Judge Karunakaran should be removed from office -- report |12 September 2017

Judge Durai Karunakaran should be removed from the Office of Puisne Judge, in line with the provisions of Article 134 (2) (b) thereof, according to the tribunal set up to inquire into his inability to perform the functions of the office of Judge on grounds of misbehaviour.

This is the recommendation of the tribunal to the President of the Republic of Seychelles under article 134 (2) (b) of the Constitution. On Monday August 28, 2017, former Chief Justice Frederick Egonda Ntende, the president of the tribunal of inquiry, handed President Danny Faure a copy of the 76-page report which contains the findings.

The tribunal members ‒ former Chief Justice Frederick Egonda Ntende as well as judges Mohan Niranjit Burhan and Samia Govinden ‒ unanimously found that “the conduct of judge Karunakaran amounts to gross and serious misbehaviour”.

The tribunal was set up under Article 134 (2) of the Constitution of the Republic of Seychelles.

According to the report, judge Karunakaran falsified records of court proceedings by inserting paragraphs into judgments without the knowledge of the parties involved and this came to light when written court records were compared to audio recordings, delayed hearings unreasonably, mediated in cases he was judging, and ordered counsels to just sit down and not speak.

During an 11-day public hearing process at the National House in May and June, judge Karunakaran faced a litany of complaints about his lack of integrity and propriety, inordinate delays in the hearing of cases and delivery of judgments, poor collegial attitude, alleged misbehaviour and disrespect to the chief justice, disregard to judiciary functions and rules, intimidation of witnesses and counsel and disrespect to counsel and forcing settlements.

Speaking to the Seychelles Broadcasting Corporation (SBC), Chief Justice Mathilda Twomey said: “This is an era of transparency and I believe that in the spirit of that statement it is only right that the public tribunal that heard everything publicly, that its recommendation should also be made public.”

She added that the report brings out that there were several other complainants apart from herself, noting that “the acts of misbehaviour are very serious and are an embarrassment to the judiciary”.

The report adds that “judge Karunakaran had turned himself into master rather than servant of the people”.

“Having considered all the afore-mentioned misbehaviour which warrant a recommendation of removal from office, we are satisfied that such misbehaviour renders the judge unworthy to hold the office he sits in and not only directly indicates his inability to hold office but also indirectly and in addition, affects the perception of others in relation to his ability to carry out the functions of his office. We are satisfied that on these counts such misbehaviour as proved against judge Karunakaran are so serious and gross as to warrant a recommendation for his removal from office. Judge Karunakaran had turned himself into master rather than servant of the people. From the above conclusions, the Tribunal is satisfied that the conduct of judge Karunakaran has breached the provisions of Article 134 (1) (a) of the Constitution and is of such a serious nature and magnitude to amount to gross misbehaviour,” writes the report.

It was in October 2016, that the decision to suspend judge Karunakaran was taken and according to Chief Justice Twomey, it was as a result of a decision made by the Constitutional Appointment Authority (CAA) to refer him to a tribunal of inquiry to investigate into his “professional conduct”.

It was alleged that judge Karunakaran’s professional conduct had fallen short of the requirements under the Constitution of Seychelles and the principles contained in the Seychelles Code of Judicial.

In late May after the tribunal rejected Attorney Philippe Boullé’s request for judges Mohan Niranjit Burhan and Samia Govinden to be removed from the tribunal because they are subordinates of Chief Justice Twomey who complained to the Constitutional Appointments Authority (CAA) about judge Karunakaran’s behaviour, the defence team sought constitutional redress and when this was refused it withdrew.

In a statement released on Monday October 10, 2016, State House said former President James Michel, under article 134 (4) of the Constitution, suspended judge Karunakaran from performing his functions until the conclusion of the inquiry.

After judge Karunakaran had challenged a ruling delivered by Supreme Court Judge Seegobin Nunkoo made on December 7, 2016, declining to grant him leave to proceed with a judicial review of the decision taken by the CAA to appoint the tribunal, on April 21, 2017 the Court of Appeal dismissed his request to have it overturn the decision.