Intervention petition on former Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva’s FR filed
2017-Oct-02 | By News Admin

Attorney-at-law and public interest litigation activist Aruna Laksiri filed an intervention petition today seeking Supreme Court’s jurisdiction to dismiss (in limine) the Fundamental Rights petition filed by former Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva who challenged the enactment procedure of Provincial Council Election bill.

On September 28, former Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva filed a Fundamental Rights petition today at the Supreme Court seeking an Interim Order by way of a direction that the amendments purported to be made to Provincial Council Election bill at committee stage of the Parliament on September 20 shall not be operative till the final determination of this petition.

Filing an Intervention petition in the Supreme Court, attorney-at-law Aruna Laksiri maintained that the former Chief Justice cannot challenge a bill passed in Parliament since it becomes law when the certificate of the Speaker is endorsed in terms of Article 80 (1) of the Constitution.  

‘A bill passed in Parliament cannot be challenged in Court through a Fundamental Rights petition’, the intervention petitioner added.

Aruna Laksiri further stated that former Chief Justice has filed this Fundamental Rights petition in contrary to the provisions of the Constitution and undermining the sovereignty of the people exercised by Parliament.

He further said the Fundamental Rights petition filed by former Chief Justice was erroneous since the Speaker had been named as a respondent in contrary to the Parliamentary Privileges Act.  

He further alleged that former Chief Justice is attempting to misuse legal process of the country and moved Supreme Court to dismiss former Chief Justice’s Fundamental Rights in limine.  

In his Fundament Rights petition, former Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva sought a declaration that the Fundamental Rights of the petitioner guaranteed by article 12(1) of the constitution has been infringed or is likely to be infringed by the executive or administrative actions of respondents.

The former Chief Justice cited Speaker Karu Jayasuriya, Attorney General Jayantha Jayasuriya and Chairman and members of Election Commission as respondents.

 The former Chief Justice is also seeking a declaration that Speaker Karu Jayasuriya is not empowered by law to certify in terms of article 79 of the constitution that the Provincial Council Election Bill which was passed at the second reading by parliament and operative provisions of which were entirely deleted and new provisions purporting to be amendments to the Provincial Council Election Act No.2 of 1988. 

The petitioner stated that the government attempted to postpone the said elections by means of the twentieth amendment to the Constitution which was challenged and Supreme Court determined that the bill is inconsistent with the Constitution and should be approved by people at referendum.

The petitioner stated that upon the said determination the government decided not to proceed with the said amendment and decided to proceed with the bill as to the quota of female candidates.

Sources : dailynews