Sri Lanka’s Supreme Court flags Telecom Bill inconsistencies

Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardana announced this morning (June 18) the Supreme Court’s determination on the Telecommunications (Amendment) Bill in Parliament of Sri Lanka.

The Supreme Court identified several clauses in the Bill as inconsistent with the Constitution, necessitating a special majority in Parliament for their passage.

The Speaker detailed the court’s ruling, highlighting that the contentious clauses could alternatively be amended to align with constitutional standards.

If amended accordingly, these clauses could then be passed with a simple majority.

The Supreme Court’s determination underscores the need for careful legislative review to ensure alignment with constitutional requirements while advancing telecommunications regulations in Sri Lanka.

The Supreme Court determination delivered by the Speaker in Parliament of Sri Lanka is as follows:

“I wish to inform Parliament that I have received the determination of the Supreme Court in respect of the bill titled Sri Lanka Telecommunications Amendment, which was challenged in the Supreme Court in terms of Article 121(1) of the Constitution. In the said determination, the Supreme Court has summarized the constitutionality of the bill as follows:

Clause 8, Proposed Section 9A(2) of the bill, is inconsistent with Article 12(1) of the Constitution. However, the inconsistency shall cease if the word ‘may’ is replaced with the word ‘shall’, as set out in the determination of the Supreme Court.

Clause 9 of the bill is inconsistent with Article 12(1) of the Constitution and can only be passed with the special majority required under Paragraph 2 of Article 84. However, the inconsistency shall cease if the clause is amended as set out in the determination of the Supreme Court.

Clause 12, Proposed Section 17(10) of the bill, is inconsistent with Article 12(1) of the Constitution and can only be passed with the special majority of Parliament required under Article 84(2). However, the inconsistency shall cease if the clause is amended as set out in the determination of the Supreme Court.

Clause 13, Proposed Sections 17A(1) and 17B of the bill, are inconsistent with Article 12(1) of the Constitution and can only be passed with the special majority of Parliament required under Article 84(2). However, the inconsistency shall cease if the clauses are amended as set out in the determination of the Supreme Court.

Clause 18(5), Proposed Sections 22(3)A and 22(3)B of the bill, are inconsistent with the provisions of Article 14(1)A, 14(1)G, and 12(1) of the Constitution and shall only be passed with the special majority of Parliament required under Article 84(2). However, the said inconsistency shall cease if Clause 18(5) is amended as set out in the determination of the Supreme Court.

Clause 18(7), Proposed Section 22(7) of the bill, is inconsistent with Article 12(1) and Article 14(1)A of the Constitution. However, the inconsistency shall cease if the clause is amended as set out in the determination of the Supreme Court.

Clause 20, Proposed Section 22AD is irrational and inconsistent with Article 12(1) of the Constitution and shall only be passed by the special majority of Parliament required under Article 84(2).

Clause 33, Proposed Section 59A of the bill, is inconsistent with Article 12(1) of the Constitution and shall only be passed by the special majority of Parliament required under Article 84(2). However, the inconsistency shall cease if Proposed Section 59A is deleted.

Clause 35, Proposed Sections 68(1)A, B, and 68(1)C of the bill, are inconsistent with Article 12(1) of the Constitution and shall only be passed by the special majority required under Article 84(2). However, the inconsistency shall cease if Clause 35 is amended by deleting Proposed Sections 68(1)A, B, and 68(1)C as set out in the determination of the Supreme Court.

“The other provisions in the bill are not inconsistent with any provisions of the Constitution. I order that the determination of the Supreme Court be printed in the official report of today’s proceedings of the House.” speaker said.