APPEAL COURT RESTRAINS MR, MINISTERS FROM FUNCTIONING

122 MPS are party to the Quo Warranto petition Court not bound to give reasons but doing so in this instance

The Court of Appeal yesterday issued an interim order restraining Mahinda Rajapaksa and 48 other respondents from functioning in the offices of Prime Minister, Cabinet Ministers, non- Cabinet Ministers and Deputy Ministers until the final determination on the Quo Warranto petition filed by 122 MPS.

The Bench comprising Justices P. Padman Surasena (President/ CA) and Arjuna Obeysekara also issued notices on the respondents returnable for December 12.

Petitioners in their writ of Quo Warranto sought the respondents to show on what authority they functioned as Prime Minister, Cabinet Ministers, non-cabinet Ministers and Deputy Ministers.

Before delivering the order Court of Appeal President Prithi Padman Surasena made two observations.

He said when the Court is to make an order on issuing notices to the respondents in a Quo Warranto writ petition, the court is not bound to give reasons for its decision unless the petition is dismissed, but that the Bench decided to set out the reasons for their decisions.

Judge Surasena said that when an interim order is granted that decision is not the final determination of the court and one should bear in the mind that fact when interpreting the order without prejudicing the parties in the case.

Delivering the reasons, he observed that the matter is of national importance and has to be dealt with great care.

He explained that the petitioners consisting of 122 parliamentarians had said in the petition arguing that they had twice passed no-confidence motions in Parliament on November 14, 2018 and November 16, 2018 under the provisions of the Constitution.

In view of the fact that the petitioners having twice passed no-confidence motions, Justice Surasena observed that under Article 48 (2) of the Constitution, when a no-confidence motion is passed in Parliament against the Government, then the Prime Minister and the Cabinet of Ministers shall stand dissolved.

He said the interim order did not restrain the functioning of the Prime Minister or Cabinet of Ministers in the Country, ‘but only restrained the respondents as individuals from functioning in those offices’.

The Judge observed the irremediable damages that could be caused from this interim order. First he pointed out that due to the interim order, the country may end up without a Prime Minister and a Cabinet. However, he said allowing the respondents to hold office would cause more damage than in the previous instance.

“If these respondents are allowed to exercise their functions until the matter is heard, the Court is of the view that considering the Prime Minister and the Ministers exercising very important public functions under the law, the court therefore is able to see that the balance or convenience is in favour of the 122 petitioner parliamentarians,” Judge Surasena said.

Kanag Iswaran PC with Ikram Mohammad PC, A.M. Faiz, Viran Corea and Suren Fernando appeared for the petitioners while Gamini Marapana PC with Navin Marapana as well as Romesh de Silva PC, Manohara de Silva PC, Sanjeeva Jayawardena PC, Ali Sabry PC and Shaveendra Fernando PC appeared for the

respondents.

Allowing the respondents to hold office will cause more damage