The Contempt of Court Case against Justice Wigneswaran and others came up before Judges Samayawardene and Fernando in the Court of Appeal today. While President’s Counsel Suren Fernando appeared for the Petitioner Deniswaran, President’s Counsel Kanag Iswaran appeared for Justice Wigneswaran. The Case was specially fixed for today Tuesday and Friday 31st.
A motion had been filed by Counsel Ganesharajah on behalf of Ananthy Sasitharan, one of the other Respondents, asking Court to release him from appearing for Ananthy since he has now been appointed Legal Adviser to the Governor, Northern Province and the Governor is a Party to the proceedings and officers tendering documents from the Governor would have to be Cross examined and it would amount to conflict of interest.
The Counsel for Deniswaran suggested that the Respondent Ananthy be given time till Friday 31st to retain Counsel and the Case could proceed on that day as earlier specially fixed. President’s Counsel Kanag Iswaran said it has been his experience that when short dates are given to retain Counsel invariably the newly appointed Counsel would inform Court that they need time to study their brief. It is best if the Case be taken out of the List on Friday and fresh clear two or three dates be given. Counsel Suren Fernando suggested two dates in early February. Counsel Kanag Iswaran informed Court that a date has been given in February for new Parties to be registered and it would be difficult for his client to come since his Party is a new one. Then a date in March was suggested by Suren Fernando. Mr.Kanag Iswaran informed Court that that would be too close to the Election. He preferred clear dates after the Election. Counsel Fernando was forced to agree to a date in May. The Case has been fixed now for 18th,19th and 20th May.
Thus all attempts to have Mr.Wigneswaran convicted before the Parliamentary Election have failed. Mr.Wigneswaran could now face his Election as well as the Case in peace.
Mr.Sumanthiran who is always present at this Case though his Client is not involved in the Case was markedly absent.