magistrate Court proceedings. Counsel for the Complainant submitted to Court that this would safeguard his client’s interests in the Magistrate Court proceedings and also the due administration of justice and sought permission from the Court of Appeal to terminate proceedings with such being recorded and a warning be issued on the respondent.
President’s Counsel Farman Cassim, appearing for Hirunika Premachandra, objected to issuing any warning and informed Court that there cannot be any settlement recorded in such circumstances. It was then recorded on behalf of Hirunika Premachandra that the statements already made with regards to the Mt. Lavinia Magistrate Court proceedings her to stand withdrawn and the Respondent Accused undertook to the Court of Appeal to not to make any further statements with regard to the case in the Mt. Lavinia Magistrate’s Court.
It was alleged that the conduct of the respondent is tantamount to interference with ongoing judicial proceedings and an attempt to create suspicions in the minds of the public towards the administration of justice.The petitioner is seeking an order to issue a rule under Section 10(3)(a) of the Contempt of Court, Tribunal or Institution Act No.08 of 2024.
Counsel Nishan Sydney Premathiratne with Gamindu Karunasena instructed by Sarvanan Neelakandan Law Associates appeared for the complainant. President’s Counsel Farman Cassim with Vinura Kularatne instructed by Shyamali Athukorala appeared for the respondent.
Our Court Corespondent