How to prove Legislature is NOT superior to Judiciary in Sri Lanka using constitution?
Current speaker of Sri Lanka parliament [Chamal Jayantha Rajapaksa] confirmed the former speaker late [Anura Priyadarshi Solomon Dias Bandaranaike's] statement that:
Lack of checks and balances among core institutions effect sovereignty of people.
3. In the Republic of Sri Lanka sovereignty is in the people ...
Expect an intellectual discussion as the answer.
The Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka states:
3. In the Republic of Sri Lanka sovereignty is in the people and is inalienable. Sovereignty includes the powers of government, fundamental rights and the franchise.
Therefore, people is/are the supremacy authority. (sovereignty is in the people and is inalienable)
Inalienable, grossly means not subject to “alienation” by others, which seems not to be synonymous to Unalienable (“incapable” of being aliened by anyone). Therefore, it is questionable for a fictional constitution to define the Inalienable Sovereignty of living-breathing people, unless ‘people’ is a fictional term, because slave cannot define master.Can a dogs and cats act upon those fictional 'people'?
Sovereignty of people defined in said constitution is exercised through:
1. powers of government
2. fundamental rights
Under the Sovereignty of people, the ‘powers of government’ are exercised as in 3 fold:
1. Legislature (define)
4. (a) the legislative power of the People shall be exercised by Parliament, consisting of elected representatives of the People and by the People at a Referendum;
2. Executive (implement)
4. (b) the executive power of the People including the defence of Sri Lanka, shall be exercised by the President of the Republic elected by the People;
3. Judiciary (control/define the definition)
4. (c) the judicial power of the People shall be exercised by Parliament through courts, tribunals and institutions created and established, or recognized, by the Constitution, or created and established by law, except in regard to matters relating to the privileges, immunities and powers of Parliament and of its Members, wherein the judicial power of the People may be exercised directly by Parliament according to law;
Answer 1: As per 'powers of government', Legislature is NOT superior to Judiciary (all are powers of people).
The current speaker of parliament Chamal Rajapaksa, referred to former speaker late Anura Bandaranaike’s statement and made a controversial statement towards public opinion.
Answer 2: If the said controversial statement considered the superiority powers of parliament over court system, where the Constitution 4.(c) defines court system as a subsystem under the parliament (exercised by Parliament through courts), the speaker's statement is true.
Answer 3: If the said controversial statement considered the superiority powers of the members of parliament over the members of court system (including C.J.), in the case of jurisdiction with assumption that members of parliament are elected by people and members of court system are not elected by people, the answer initially directs at 4.(e) the franchise.
4.(e) the franchise shall be exercisable at the election of the President of the Republic and of the Members of Parliament, and at every Referendum by every citizen who has attained the age of eighteen years, and who being qualified to be an elector as hereinafter provided, has his name entered in the register of electors.
Franchise is a special privilege conferred by government upon an individual or corporation (http://thelawdictionary.org/franchise/ - Black's Law Dictionary)
Constitution 4.(e) and practice of using citizen/national ID at the election process clearly show, members of parliament are elected by fictional citizens defined under the constitution, and NOT people with sovereignty.
There are no specific provisions defined under constitution at least for fictional 'people' other than citizens to participate in election as an elector.
89. No person shall be qualified to be an elector at an election of the President, or of the Members of Parliament or to vote at any Referendum, if he is subject to any of the following disqualifications, namely-
(a) if he is not a citizen of Sri Lanka ;
(Democracy cannot co-exist with republic - http://godofgodseyes.blogspot.com/2012/09/can-republic-co-exist-with-democracy.html)
Therefore, the election process gives NO special powers for members of parliament over members of court system.
Further more, compulsory citizen status demanded at article 89.(a) of the constitution contradicts with article 93 where voting for the election can be free only if electors are outside the system (not defined in constitution). Freedom is different to liberation.
93. The voting for the election of the President of the Republic and of the Members of Parliament and at any Referendum shall be free, equal and by secret ballot.
Answer 4: If sovereignty of people are exercised by fictional citizens, the constitution contradicts itself and nullifies it’s integrity as a result, where citizens are not people and not all people of the country (by virtue of registration) get citizenship as per Article 26 of the constitution.
26. (2) A citizen of Sri Lanka shall for all purposes be described only as a "citizen of Sri Lanka," whether such person became entitled to citizenship by descent or by virtue of registration in accordance with the law relating to citizenship.
(3) No distinction shall be drawn between citizens of Sri Lanka for any purpose by reference to the mode of acquisition of such status, as to whether acquired by descent or by virtue of registration.
(Constitutional fraud against people of the country - http://godofgodseyes.blogspot.com/2012/09/constitutional-fraud-against-people.html)
It is the people wish that a fraudulent constitution known as the 'Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka' shall not lawfully exist.
Answer 5: Inalienable sovereignty of people cannot be fully and/or partly be surrendered by agents (franchised persons or corporation) under the fictional constitution (includes any private corporation registered under the constitution), when agreeing to international treaties, applying for loans at IMF and privatization. Therefore, practicality is unconstitutional.
It seems the speaker of the parliament of Sri Lanka opened-up a can of worms!