The Sunday Leader

Haste Makes Waste With 18th

By Faraz Shauketaly

In its haste to present the 18th Amendment to the Constitution, the legal draughtsman omitted to include a critical component to the controversial 18th Amendment.
The Cabinet of Ministers originally had one version which in fact found its way to the various intervening petitioners, In the Supreme Court whilst Attorney General Mohan Pieris was making his case, the Intervening Petitioners found that the AG was quoting from a different version. Once objections were raised the AG provided copies from his copy for the benefit of the intervening petitioners.
However there was a serious omission in the application to the Supreme Court. The time limit – in terms of the Parliamentary Council’s make up – for the nominee of the Leader of the Opposition was omitted as was what procedure would follow if indeed the Leader of the Opposition did not make a nomination. Once the Bill reached parliament the glaring anomaly was taken care of at committee stage and the necessary changes made in time for Parliament to vote. The changes were written in to ensure that if the Oppositions’ nominee was not forthcoming within 7 days, then the Speaker would step in and make a nomination of his own instead. Without this vital change, the entire implementation of the 18th Amendment may well have gone back to the Supreme Court for clarification at even greater cost.

3 Comments for “Haste Makes Waste With 18th”

  1. M.H.Sheriff

    Silly Draft.

    • gamarala

      It is surprising that the supreme court did not detect/comment on/correct this omission.

  2. naseeff

    After all. Courts/Police/Army/Navy and all other departments are under MR dynasty control. So what can judge do nothing obey or you are out. That is meaning of democracy in Srilanka: What is ruling party says is democratic values and if you oppose them you are fired and you are rebellion. That is the way things are going now

Comments are closed

Photo Gallery

Log in | Designed by Gabfire themes