Cal WRIT/ 89/2015 Vs

1 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA In the matter of an Application for order in the nature of Writ of Quo Warrantor, certiorari and Mandamus under and in terms of Article 140 of the Constitution. General Sarath Fonseka of No.461/7, Pubudu Pedesa, I Wali Road, i Thalawathugoda. \'.1 PETITIONER CAl WRIT/ 89/2015 Vs, 1. Dhammika Kitulgoda, Former Secretary- General of Parliament, Parliament of Sri Lanka, Sri Jayewardenepura, Kotte. 2. Da yananda Dissana yake, Former Commissioner of Elections, 83/C Honnantara South, Samupakara Mw, Piliyandala. 3. Dhammika Dasanayake, Secretary- General Parliament, Parliament of Sri Lanka, Sri Jayewardenepura, Kotte. 4. Mahinda Deshapriya, Commissioner of Elections, Elections Secretariat, \ 2 Rajagiriya. 5. H.K. Kamal Padmasiri, Returning Officer, District Secretariat, Colombo 05. 6. Lakshman Nipunarachchi of No.07 Rajaye Niwasa, Bokundara, Piliyandala. 7. Jayantha Ketagoda of No.12/A, Dambugahawatta, Malabe. 8. Hon. Attorney General, Attorney General's Department, Colombo 12. RESPONDENTS f f Before : Vijith K. Malalgoda PC J (PICA) & J '\, H.C.J. Madawala J Counsel : Faiz Musthapha PC with Upul Jayasuriya, S.P. Sriskantha and Ifthikar Asihq for the Petitioner, Ms. Farzana Jameel Senior DSG with Sumith Dharmawardhane DSG and rd th th th Yuresha de. Silva for the 3 ,4 , 5 and 8 Respondents, Srinath Perera PC with Buddhika Wansharatne for the i h Respondent 3 Argued On : 13.05.2015 Written Submissions On : 29.05.2015, 03.06.2015 Order On : 18.06.2015 Order Vijith K. Malalgoda PC J (PICA) The Petitioner has filed the present Application before this Court seeking inter alia; b). Issue a mandate in the nature of a Writ of Quo Warrantor calling upon the i h Respondent to show cause by what authority he claims to function as a Member of Parliament and declare that such claim is null and void and that the said i h Respondent is not entitled in Law to hold office as a I~, ; Member of Parliament for the Electoral District of Colombo, ,1 1 J c). Issue a mandate in the nature of a Writ of Certiorari quashing; I j i nd 51 1. The decision of the 2 Respondent informing the 1 Respondent that in terms ,~ } I of section 64 of the Parliamentary Elections Act the Petitioner's seat as a i 1 j I Member of Parliament has fallen vacant, J \ ! J II. The direction made by the 2nd Respondent to fill the vacancy in terms of I Article 99 13 (b) of the Constitution I, ! r, i , III. The return by the 51h Respondent to the effect that 61h Respondent was elected to Parliament for the said Electoral District IV. The notification in Government Gazette, by the 2nd Respondent, causing the name of the i h Respondent to be published as being elected as a Member of Parliament d). Issue a mandate in the nature of a Writ of Certiorari quashing; I nd 51 I I the decision of the 2 Respondent informing the 1 Respondent that in terms of section 64 of the Parliamentary Elections Act the Petitioner's seat as a Member of Parliament has fallen vacant, I I \ 4 II the decision of the 2nd Respondent informing the 15t Respondent that in terms of section 64 of the Parliamentary Elections Act that the Petitioner's seat which had been purportedly filled by the 6th Respondent had become vacant, III the direction made by the 2nd Respondent to the 5th Respondent to fill the vacancy in terms of Article 99 13 (b) of the Constitution, IV the return by the 5th Respondent to the effect that the i h Respondent was elected to Parliament for the said Electoral District, V the Notification in the Government Gazette by the 2nd Respondent, causing the name of the i h Respondent to be published as being elected as a Member of Parliament, e). Issue a mandate in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 3rd Respondent to take all necessary steps according to Law to enable the Petitioner to sit and vote in Parliament and exercise j the powers, privileges and immunities as a Member of Parliament; The Petitioner is the Leader of the Democratic Party and has contested the parliamentary elections \ 2010 as a candidate of the Democratic National Alliance and secured 98456 preference votes, which I is the highest number of preference votes received by the said Alliance. J ,J Two members were selected as Members of Parliament from the said Alliance namely the Petitioner 1 1 and one Sunil Handunnetti who placed second in the number of preference votes. 