I wish to inform Parliament that I have received the
Determination of the Supreme Court in respect of the Bill titled
“Twenty First Amendment to the Constitution” which
was challenged in the Supreme Court in terms of Article
121(1) of the Constitution.
The Supreme Court has made the following Determination:—
(i) Clauses 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 23,
24, 26, 27, 28 and 36 of the Bill contain provisions
inconsistent with Article 3 read together with Article
4(b) of the Constitution and as such may be enacted
only by the special majority required by Article 84 (2)
and upon being approved by the People at a
Referendum by virtue of Article 83;
(ii) Clauses 2, 3 and 4 of the Bill are inconsistent with
Article 3 read together with Article 4(e) of the
Constitution and as such may be enacted only by the
special majority required by Article 84(2) and upon
being approved by the People at a Referendum by
virtue of Article 83;
(iii) Clause 14 of the Bill as it presently stands is
inconsistent with Article 3 read together with Article
4(b) and as such may be enacted only by the special
majority required by Article 84(2) and upon being
approved by the People at a Referendum by virtue of
Article 83.
A
However, the necessity for a Referendum will cease if
the proposed Article 41A(1) provides for the President
to appoint one person as a member of the Council as
his nominee and if the proposed Article 41A (6) is
suitably amended to remove the deeming provision set
out therein;
(iv) Clause 19 of the Bill is inconsistent with Article 3 read
together with Article 4(b) of the Constitution and as
such may be enacted only by the special majority
required by Article 84(2) and upon being approved by
the People at a Referendum by virtue of Article 83;
(v) Clause 30(a) of the Bill seeks to limit the judicial power
of the people, and therefore is inconsistent with Article
3 read together with Articles 4(c) and 4(e) of the
Constitution and as such may be enacted only by the
special majority required by Article 84(2) and upon
being approved by the People at a Referendum by
virtue of Article 83;
(vi) Clause 39 of the Bill in so far as it seeks to repeal
Article 129(1) of the Constitution is inconsistent with
Article 3 read together with Article 4(c) of the
Constitution and as such may be enacted only by the
special majority required by Article 84(2) and upon
being approved by the People at a Referendum by
virtue of Article 83;
(vii) Clause 43 of the Bill is inconsistent with Articles 2 and
3 read together with Article 4(b) of the Constitution
and as such may be enacted only by the special
majority required by Article 84(2) and upon being
approved by the People at a Referendum by virtue of
Article 83;
(viii) Clause 51 of the Bill seeks inter alia to introduce
Chapter XIX-C titled National Security Council of which
the Prime Minister is to be the Chairperson. The
proposed Articles 156J (1) and 156J (2) are
inconsistent with Articles 1, 2 and 3 read together with
Article 4(b) of the Constitution and as such may be
enacted only by the special majority required by Article
84(2) and upon being approved by the People at a
Referendum by virtue of Article 83. However, such
inconsistency would cease if the proposed Articles
156J (1) and 156J (2) are amended to change the
composition of the proposed National Security Council
and make the President, the Chairperson of the
proposed Council.
I order that the Determination of the Supreme Court be
printed in the Official Report of today’s proceedings of the
House.
