The Supreme Court yesterday concluded oral submissions on petitions seeking a ruling that the Finance Amendment Bill submitted by the Minister of Finance to Parliament is unconstitutional.
The Supreme Court said it will soon refer its decision to the President and the Speaker of Parliament. The Supreme Court also directed the petitioners and the Attorney General to file written submissions on these petitions on or before 12 noon on 2 August.
Eight petitions seeking a ruling that the Finance Amendment Bill submitted by Finance Minister Basil Rajapaksa was unconstitutional were heard for the second day today before a three-judge Bench comprising Justices Priyantha Jayawardena, Kumuduni Wickramasinghe and Shiran Gunaratne.
The Attorney General informed the Supreme Court on Wednesday that several amendments would be made to the Finance Amendment Bill submitted by the Minister of Finance for Parliamentary approval.
When eight petitions filed against the Finance Amendment Bill were taken up for hearing, the Senior State Counsel stated that several provisions on pages 4, 5, 8,12,14,17 of the Bill were to be amended.
Former JVP MP Sunil Handunnetti and several others have filed the petitions before the Supreme Court seeking an order that the Finance Amendment Bill introduced by the Finance Minister Basil Rajapaksa is unconstitutional.
The petitions seek an order requiring the bill to be passed by a two-thirds majority and a referendum to become law.
The petitions were called before a panel of Supreme Court judges comprising justices Priyantha Jayawardena, Kumuduni Wickramasinghe and Shiran Gunaratne.
The court pointed out that the court’s decision on the constitutionality of a bill should be pronounced within three weeks of filing a petition against it.
Accordingly, the Bench pointed out that if it is possible to make brief statements on the petitions, the court will have time to consider the facts and make a decision.
Attorney-at-Law Shantha Jayawardena, appearing for former JVP MP Sunil Handunnetti, said the bill allowed the legalisation of ill-gotten gains.
He pointed out that this would give legitimacy to the offenses committed under the Money Laundering Act.
The Attorney General pointed out that this would remove the powers of the judiciary to take action against those who earn money through illegal activities, including drug trafficking.
He pointed out that all the provisions contained in this Bill are contrary to the provisions of Article 12 (1), 12 (2), 27 (2), a, b, e, f, 148, 8 of the Constitution.
Attorney-at-Law Suren Fernando, appearing for the petition filed by Samagi Jana Balawegaya MP Eran Wickramaratne, said that the provisions of the Act would exempt money from foreign taxes.
He added that the Government does not receive a large amount of tax revenue other than providing relief to racketeers.
President’s Counsel M.A. Sumanthiran appearing for the petition, filed by the Centre for Policy Alternatives, said the bill is completely unconstitutional. He further added that the provisions that do not require the disclosure of sources of income are a contributing factor to the increase in financial crime and that it seeks to give legitimacy to the money earned even by murder.
National Trade Union Confederation President and United National Party former MP Saman Rathnapriya, Samagi Jana Balawegaya General Secretary Ranjith Madduma Bandara, Ceylon Bank Employees Union former Deputy President Kottegoda Withana, and others from the Centre for Policy Alternatives have filed petitions challenging the bill.
The petitions, filed separately, call for an order requiring the bill to be passed by a two-thirds majority in Parliament and a referendum if it is to become law.
(FT)