Connect with us

News

Sections of Telecom Bill inconsistent with Constitution- SC

Published

on

The Supreme Court has determined that some sections of the Telecommunications Amendment Bill are inconsistent with the Constitution.

The Determination of the Court as to the constitutionality of the Bill, titled “Sri Lanka Telecommunications (Amendment) Bill,” is as follows:

1) Proposed Section 9A (2) [Clause 8] states that the TRC may give the provider or operator who is the subject of such investigation, an opportunity to be heard and produce documents before making a determination and thereafter make an appropriate order. The use of the word “may” might be construed to mean that it is not compulsory for the rules of natural justice to be followed which makes it inconsistent with Article 12 (1) of the Constitution. The inconsistency will cease if the word “may” be replaced with the word “shall”.

2) Clause 9 of the Bill is inconsistent with Article 12 (l) of the Constitution and can only be passed with the special majority required under paragraph (2) of Article 84.

The learned ASG submitted that the following amendment will be moved at the Committee Stage:

Page 8, Clause 9: delete line l0 to II and substitute the following:- “frequency spectrum into number of bands based on International Telecommunication Union policies and guidelines or international best practices, in the best interest of the efficient management of the frequency spectrum and specify the service or”;

We are of the view that the inconsistency with Article 72 (7) will cease if Clause 9 is amended as suggested.

3) The learned ASG submitted that a further amendment is proposed to Clause 9 as follows:

Page 8, Clause 9: insert the following immediately after line l7:- “(d) vary the service or services or purpose for which such radio frequency has been assigned, from time to time.”

The proposed amendment is inconsistent with Article 727lL) read with Articles 3 and 4 of the Constitution and can only be passed with the special majority required under paragraph (2) of Article 84 and approved by the People at a Referendum by virtue of Article 83.

4) Clause 12 [proposed Section 17(10)] of the Bill is inconsistent with Article 72(t) of the Constitution and can only be passed with the special majority required under paragraph (2) of Article 84.

The inconsistency will cease if: (i) the word “facility” in Clause 12, page L3 line 14 is replaced with the word “infrastructure”; (ii) line 17 on page 13 is deleted and substitute the following: “specified by regulations made under this Act.”

5) Clause 13 [proposed Section 17A. (1)] is vague and overly broad and therefore inconsistent with Article L2 (7) of the Constitution and can only be passed with the special majority required under paragraph (2) of Article 84. The inconsistency will cease if Section 77A. (1.) in Clause 13 is amended by deleting the words “and on any contravention of the provisions of this Act or any regulation or rule made thereunder”

6) Clause 13 [proposed Section 178] is vague and confer unfettered power on the TRC to revoke a licence and is inconsistent with Article 72 (7) of the Constitution and can only be passed with the special majority required under paragraph (2) of Article 84.

The inconsistency will cease if: (a) proposed Section 178 (4) (b) is deleted; and (b) proposed Section 178(6) is amended by deleting the words “on the breach of any terms and conditions of the licence or”; (c) proposed Section 17 (8Xd) is deleted.

7) Clause 18 (5) [proposed sections 22 (3A) and 22 (38)] are vague and is inconsistent with the fundamental rights guaranteed by Article L4 (L)(a), La (1Xg) and 72 (7) and can only be passed with the special majority required under paragraph (2) of Article 84.

The inconsistency will cease if Clause 18(5) is amended as follows: Page 24. Clause I 8 : (l) delete lines I to 22 (both inclusive) and substitute the following:- “(3A) In the overall planning and management of radio frequency spectrum, the Commission shall have power to- (a) direct any person to whom a licence has been issued under subsection (l) to comply with and to implement new technologies for the efficient use of radio frequency spectrum in the public interest; and (b) vary any radio frequency after giving written notice to the relevant person prior to a reasonable period of such variation and giving reasons therefor.

(3B) Any person who is aggrieved by the variation of the radio frequency referred to in paragraph (b) of subsection (3A) may appeal to the Commission within three weeks from the receipt of such notice referred to in that paragraph.

(3C) The Commission shall, after giving such aggrieved person a fair hearing on any objection to such variation communicate its decision to the person who made an appeal to the Commission within three weeks from the date of receipt of such appeal.

(3D) The Commission may consider payment of any compensation to the relevant person whose radio frequency has been varied under paragraph (b) of subsection (3A).”; and (2) insert the following immediately after line 22:- “(6) by the insertion immediately after subsection (4) thereof, of the following new subsection:- “(4A) Any person who is aggrieved by the decision referred to in subsection (3C) of ‘ this section may appeal to the Court of Appeal within one months from the date of communication of the decision of the Commission,

(4B) The Court of Appeal may grant any interim relief to such aggrieved person pending the final determination of the appeal.”

