The Supreme Court recently dismissed a petition seeking to postpone the presidential election until the 19th Amendment to the Constitution was ratified through a referendum, and imposed a court fee of Rs 5 lakhs upon the petitioner.
The petition, filed by Attorney-at-Law Aruna Laksiri Unawatuna, was reviewed by a three-judge panel: Chief Justice Jayantha Jayasooriya, Supreme Court Judge Arjuna Obeysekera, and Supreme Court Judge Priyantha Fernando. The panel criticized the petitioner for misleading the court and misusing the judicial process.
During the proceedings, Deputy Solicitor General Kanishka de Silva, representing the Attorney General, argued that the petition lacked legal merit and should be dismissed. She noted that the petitioner had challenged the legality of the 19th Amendment, which had already been enacted by Parliament and signed by the Speaker. Therefore, the Supreme Court did not have jurisdiction to review the amendment’s legality. Additionally, the petitioner had failed to demonstrate how his fundamental rights were violated and did not file the petition within the legally required timeframe.
Lawyer Aruna Laksiri argued that the 19th Amendment was not formally adopted as it did not go through a referendum, contrary to the requirements for constitutional amendments involving Article 70. Chief Justice Jayasooriya responded that only the 2015 Supreme Court decision was relevant, not the 2002 decision cited by the petitioner.
The Chief Justice criticized the petitioner for not being familiar with the relevant Supreme Court rulings and emphasized that the 2015 decision specified what required a referendum. The court found that the petitioner had misrepresented the law and misused the judicial process.
The Additional Solicitor General also urged the court to dismiss the petition, citing lack of legal basis. The panel agreed and ordered the petition to be dismissed, with the petitioner required to pay a court fee of Rs 5 lakhs by July 31.
Filed on July 11, the petition argued that the 19th Amendment had not been properly ratified and sought to delay the presidential election until the amendment was approved by a referendum. It named the Election Commission, its members, the Secretary General of Parliament, and the Attorney General as respondents.
The petitioner claimed that the 19th Amendment altered Article 70 of the Constitution, limiting the President’s power to dissolve Parliament and should have been approved by a referendum. He argued that holding the election without this approval was unconstitutional and requested that the Supreme Court order a referendum on the amendment.
Source BBC Sinhala
