The Attorney General raised preliminary objections before the Court of Appeal today, requesting that the petition filed seeking the issuance of a directive to revoke the Parliamentary seat of Minister of Public Security, Ananda Wijepala, be dismissed without examination.
The petition filed by Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) Administrative Secretary Renuka Perera was taken up for consideration before the Acting President of the Court of Appeal Mohamed Lafar Tahir and Justice K.M.S. Dissanayake.
Representing the Attorney General, the Additional Solicitor General told the court that the most important stakeholders had not been named as respondents in the petition.
Pointing out that the President’s Chief of Staff is appointed by the President’s Secretary on the President’s directive, the Additional Solicitor General said the President’s Secretary has not been named as a respondent, which was a serious legal deficiency.
Accordingly, the Additional Solicitor General said there was no possibility of continuing this petition and requested that it be dismissed without examination.
At this point, Attorney Upul Kumarapperuma, appearing before the court on behalf of the respondent Minister Ananda Wijepala, argued that the appointment of the Chief of Staff of the President was made by the President himself, and that challenging the official act of the President before the Court of Appeal by filing a writ petition was not permissible.
Therefore, Attorney Upul Kumarapperuma presented his preliminary objections, stating that the Court of Appeal did not have the jurisdiction to consider this petition and requested that it be dismissed.
Attorney Vishva Perera, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, mentioned that the appointment of the Minister as the Chief of Staff of the President would not, in any way, be challenged by him.
He emphasized that his contention was solely based on the fact that the respondent Minister was not qualified to sit in Parliament or cast a vote.
Considering the presented arguments, the Acting Chairman of the Court of Appeal stated that, since the respondents have raised preliminary objections regarding the possibility of proceeding with this petition, it is necessary to first issue a ruling on that matter.
Therefore, the judge instructed all parties involved in the petition to submit their written submissions on the preliminary objections by 18 March 2025. (Newswire)