8) Clause 78(7) of the Bill [proposed Section 22(7)) is inconsistent with Articles 12 (1) and 14 (1Xa) of the Constitution. The inconsistency will cease if proposed Section 22 (71 is amended so that the competition-based methodology in assigning radio frequencies is promulgated by regulations made under the SLT Act with Parliamentary oversight.

9) Clause 20 [proposed Section 22ADl is irrational and inconsistent with Article 12(1) and can only be passed with the special majority required under paragraph (2) of Article 84.

10) The learned ASG informed that a Committee Stage Amendment will be moved to amend proposed Section 22AC (2) whereby an offence is created by such Committee Stage Amendment. The Proposed Committee Stage Amendment to Clause 20 introducing Section 22AC (2) is inconsistent with Article 121 (1) read with Articles 3 and 4 of the Constitution for the reasons adumbrated above and earlier under “Committee Stage Amendments” and can only be passed with the special majority required under paragraph (2) of Article 84 and approved by the People at a Referendum by virtue of Article 83.

11) ln view of our determinations set out in 9 and 10 above, proposed Section 22AD becomes redundant.

12) Clause 33 of the Bill [proposed Section 59A] is vague and is inconsistent with Article L2(1) of the Constitution and could be validly passed only with the special majority provided for in Article 8aQ) of the Constitution.

The inconsistency will cease if proposed Section 59A is deleted. 1,1. 12. Page 64 of 65 1″3.

13) Clause 35 of the Bill (proposed Section 68(14)(b)and Section 68(14)(c)] is vague and overbroad and inconsistent with Article 12(1) of the Constitution and can only be passed with the special majority required under paragraph (2) of Article 84.

This inconsistency will cease if Clause 35 is amended by deleting the proposed Section 68(1A)(b) and Section 68(1A)(c).

14) Subject to above, none of the other provisions in the Bill are inconsistent with any provision in the Constitution. Other than the Committee Stage Amendments which are specifically referred to in this Determination, we have not considered the constitutionality of any other Committee Stage Amendment.



News

IMF turning a blind eye to NPP corruption: Opp.

Published

on

Patali / G. L. Peiris

The People’s United Opposition yesterday (01) alleged that the International Monetary Fund (IMF) had turned a blind eye to serious corruption allegations against the NPP government and was going ahead with the USD 2.9 bn loan in terms of the Extended Fund Facility (EFF) programme, finalised in 2023.

Addressing the regular weekly media briefing at the Flower Road Office of former President Ranil Wickremesinghe, former Ministers Prof. G. L. Peiris and Patali Champika Ranawaka questioned the failure on the part of the IMF to act in spite of the NPP government engaging in open corrupt practices, contrary to the terms and conditions of the agreement/understanding with the lending agency.

The media was told that the IMF couldn’t absolve itself of the responsibility for the actions of the government, especially because Sri Lanka, experiencing severe economic difficulties, was receiving loans from IMF at over 8%. Ex-parliamentarian Ranawaka pointed out that what Sri Lanka received from the IMF was not JAICA-type soft loans and the country was further burdened.

Prof. Peiris and Ranawaka alleged that the IMF appeared to have chosen not to take up the serious and growing accusations, particularly over coal and fuel scams that caused massive losses. They claimed the government had taken decisions at the expense of the country but for the benefit of certain businessmen close to them.

Both Prof. Peiris and Ranawaka explained the circumstances under which certain persons and companies received privileged status to import very costly vehicles and even helicopters and aircraft as the government

wasted precious foreign reserves for the benefit of friends. Ranawaka named two companies that benefited from government actions while alleging that those engaged in lucrative coal and fuel business made a killing.

They pointed out that the IMF released the latest USD 695 mn amidst stepped up serious allegations against the government. (SF)

Continue Reading

News

Shavendra tells Beijing meet Sri Lanka should not become an arena for geopolitical rivalry among major powers

Published

on

Shavendra Silva

Retired battlefield commander with possibly the best battlefield record, having recovered the most amount of enemy occupied territory by troops he led from the front, General Shavendra Silva recently discussed growing challenges faced by smaller countries, like Sri Lanka, in what he called the evolving global environment.

Stressing that responsibilities must be shared across all states, the former Commander of the Sri Lanka Army told the 5th edition of the Wanshou Dialogue on Global Security in Beijing: “Major powers bear a special responsibility to exercise strategic restraint, avoid coercive practices, uphold international law, and contribute toward global stability rather than fragmentation.

Emerging and middle powers have an increasingly important role as bridge builders promoting dialogue, cooperation, and institutional reform.

For countries such as Sri Lanka, the path forward lies in principled and balanced diplomacy.

