Eight fundamental rights petitions relating to the date of the parliamentary elections and reconvening of the dissolved Parliament were heard before a five judge bench of the Supreme Court today.
Making submissions Counsel for the Petitioners Victor Ivan and Charitha Guneratne M.A. Sumanthiran PC explained that the functioning of all three arms of the state – Executive, Legislature and Judiciary – were essential to a democracy.
“These three organs are like three legs of a tripod. If one falls the whole thing will collapse” Sumanthiran argued. “A country without Parliament is not a democracy” he said.
The senior lawyer submitted to court that the President’s proclamation dissolving parliament was ab initio void because his power to dissolve Parliament prematurely has a clear qualifier attached that Parliament must meet within three months of dissolution.
The dates of the election and the convening of parliament are also included in the proclamation and those dates are no longer fulfilled.
Sumanthiran went on to state that the June 20th election could in any event not be held now as several legal stipulations could not be met by that date.
The Parliamentary Elections Act requires at least five weeks of campaigning to be granted before a polling date.
Raising preliminary objections on the petitions filed, Additional Solicitor General Indika De Silva noted that the petitions could not proceed because it did not meet the time-bar for FR petitions.
The ASG also objected to the fact that while the functions of the president were being referenced, in one of the petitions petitioners had failed to cite the President as a respondent. Further submissions on the objections will be raised later during proceedings.