Connect with us

News

Several provisions of Bill inconsistent with Constitution

Published

on

The Supreme Court had determined that the Colombo Port City Commission Bill could become law if several provisions therein inconsistent with the Constitution were changed, Parliament was told yesterday.

Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena, announcing the decision of the Supreme Court, said that the Court had determined that certain provisions of the Bill were not consistent with the Constitution. Those inconsistencies could be rectified as per the directions of the Court. Otherwise, the provisions at issue had to be passed by a special majority in Parliament and approved by the people at a referendum, he added.

 The Speaker’s announcement in Parliament: “I wish to inform the Parliament that I have received the Determination of the Supreme Court in respect of the Bill entitled ” Colombo Port City Economic Commission” which was challenged in the Supreme Court in terms of Article 121 (1) of the constitution.

The determination of the Supreme Court as to the constitutionality of the bill entitled ‘Colombo Port City Economic Commission’ is as follows:

01. The provisions of clauses 3(6), 30 (3) second proviso, 55(2) and 58 (1) of the bill are inconsistent with Article 12 (1) of the constitution and could be validly passed only with the Special Majority provided for in Article 84 (2) of the constitution.

However, the said inconsistencies will cease if the clauses are amended as mentioned in the determination of the Supreme Court.

02. The provisions of clauses 3 (5) proviso, 3 (7), 6 (1) (b), 30 (3) first proviso, 71 (1), and 74 (Interpretation ‘Regulatory Authority”) of the bill are inconsistent with Article 12 (1) of the constitution and could be validly passed only with the Special Majority provided for in Article 84 (2) of the constitution.

However, the said inconsistencies will cease if the clauses are amended as mentioned in the determination of the Supreme Court.

03. The provisions of clauses 3 (4), 6 (1) (u), 68 (1) (f) and 68 )3) are inconsistent with Article 76 read with Articles 3 and 4 of the constitution and could be validly passed only with the Special Majority provided for in Article 84 (2) of the constitution and approved by the People at a Referendum by virtue of the provisions of Article 83.

However, the said inconsistencies will cease if the clauses are amended as mentioned in the determination of the Supreme Court.

04. The provisions of Clause 52 (3) read with clauses 52 (5) and 71 (2) (p) of the bill are inconsistent with Article 148 of the constitution and could be validly passed only with the Special Majority provided for in Article 84 (2) of the constitution and approved by the People at a Referendum by virtue of the provisions of Article 83.

However, the said inconsistencies will cease if the clauses are amended as mentioned in the determination of the Supreme Court.

05. The provisions of Clauses 30 (1), 33 (1), 40 (2), and 71 (2) (l) of the bill are inconsistent with Article 14 (1) (h) of the constitution and could be validly passed only with the Special Majority provided for in Article 84 (2) of the constitution.

However, the said inconsistencies will cease if the clauses are amended as mentioned in the determination of the Supreme Court.

06. The provisions of clauses 53 (2) (b) read with clause 53 (3) (b) of the bill are inconsistent with Article 76 of the constitution read with Articles 3 and 4 of the constitutions and could be validly passed only with the Special Majority provided for in Article 84 (2) of the constitution and approved by the People at a Referendum by virtue of the provisions of Article 83.

However, the said inconsistencies will cease if the clauses are amended as mentioned in the determination of the Supreme Court.

07. The provisions of clauses 60 (c) and clause 60 (f) of the bill are inconsistent with Article 148 of the constitution and could be validly passed only with the Special Majority provided for in Article 84 (2).

However, the said inconsistencies will cease if the clauses are amended as mentioned in the determination of the Supreme Court.

08. The provisions of clause 37 of the bill is inconsistent with Article 12 (1) and 14 (1) (g) of the constitution and could be validly passed only with the Special Majority provided for in Article 84 (2).

However, the said inconsistency will cease if a new sub-clause is added to clause 37 of the bill restraining such authorized person making use of any exemptions or incentives granted under this bill when conducting business outside the area of authority of the Colombo Port City to the detriment of similar businesses conducted outside such area of authority by within the territory of Sri Lanka. The Supreme Court had determined that the rest of the clauses of the bill are not inconsistent with the constitution.



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

Record 1,600 students take Russian Classical Ballet examination in Sri Lanka

Published

on

By

More than 1,600 students sat this year’s Russian Classical Ballet Examination, the largest number ever to take part in the examination in Sri Lanka. Exams were held in Colombo from 5, to 18, October and in Galle on 10 October.

Students aged four and above came from across the island, including Colombo, Galle, Gampaha, Negombo, Matara, Kelaniya, Panadura, Wattala, Kiribathgoda, Ratnapura, Kandy, Kurunegala, Bandarawela and Badulla. They are taught by 15 dedicated teachers trained in the Vaganova method, the renowned Russian system of classical ballet training.