This requires maintaining constructive relations with all nations while safeguarding sovereignty, strategic independence, and national interests.

Sri Lanka has consistently maintained that its territory should not become an arena for geopolitical rivalry or military confrontation among larger powers.

Instead, our focus remains on strengthening national resilience through economic development, institutional stability, maritime awareness, modern defence capabilities, and agile diplomacy.

Credible domestic institutions, accountable governance, and national cohesion ultimately strengthen sovereignty while reducing opportunities for external interference.”

Referring to his service as Ambassador and Deputy Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka to the UN in New York, General Silva said that his engagements at the UN and other international forums reinforced the importance of defending national interests while remaining committed to reconciliation, development, and peaceful coexistence.

The celebrated battlefield commander discussed the transformation of global security, the future direction of the international order and the responsibilities of states in this transitional era. Silva said: “Today, security threats extend far beyond conventional warfare.

Cyber threats, terrorism, disinformation, economic coercion, artificial intelligence, and the weaponisation of technology increasingly influence global stability. At the same time, climate change, pandemics, food insecurity, and economic disruptions have demonstrated how closely national security and human security are now interconnected.

For Sri Lanka, located at the centre of the Indian Ocean along one of the world’s most important maritime trade routes, these developments carry direct strategic significance. Sri Lanka’s own experience offers valuable lessons.

The defeat of the LTTE, in 2009 demonstrated the importance of decisive state action against terrorism, while also revealing how modern conflicts become internationalised through financing networks, propaganda, illicit arms flows, and external geopolitical pressures.

The post-conflict period further reinforced the importance of reconciliation, economic recovery, institutional rebuilding, and long-term national resilience.

Smaller states increasingly face pressures arising from great-power rivalry, economic dependency, and strategic competition.

Sri Lanka has, therefore, consistently sought to maintain strategic balance while safeguarding sovereignty and constructive engagement with all partners.

China has remained an important development and economic partner for Sri Lanka over many decades. The relationship, strengthened through the 1952 Rubber-Rice Pact, expanded significantly in the post-war period through cooperation in infrastructure, connectivity, logistics, energy, and economic recovery. Projects associated with the Belt and Road Initiative have contributed to Sri Lanka’s development, regional connectivity, and post-crisis resilience. China also extended support during the COVID-19 pandemic and Sri Lanka’s recent economic stabilisation efforts.

The future international order must be shaped not by confrontation or exclusive blocs, but through pragmatic cooperation, institutional reform, and balanced multilateral engagement.

International institutions, particularly the United Nations system, must evolve to better reflect contemporary geopolitical realities and the growing voice of the Global South.

Without greater inclusivity and legitimacy, multilateral institutions risk losing effectiveness in addressing increasingly complex global challenges.

Equally important is preserving a rules based maritime order grounded in international law, particularly the principles of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

The international community must also establish clearer norms governing emerging technologies, cyber operations, artificial intelligence, autonomous weapons systems, and outer space security.

Sri Lanka’s recent economic stabilisation efforts further demonstrated that internal resilience is essential for maintaining strategic autonomy and an independent foreign policy.

It is also an opportunity to build a more inclusive, balanced, and resilient international order capable of responding to the realities of the 21st century.

Continue Reading

News

Govt. leaders speak to Basil more than I do – Namal

Published

on

Namal

SLPP MP Namal Rajapaksa has defended former Finance Minister Basil Rajapaksa following questions over his continued stay in the United States, despite facing scrutiny over several legal and corruption-related matters in Sri Lanka.

Speaking to the media, Namal Rajapaksa rejected claims that Basil Rajapaksa was absconding, stating that he did not believe any member of the Rajapaksa family is evading legal proceedings.

“People in the government speak to my uncle more often than I do. Whether he is remaining abroad, based on their advice, I do not know. You will have to ask them and my uncle. However, he continues to be represented within the judicial process,” Namal Rajapaksa said.

He noted that Basil Rajapaksa was represented before Sri Lankan courts through his lawyers and that the relevant legal processes were continuing.

Responding to criticism that members of the Rajapaksa family were avoiding court proceedings by remaining overseas, Namal Rajapaksa said legal representation was taking place through the proper channels and that the judicial process was being followed.

He also questioned the Government’s priorities, claiming that greater attention was being placed on investigations involving Rajapaksa family members, while several issues, affecting the public, remained unresolved.

Namal Rajapaksa pointed to challenges faced by farmers, including rising fertiliser costs and difficulties in selling produce, as well as concerns in the tea sector, factory closures, job losses and the resignation of public officials.

He alleged that the Government was attempting to gain political advantage by focusing on some investigations rather than addressing economic and governance issues facing the country.

Continue Reading

Trending