Attorney-at-Law M.A.A.M. Behshad has petitioned the Court of Appeal over his exclusion from the list of 38 selected as State Counsel.
The court has been moved in terms of Article 140 of the Constitution. Among the respondents are Attorney General Parinda Ranasinghe, his predecessor Sanjay Rajaratnam, Chairman of Public Service Commission Sanath J. Ediriweera and Solicitor General Ayesha Jinasena.
In his petition, Behshad has claimed that there were two lists, one prepared by the office of the first respondent Parinda Ranasinghe, and the other by his predecessor Sanjay Rajaratnam. The petitioner has also sought material relevant to the selection of new State Counsel from the first respondent and the second respondent Chairman of Public Service Commission Sanath J. Ediriweera.
The petitioner has questioned the procedures in place and alleged favouritism at the expense of those who really deserved an opportunity to serve as State Counsel. According to the petition, the crux of the matter is the decision to increase the pool of candidates, from 46 to 76, having discarded the original plan to recruit 23 State Counsels. With the increasing of the candidates’ pool, the powers that be increased the number of recruits to 38, the petitioner stated.
The unexpected move reduced the merit-based selection due to the inclusion of those, the petitioner called, lower-scoring candidates.
Declaring that he met the standards set by the authorities, the petitioner has requested the holding up of appointments pending the conclusion of the case, prevent respondents to be part of the recruitment process, etc.
(SF)
