Election Commissioner 'Valid In Law'

[TamilNet, Monday, 17 January 2000, 16:42 GMT]
Court of Appeal has declared that the appointment of an Acting Commissioner of Election by President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunge during the recent Presidential Election was valid in law. The Court held that it was the President's prerogative.

The Bench comprised Justice Hector Yapa, Justice Asoka de Silva and Justice Gunawardene.

In their suit, News Editor of Ravaya, Newton Seneviratne and former Air Force Commander Air Vice Marshal Harry Goonatileke had challenged the legality of the appointment of D.M.P.B.Dassanayake as an Acting Election Commissioner.

The Order said:- The President, under Article 103 of the Constitution, has exclusive power to appoint the Commissioner. Further, the President also has the exclusive power to make the acting appointment at any time.

The Article 103(4) of the Constitution, which confers that power on the President, is couched in the following words. "Wherever the Commissioner of Elections is unable to discharge the functions of his office, the President may appoint an Acting Commissioner in place of the Commissioner."

The term "Wherever" means that whatever time or in any or every instance. The President can make the Acting appointment at a time whatsoever no matter that the proclamation for Presidential Election had been made. The submission of the petitioners broadly speaking was that the President's power to make an Acting Election Commissioner is ousted, by Section 19 of the Presidential Election Act, once or from the time the proclamation is made announcing a Presidential Election till the time or stage that symbol being the last duty, in the sequence of duties, assigned to the Commissioner under Part two of the Act.

The Court also held that in cases or situations when the law has conferred on the President immunity from legal proceedings, the President has no right to ask that he/she be heard in defence of his actions or omissions while he/she still holds office.

"That would be a surrender of immunity by the President. And the President has no right to surrender immunity conferred upon him by law because the immunity is conferred on him in the public interest and not in his own personal interest," Justice Gunawardena said.

"The immunity conferred on the President is not the right of the President alone for it is the right of the public also."


Related Articles:
09.12.99   Elections Commissioner post challenged

 

Latest 15 Reports
24.04.22 05:44  
தீவின் நெருக்கடிச் சூழலில் ஈழத்தமிழர் தேசம் கடைப்பிடிக்கவேண்டிய நிலைப்பாடுகள்
09.04.22 14:44   Photo
குறிதவறும் ஈழத்தமிழர் தலைமைகளுக்கு வரலாறு தருகின்ற எச்சரிக்கை
21.01.22 07:24   Photo
ஈழத்தமிழர் தேசத்தின் தலைமைத்துவம் தேர்தல் அரசியற் கட்சிகளுக்கு அப்பாலானது
02.11.21 15:32   Photo
13 ஆம் சட்டத்திருத்தத்தால் கட்டமைக்கப்பட்ட இன அழிப்பை எதிர்கொள்ள முடியுமா?
15.09.21 08:19  
English version not available
17.05.21 19:23   Photo
Ananthi blames war criminal Silva for blocking collective memorial at Mu'l'livaaykkaal
09.04.21 14:46  
English version not available
23.03.21 12:41   Photo
No focus on Tamil genocide, geopolitics gets played out in Geneva in favour of QUAD formation
21.03.21 13:34   Photo
Navi Pillay explains ‘human rights’ limitations in Geneva on Tamil genocide
15.03.21 20:36   Photo
Deceived Tamil activists in UK falsely claimed ‘substantial changes’ to Zero draft
09.03.21 21:34   Photo
UK repeatedly wronged Tamils says hunger-striker, demands genocide justice
26.02.21 11:53   Photo
Tamils witness false dilemma in Geneva as geopolitical formations pit against each other
19.02.21 14:02   Photo
UK not prepared to push for ICC option in new UNHRC Resolution
07.02.21 23:16   Photo
Unprecedented P2P uprising paves the way for rights-oriented politics of Tamils and Muslims
22.01.21 08:01   Photo
Gotabaya sets up deceptive COI citing ‘sovereignty’ and ‘non-aligned’ foreign policy
 
Find this article at:
http://www.tamilnet.com/art.html?catid=13&artid=4530