They were examined by  Dr. Oxana Karnovich of the Moscow State Academy of Choreography,  a distinguished academic and curator.

The Russian School of Ballet and Dancing was established in 2001 by  Michael Ustinov, Buddhapriya Ramanayake and Mrs Chandi Aluvihare, with Mrs Galina Pleshakova as its founding instructor. Today the School is led by Director Madam Maria Popova, Counsellor of the Embassy of the Russian Federation in Sri Lanka.

 

Continue Reading

News

Buddhist hierarchy demands prison perks for monk convicts

Published

on

MONETABRIEF– Sri Lanka’s two most senior Buddhist chapters, Malwatte and Asgiriya, demanded special concessions for monks serving prison sentences, following the disrobing of convicted monk Ven. Galagodaatte Gnanasara in line with established procedures.

The chief prelate of the Asgiriya chapter, Most Venerable Warakagoda Sri Gnanarathana, told Prisons Commissioner Senaka Palletenna that Ven. Gnanasara, who is serving a six-year sentence for contempt of court, must be released immediately.

Prison authorities have no power to release or pardon convicts, but Palletenna told the monk in Kandy on Friday that he would convey his request to the relevant government authorities.

“There is no point in talking about this and that… The entire country has been shaken (??????? ) . He must be released,” the Asgiriya chief prelate said.

The Malwatte chief prelate, Most Venerable Thibbatuwawe Sri Siddhartha Sumangala, appeared to accept the court verdict against Ven. Gnanasara, but asked the prisons chief whether a separate section could be established for convicted monks.

Palletenna noted that a special ward for the clergy already existed at Welikada Prison.

At least 63 convicted Buddhist monks are currently incarcerated within Sri Lanka’s criminal justice system.

Meanwhile, a group of 34 Buddhist monks named in a Colombo Fort Magistrate’s Court order to vacate the vicinity of the Presidential Secretariat ended their protest and dispersed after lunch on Friday.The monks are demanding an unconditional pardon for Ven. Gnanasara, who has previously been imprisoned, making him a reconvicted prisoner.

Continue Reading

News

Debate on NCM against Speaker postponed indefinitely

Published

on

The debate on the no-confidence motion against Speaker Dr. Jagath Wickramaratne, submitted by the Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB), has been postponed indefinitely pending the Attorney General’s opinion on certain technical issues in the motion.

Government representatives raised the matter at a meeting of the Committee on Parliamentary Business, pointing out that several provisions of the motion required clarification and that the Attorney General’s advice should be obtained.

As obtaining the opinion would take time, the debate could not be scheduled for the next parliamentary week, parliamentary sources said.

Chief Opposition Whip Gayantha Karunatilaka said a date for the debate would be decided after the Attorney General’s advice was received.

Meanwhile, Parliament is scheduled to meet from October 20 to 23, Secretary General of Parliament Kushani Rohanadeera announced.

The parliamentary business for the week was finalised at a meeting of the Committee on Parliamentary Business held on Friday (16) under the chairmanship of Deputy Speaker Dr. Rizvie Salih.

On each sitting day, the period from 9.30 a.m. to 10 a.m. will be allocated for parliamentary business under Items 1 to 6 of Standing Order 22. Questions for Oral Answers will be taken up from 10 a.m. to 11 a.m., followed by questions under Standing Order 27(2) from 11 a.m. to 11.30 a.m.

On Tuesday, October 20, an Opposition-sponsored Adjournment Motion will be debated from 11.30 a.m. to 5.30 p.m.

On Wednesday, October 21, a resolution under the Public Debt Management Act and a Supplementary Estimate will be taken up for debate and approval from 11.30 a.m. to 5 p.m. The annual reports of five statutory institutions will subsequently be presented for approval without debate, while questions at the Adjournment Time will be taken up from 5 p.m. to 5.30 p.m.

On Thursday, October 22, the Second Reading debates on two Bills to amend the Poisons, Opium and Dangerous Drugs Ordinance (Bills Nos. 79 and 80) will be held from 11.30 a.m. to 5 p.m.

The annual reports of five statutory institutions will then be taken up for approval without debate, followed by an Opposition-sponsored Adjournment Motion from 5 p.m. to 5.30 p.m.

On Friday, October 23, the Second Reading debate on the Elimination of Rabies and Registration of Dogs Bill will be held from 11.30 a.m. to 5 p.m. A Government-sponsored Adjournment Motion will be debated during the final half-hour of the sitting.

Continue Reading

Trending