ECONOMYNEXT – Sri Lanka’s Supreme Court has ruled that ex-President Ranil Wickremesinghe was wrong in declaring emergency in 2022 soon after he was elected to the post by the parliament and ordered the attorney general to issue instructions to future presidents on similar actions.
Justice Yasantha Kodagoda in the ruling the declaration of July 17, 2022 and regulations on July 18 are “are a nullity and is deemed to have never had the recognition of the law.”
“The Attorney General is directed to, within three (3) months from the date of this Judgment incorporate the principles of law contained in this Judgment into a detailed legal advisory, and forward such advisory to the Office of His Excellency the President for necessary consideration,” Justice Kodagoda said.
“A copy of that advisory is to be filed of record in this Court.
Chief Justice Murdu Fernando agreed.
However Justice Arjuna Obeyesekere dissented.
He did not agree with the majority opinion that “it is highly doubtful (although the run up to the 17th July 2022, there was an extraordinary situation) whether the ground situation that prevailed as at 17th July 2022 amounted to ‘a state of public emergency’.”
He agreed with the majority that the legal authority to act under the Public Security Ordinance came if there was “a state of public emergency or the imminence of a state of public emergency.”
“I agree that the existence of such a state of public emergency or the imminence of a state of public emergency is a precondition to the President issuing a Proclamation in terms of Section 2(1) of the Ordinance,” Justice Obeyesekere said.
“I also agree with the view taken by the majority that an objective test must be applied in Court determining whether such a state of public emergency or the imminence of a state of public emergency existed at the time of the Proclamation. I am however not in agreement with the majority opinion that on the facts and circumstances of this case, “it is highly doubtful (although the run up to the 17th July 2022, there was an extraordinary situation) whether the ground situation that prevailed as at 17th July 2022 amounted to ‘a state of public emergency’”.
“In arriving at my conclusion that there in fact existed a state of public emergency, I am guided by the material placed by the Petitioners, the factual scenario that prevailed as at 17th July 2022 and the affidavit of the Secretary to the President, the annexures thereto, and the communication of the Acting President to the Speaker.”
Justice Kodagoda said he went through the dissenting decision but he did not agree because the President had not given enough reasons for the decision.
“I most respectfully find myself unable to accept my learned brother Justice’s approach wherein he appears to have deviated from the contemporary administrative law requirement of the duty to give reasons
by the decision-maker in cases where the decision-maker is the President,” he said. (Colombo/July24/2025)