If the Parliament is supreme then there is no constitution. Speaker’s certification does not cure the defect or the resolution as a act of parliament
(Lanka-e-News-29.Dec.2012, 11.00PM) Impeachment of Chief justice is not an act of parliament. PSC proceedings violated the due process and fair hearing under the constitution and deem null and void. Speaker’s certification does not cure the defect or the resolution as a act of parliament.
The Speaker and the members of parliament already setup the schedule to pass the resolution in the Parliament. They made statements that the proceedings will be legally valid after passing the parliament.
The members of Parliament believe that the Speaker’s certification is sufficient and the president may remove the Chief Justice.
As the Impeachment proceedings are unconstitutional and violated the due process and fair hearing as guaranteed by the constitution further proceeding by the Parliament will not be an act of Parliament.
There are two types of due process of law.
Procedural due process of law. The Parliament must use fair proceedings.
Substantive due process of law. The laws under which the Parliament acts must be constitutional.
These rights had come to life in the form of fundamental right in the Sri Lankan constitution.
All three institutions, the President, Parliament and Judiciary must obey and respect these legal rights when they perform their duties.
Any act that violates of fundamental rights guaranteed by the constitution by any of the three branches, that act will become null and void.
However the Supreme Court is the only institution out of the three branched to declare the invalidity of such act committed by the three branches.
When a sovereign Parliament has purported to enact a bill and it has received the Royal assent, is it a valid Act in the course of whose passing there was a procedural defect or is it an invalid Act which Parliament had no power to pass in that manner?
In The Bribery Commissioner v. Ranasinghe 1964 Privy Council held” When a legislative power is given subject to certain manner or form, the power does not exist unless and until the manner and form is complied with”.
In Thambiayah v. Kalasingham (50 N.L.R. 25 at 37)” This lord ship therefore are in accent with the view so clearly expressed by the Supreme Court that the orders made against the respondent are null and void inoperative on the ground that the persons composing the Bribery Commission Tribunal which tried him were not lawfully appointed to the
tribunal ” Full story >>
(Lanka-e-News-29.Dec.2012, 11.00PM) Impeachment of Chief justice is not an act of parliament. PSC proceedings violated the due process and fair hearing under the constitution and deem null and void. Speaker’s certification does not cure the defect or the resolution as a act of parliament.The Speaker and the members of parliament already setup the schedule to pass the resolution in the Parliament. They made statements that the proceedings will be legally valid after passing the parliament.
The members of Parliament believe that the Speaker’s certification is sufficient and the president may remove the Chief Justice.
As the Impeachment proceedings are unconstitutional and violated the due process and fair hearing as guaranteed by the constitution further proceeding by the Parliament will not be an act of Parliament.
There are two types of due process of law.
Procedural due process of law. The Parliament must use fair proceedings.
Substantive due process of law. The laws under which the Parliament acts must be constitutional.
These rights had come to life in the form of fundamental right in the Sri Lankan constitution.
All three institutions, the President, Parliament and Judiciary must obey and respect these legal rights when they perform their duties.
Any act that violates of fundamental rights guaranteed by the constitution by any of the three branches, that act will become null and void.
However the Supreme Court is the only institution out of the three branched to declare the invalidity of such act committed by the three branches.
When a sovereign Parliament has purported to enact a bill and it has received the Royal assent, is it a valid Act in the course of whose passing there was a procedural defect or is it an invalid Act which Parliament had no power to pass in that manner?
In The Bribery Commissioner v. Ranasinghe 1964 Privy Council held” When a legislative power is given subject to certain manner or form, the power does not exist unless and until the manner and form is complied with”.
In Thambiayah v. Kalasingham (50 N.L.R. 25 at 37)” This lord ship therefore are in accent with the view so clearly expressed by the Supreme Court that the orders made against the respondent are null and void inoperative on the ground that the persons composing the Bribery Commission Tribunal which tried him were not lawfully appointed to the
tribunal ” Full story >>
