The Supreme Court on Thursday began hearing petitions challenging the Anti-Corruption (Amendment) Bill placed before Parliament by the government.
A total of 14 petitions have been filed against the proposed legislation, Ada Derana and Hiru News both reported. The petitioners include former Minister Prof. G. L. Peiris and several other parties.
The petitions are being heard before a three-judge bench comprising Justices Shiran Gunaratne, Mahinda Samayawardhena and Sampath Wijeratne.
What the petitioners argue
The petitioners contend that certain provisions of the Bill violate fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution, including the sovereignty of the people, and that the legislation would curtail the public’s right to information.
They have asked the court to determine that if the Bill is to be passed, it must receive a two-thirds majority in Parliament and approval at a referendum — the highest bar the Constitution sets for ordinary legislation, and one the government has not indicated it intends to meet.
How this follows the TISL petition
The hearing comes two days after Transparency International Sri Lanka’s own challenge to the Bill. TISL filed its petition on 31 August, objecting to five clauses and likewise asking the court to rule that they require a referendum.
TISL’s objections centred on provisions that would let CIABOC’s Director-General decide whether to refrain from prosecuting accomplices without a magistrate’s authorisation; raise the state shareholding threshold triggering asset-declaration duties from 25 per cent to 50 per cent; remove the duty to declare the assets of cohabitants; give CIABOC discretion to redact declarations and criminalise other uses of them; and make “bail the exception and remand the norm”.
Neither Ada Derana nor Hiru said whether TISL’s petition is among the 14 now being heard together, or whether the court has consolidated the challenges. The Bill was placed on Parliament’s Order Paper on 19 August and would amend the Anti-Corruption Act No. 9 of 2023.
The second constitutional challenge before the court
The bench hearing the Anti-Corruption Bill is separate from the five-judge bench that concluded hearings on the 22nd Amendment on 2 September, with its determination going to the Speaker. Both matters turn on the same question of whether a referendum is required.
Not yet reported
Neither outlet named counsel for the petitioners or the state, reported the Attorney General’s position on the Bill, or said how long the hearing is expected to run. Under the Constitution the court must deliver its determination on a Bill within three weeks of it being placed on the Order Paper unless the Speaker allows longer; neither report addressed the timetable.
