JUDICATURE ACT aMENDMENTS NEED TWO THIRDS - SC

Law & Order-Disna Mudalige-Camelia Nathaniel and Amali MallawaarachchiWednesday,April 4, 2018 

The Supreme Court (SC) has determined that three Sections of Judicature (Amendment) Bill are inconsistent with the Constitution and need to be passed by a two thirds majority in Parliament.

The Government presented the Bill on March 6 to set up a permanent High Court-at-Bar to expedite cases of large scale corruption and financial crimes.

Speaker Karu Jayasuriya announced to the House yesterday that the SC has determined that Sections 12 A (1), 12 A (2) and 12 A (7) are inconsistent with the Constitution.

Section 12 A (1) of the Bill deals with the setting up of the Permanent High Court-at-Bar, and the nature of cases to be taken up in it.

The SC has ruled that an amendment is required to be made to the Constitution to give effect to that Section.“This requires the bill to be passed by a two thirds majority. However, if the jurisdiction is conferred on a the High Court of Provinces under Article 154 P(3) (a) like in Act No 10 of 1996 and Act No 54 of 2006 this amending section will cease to be inconsistent” the SC ruling stated.

Section 12 A (2) states, “the Permanent High Court at Bar shall consist of three Judges sitting together, nominated by the Judicial Service Commission from among the High Court Judges of which one Judge shall be nominated by the Judicial Service Commission as the Chairman”.

The SC has ruled that the Judicial Service Commission nominating judges to the Permanent High Court-at-Bar is inconsistent with the article 154 P (2) of the Constitution.“An amendment is required to be made to the Constitution to give effect to the Section 12 A (2) of the Bill which requires a two-thirds majority. However, if 12 A (2) of the Bill is removed and Article 154 P (2) remains as it is, this inconsistency will cease,” the determination said.

Section 12 A (7) allows the Attorney General or the Director General for the Prevention of Bribery and Corruption to refer the cases to the Permanent High Court at Bar.

The SC has determined that Section 12 A (7) is inconsistent with Article 12 (1) of the Constitution.

“However, if the Chief Justice is given the power to decide whether to hold a trial at Bar or not this amending section will cease to be inconsistent,” it has ruled.

The Bill is scheduled for debate on Thursday.