A Sri Lankan Supreme Court Judge Takes His Battle for Reputation to India
A sitting judge of Sri Lanka’s highest court, the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka, Justice A. H. M. D. Nawaz, has taken the unusual and rare step of seeking the assistance of an Indian court to compel the removal of online articles that he claims have damaged his reputation for nearly a decade.
To this end, he has filed a petition before the High Court of Karnataka in Bengaluru, India.
Why He Approached an Indian Court
A Sri Lankan judge turning to a foreign court has sparked significant discussion within legal circles. The central issue revolves around the long-standing legal principle “nemo judex in causa sua”—that no person should be a judge in their own case.
Since Justice Nawaz currently serves as a judge of the Supreme Court, initiating a case within Sri Lanka’s own judicial system could create ethical and institutional complications. His legal team has argued that such a case might raise questions about judicial propriety and conflicts of interest.
Therefore, the petition states that the Google India headquarters located in Bengaluru provides the jurisdictional basis for the Karnataka High Court to hear the matter, as the search engine allegedly hosts and disseminates the disputed links globally.
The Controversial Articles and Allegations
The petition arises from a series of articles published in 2015 and 2020 by two Sri Lankan websites:
Colombo Telegraph and Lanka eNews.
These articles allegedly raised questions about Justice Nawaz’s conduct during his time as a Deputy Solicitor General, suggesting links to a bribery investigation involving a state-owned enterprise.
The reports also questioned his 2020 appointment as President of the Court of Appeal, which came during the presidency of Gotabaya Rajapaksa.
Justice Nawaz’s petition strongly rejects these allegations. He states that throughout his entire judicial career no finding of misconduct has ever been proven against him. The judge further argues that the continued circulation of these online articles amounts to a “character assassination” before the international legal community.
The International Legal Argument: “Right to be Forgotten”
The legal arguments presented in the case extend beyond conventional defamation law.
Justice Nawaz’s lawyers have invoked Article 21 of the Constitution of India, which protects the right to life and personal dignity, and which can apply even to non-citizens.
They have also relied on the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), a global human rights treaty that safeguards personal dignity and reputation.
Perhaps the most notable argument raised in the petition is the invocation of the “Right to be Forgotten”—a legal concept widely recognized in European jurisprudence that allows individuals to request the removal of certain online search results associated with their names.
Justice Nawaz’s lawyers have urged the Indian court to apply this principle by directing Google to remove links to the disputed articles.
A Cross-Border Digital Legal Challenge
In 2023, Justice Nawaz reportedly sent legal notices to the publishers of the articles as well as to Google. However, the technology company responded that it could not remove the links without a formal court order.
This development prompted the current legal action before the Karnataka High Court.
The case now raises broader questions about the challenges of regulating information in the digital age—particularly when freedom of expression intersects with the protection of personal reputation across national borders.
Proceedings Before the Court
According to reports published by Indian newspapers such as The Hindu and The Indian Express, the Karnataka High Court has already issued notices to Google India and to India’s Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology.
The court has given the respondents time until 16 March to submit their responses.
A Case With Wider Implications
This unusual legal move by a sitting Sri Lankan Supreme Court judge has drawn attention because it highlights several complex issues:
-
The ethical constraints faced by judges seeking legal remedies in their own jurisdictions.
-
The growing influence of digital platforms in shaping reputations globally.
-
The emergence of cross-border litigation involving internet content.
As the case proceeds before the High Court of Karnataka, it may set an important precedent on how courts handle disputes involving international reputational claims and digital search engines.
For now, the legal battle of Justice Nawaz represents a striking example of how the internet age is transforming traditional legal boundaries—forcing courts to confront questions that extend far beyond national borders.