Supreme Court Declares Gender Equality Bill Inconsistent with Sri Lankan Constitution

COLOMBO (News 1st); Sri Lanka's Supreme Court has determined that the promulgation of the Bill titled “Gender Equality” is inconsistent with Article 12 of the Constitution.

The Supreme Court has determined that the Bill as a whole cannot be enacted into law, unless the appropriate procedure laid down in Articles 83 and/or Article 84 and read with Article 80 of the Constitution which requires that the number of votes cast in favor thereof must amount to not less than two-thirds of the whole number of Members of Parliament (including those not present), and is approved by the People at a Referendum.

The speaker of parliament, Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena announced the determination to the house on Friday (7)

"I wish to inform Parliament that I have received the Determination of the Supreme Court in respect of the Bill titled “Gender Equality” which was challenged in the Supreme Court in terms of Article 121(1) of the Constitution.

In the said determination, the Supreme Court has determined the Constitutionality of the Bill as follows:—

-The Supreme Court held that the promulgation of this Bill is inconsistent with Article 12 of the Constitution.

The Supreme Court also has held that the objects of this Bill in Clause 2 read with Clause 3, Clause 4 would be inconsistent with Article 9, 10, 12, 14(1)(e) and27(1)(g) of the Constitution.

The Supreme Court has also held that Clause 4, 7, 17, 18, 25, 26 and 27 are inconsistent with Articles 9, 10, 12(1), 14(1)(e),14(1)(f), 27(1)(g) of the Constitution.

The Supreme Court has held that power being vested in the Council set up under Clauses 5 and 6 read with clause 7 are inconsistent with Articles 9, 10, 12(1), 14(1)(e),14(1)(f) and 27(1)(g) of the Constitution.

Therefore,clauses 17 and 18 of the Bill which set out the requirement of the office of “Gender Focal Point” and the provisions in Clauses 8 to 16 and 19 to 24 of the Bill, which are incidental provisions for the existence, management and exercise of powers and duties of the Council are also inconsistent with Articles 9, 10, 12(1),14(1)(e), 14(1)(f) and 27(1)(g) of the Constitution.

-The objects of the Bill are inconsistent with Articles 3,4(d), 9 & 10 of the Constitution, and they are inseparable from the other provisions of the Bill. Therefore, the Supreme Court has determined that the Bill as a whole is inconsistent with Articles 3, 4(d),9 &10 of the Constitution.

-The Supreme Court has determined that the Bill as a whole cannot be enacted into law, unless the appropriate procedure laid down in Articles 83 and/or Article 84 and read with Article 80 of the Constitution which requires that the number of votes cast in favor thereof must amount to not less than two-thirds of the whole number of Members of Parliament (including those not present), and is approved by the People at a Referendum.

I order that the Determination of the Supreme Court be printed in the Official Report of today’s proceedings of the House."