Court Case filled on Constitutional Amendments
Must be done through procedure prescribed in the Constitution —
On 27th January 2015, a group within the Sinhala Nationalist Movement (SNM) filed a Writ application in the Court of appeal requesting the Appeal Court to issue directives to the Government to follow the proper legal procedure already prescribed in the Constitution during proposed Constitutional amendments stated in the so called 100 day program of President Maithreepala Sirisena, which was due to be imitated on January 21st January 2015.
The application number of the Writ is CA (Writ) 57 / 2015 and the petitioner is Mr. Jayantha Liyanage. The named respondents in the Writs are P.B. Abeykoon, Secretary to the President, Sumith Abeysinghe, Secretary to the Cabinet, Ranil Wickramasinghe, Prime Minister and Attorney general.
Petitioner seeks a Writ of Prohibition preventing the 2nd respondent from endorsing a Constitutional Amendment as an ‘Urgent Bill’.
Petitioner arguing that Sirisena’s 100 day programme on the constitution change is unconstitutional. The 100 day programme stated that;
On Wednesday, January 21
The process will begin of abolishing the executive authoritarian executive Presidential system and replacing it with an executive of a Cabinet ministers responsible to parliament, and of repealing the 18th Amendment to the Constitution with legislation to establish strengthened and independent institutions including judicial services commission, a police commission, a public services commission, an election commission, a commission against bribery & corruption and a human rights commission. This will be through a 19th Amendment to the constitution, which will be presented to parliament and passed as swiftly as possible.
The news sources are reporting that the Ranil’s government is moving 19TH Amendment as an “Urgent Bill”.
In the Writ application petitioners have argued that there is a clear procedure to amend the Constitution in the 12th Chapter of the current Constitution under Articles 82, 83 & 84. Urgent Bills can be presented under article 122 of the Constitution, which is not part of the Chapter 12.
The main argument of the petitioners is that what exactly is the urgency indicated in the 100-day program when it stated ‘…and passed as swiftly as possible?’ 100-day means over three months and if Constitutional changes initiated according to the Chapter 12 procedure, then it will be over within 28 days which is a small part of the 100-day program.
Constitution is the Supreme Law of the land that affects the entire country and the rights of its citizens. Therefore when a proper procedure is already in place for citizen’s to take part in the Constitutional amending procedure, why the present government intends to by-pass or circumvent that proper procedure laid down in the Constitution?
This government was elected by a majority vote to establish Good governance and Rule of law, which was said to have been undermined by the previous government. For example, when the 18th Amendment was presented as an urgent Bill, many professional organizations, political groups / parties raised its voiced for doing that and ironically, the same people who opposed the presentation of the 18th amendment as an Urgent Bill, now considering the same procedure, which they said undermined the Rule of Law.
Therefore, this application has been filed in order to remind this transitional government that there is a proper procedure in the constitution, which should be followed in order to establish the Rule of Law, for which they say that they have received a mandate.
Opposition parties in the parliament raised questions as to the removal of the Chief Justice and appointment of the new Chief Justice stating that the removal and the appointment are unconstitutional and violation of the procedures set out for the same. Pro-Federalism Prime Minister Ranil who high-jacked the Prime Minister post has refused to allow a parliament debate on the issue of the Chief Justice instead threaten to dissolve the parliament and has stated that he will call for a general election.
Read more;
An interim-government has no right to make Constitutional changes through an ‘Urgent Bill’
1034 Viewers
