SC rules Appropriation Bill unconstitutional

Wednesday, 7 November 2012 01:12 - - {{hitsCtrl.values.hits}}

Will need amendments or 2/3 majority to pass

The Supreme Court has ruled that Clause 2.1 of the Appropriation Bill tabled in Parliament on 9 October 2012 is inconsistent with the Constitution, the Speaker of Parliament told the House yesterday.

The Court has ruled that the Appropriation Bill will need to be amended and re-presented to Parliament or would require a two-thirds special majority to be passed.

It is not yet clear whether the ruling means that the Government will have to subject the Bill to amendment or present it in Parliament again to pass it with a two-thirds majority in order to present the Budget on schedule tomorrow. Originally Parliament was only scheduled to meet yesterday (6), ahead of the 8 November unveiling of the Budget.

SC rules...

The Centre for Policy Alternatives filed a petition challenging the constitutionality of some clauses of the Appropriation Bill, which lays out Government expenditure for year 2013 on 16 October. CPA contended that Clause 5 and 6 of the Bill were inconsistent with the provisions of Articles 3, 4, 148 and 150 of the Constitution and that Clause 2(1) (b) and 7 of the Bill were inconsistent with Articles 3, 4 and 148 of the Constitution.

CPA Executive Director Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu told the Daily FT that certain clauses of the Bill have been deemed unconstitutional by the Court. “They will probably have to amend it,” he said.

UNP National List MP and Economist Dr. Harsha De Silva also opined that the Government was likely to present the Bill with amendments.