SC commences hearing petitions challenging proposed 22 A

By Chitra Weerarathne and A.J.A. Abeynayake

President’s Counsel Manohara de Silva yesterday supported a Special Determination Application, filed in the Supreme Court, pertaining to the proposed 22nd Amendment to the Constitution.

The Counsel said that the executive power was vested with the President. But no power should be or could be absolute. There could be checks and balances. But the ultimate decision-making power could be with the President, subject to guidelines that could be suggested, he explained.

The President may appoint members to the Constitutional Council. The Leader of the Opposition and the Prime Minister might make suggestions to the President. The President had to nominate other names if he did not agree with the names of likely appointees, suggested by the constitutional council, the counsel added.

Only eminent persons must be appointed to the Constitutional Council, the President’s Counsel insisted.

Attorney General Sanjay Rajaratnam P.C. appeared with Additional Solicitor General Nerin Pulle P.C., for the state.

The Supreme Court yesterday commenced hearing the petitions filed challenging the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution Bill submitted by the government to Parliament.

The petitions are heard before a three-judge bench consisting of Chief Justice Jayantha Jayasuriya, Justices Buwaneka Aluwihare and Arjuna Obeysekera.

The petitions have been submitted by nine citizens including the Secretary of Vinivida Foundation, Attorney-At-Law Nagananda Kodithuwakku, Dr. Gunadasa Amarasekara, Lawyer Nuvan Ballantudawa, Tissa Bandara Ratnayake, H.D.J. Kulatunga, and B.P. Dahanayake.

The Attorney General has been named as the respondent.

The 22nd Amendment to the Constitution Bill was submitted to Parliament on 10 August.

The petitioners have alleged that some of its clauses are not consistent with the provisions of the current Constitution, and that the fundamental human rights, guaranteed by the Constitution, are being violated by them.

Therefore, the petitions have requested the Supreme Court to declare that if it is necessary to pass the clauses included in the relevant Bill, it should be passed by a two-thirds majority vote in Parliament and approved by the people at a referendum.

The Court will convey its decision in respect of these Special Determination applications to the Speaker of Parliament.