1 The Commissioner of Election by Government Gazette 1649/2 dated 12.04.2010 has declared them as Members of the Parliament under section 62 of the Parliamentary Elections Act No. 1 of 1981. In February 2010 the petitioner was charged before two General Court Martial. He was also indicted in the High Court of Colombo in 3 cases under the Penal Code and Emergency Regulations. On 13.08.2010 the petitioner was found guilty by the 15t Court Martial of having committed offences under the Army Act and on 17. 08. 2010 he received a letter from the Army Commander that the President had confirmed his sentence and that he was cashiered from the Sri Lanka Army. 5 On 17.09.2010 the Petitioner was found guilty by the 2nd Court Martial of having Committed offences under the Army Act and was sentenced to 30 months rigorous imprisonment. The President had confirmed the sentence of 30 months imprisonment and on 30.09.2010 the Commander informed the petitioner of this decision. The Petitioner was also convicted of offences under the Penal Code by the High Court of Colombo and sentenced for three years rigorous imprisonment. I Section 64(1) of Parliamentary Elections Act which refers to filling of vacancies reads thus, I 64 (1); Where the seat of a Member of Parliament becomes vacant as provided in Article 66 of the of Constitution [other than paragraph (g) of that Article] or by virtue of j f i ! provisions of paragraph 13 (a) of Article 99 of the constitution, the Secretary - '\, I i General of Parliament shall inform the Commissioner who shall direct the returning I i officer of the electoral district which returned such member to fill the vacancy as 1 provided for under paragraph 13 (b) of article 99 of the Constitution within one month of such direction. Article 66 of the Constitution refers to various instances where vacation of seats can take place in the Parliament and Article 66 (d) refers to; 66 (d); If he becomes subject to any disqualification specified in Article 89 or 91 Article 91 of the Constitution speaks of the circumstances under which a person becomes disqualified to be elected as a Member of Parliament or sit and vote in Parliament and section 91 (a) reads as follows, I 91 (a); If he is or becomes subject to any of the disqualifications specified in Article 89 I Therefore it is understood that if a person become disqualified to become an elector under any provision in Article 89, with the operation of Article 91 read with Article 66 of the Constitution, any sitting member of the Parliament will be unseated and his seat become vacant. Article 89 (d) of the Constitution reads as follows; 89 (d); If he is serving or has during the period of seven years immediately preceding completed serving of a sentence of imprisonment (by whatever name called) I 6 for a term not less than six months imposed after conviction by any court for an offence punishable with imprisonment for a term not less than two years or is under sentence of death or is serving or has during the period of seven years I immediately preceding completed the serving of a sentence of imprisonment f for a term not less than six months awarded in lieu of execution of such I I l sentence; Provided that if any person disqualified under this paragraph is granted a free t pardon such disqualification shall cease from the date on which the pardon is 1 I granted; Therefore it is understood that, with the convictions and the sentences imposed on the Petitioner as referred above, by operation of Article 89 of the Constitution the petitioner was disqualified to be an II 1 elector, and therefore he was unseated from the Parliament with the operation of Articles 91 and 66 1 \ of the Constitution. Since the appointment of Members of Parliament are based on the proportional representation basis; filling of vacancies were also to be carried out on the same basis. Il Article 99 13(b) provides "the candidate from the relevant recognized political party or independent group who has secured the next highest number of preferences shall be declared elected to fill such J vacancy" I The term "shall be declared "referred to in the said Article plays a significant role, when considering the extent to which Article 99 (13) (b) is binding the relevant officials, who are responsible for the implementation of the said Article. In the case of eST V. Super Cotton Bowl Refilling Works (1989) I sec 463; AIR 1989 SC 922 the term "shall be final" was considered by a bench comprising of Sabyasachi Mukharji and S. Ranganathan 11 and concluded that "shall be final" means it is final and there is an end. In Kydd V. Watch Committee of City of Liverpool (1980) AC 327-331-32 Lord Loreburn L.C construing the provisions of S.

Load more