COLOMBO ‒ The Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) has appealed to political parties to permit their Members of Parliament to exercise independent judgment and vote according to their conscience during the parliamentary debate on the proposed 22nd Amendment to the Constitution.
The call follows the Supreme Court’s determination that the Bill, in its present form, does not require approval by the People at a referendum.
In a statement issued on Wednesday (23), the BASL stressed that the Supreme Court’s role under Articles 120, 121 and 123 of the Constitution is to determine the constitutional requirements for enacting the Bill, including whether its provisions require approval at a referendum under Article 83.
It said the Court’s determination should not be understood as an assessment of whether the proposed amendment constitutes “good or bad policy, desirable or undesirable, wise or unwise,” or whether Parliament ought to enact it.
The responsibility for deciding whether the proposed amendment should become law now rests with Parliament and, ultimately, with each individual MP when voting on the Bill, the BASL, urging MPs to consider the possible and probable consequences of the proposed amendment, as well as what it described as a lack of transparency and a proper consultative process in its introduction.
It also urged MPs to take into account concerns raised by a broad cross-section of society regarding the proposed constitutional changes.
The BASL referred to concerns expressed by the Maha Nayakes of the Three Nikayas, the Catholic Bishops’ Conference in Sri Lanka, the Church of Ceylon, the Judicial Service Association, the Commonwealth Lawyers Association, LAWASIA, the International Association of Judges, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, the French National Bar Council, and more than 40 professional associations and trade unions, including the Government Medical Officers’ Association.
It also pointed to Sri Lanka’s history of constitutional amendments, noting that provisions of previous amendments had passed constitutional scrutiny while, in its view, subsequently having adverse implications for democracy, constitutionalism, judicial independence and the rule of law.
The BASL said the distinction between the Supreme Court’s constitutional determination and Parliament’s responsibility to decide whether to enact legislation was important in this context.
It reminded MPs, when called upon to vote, to take a principled position while giving due consideration to their constitutional responsibilities, their role as representatives of the people and their duty to the sovereignty of the people of Sri Lanka.
–ENCL
Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.