Sunday Dec 15, 2024
Sunday Dec 15, 2024
Tuesday, 12 November 2019 00:00 - - {{hitsCtrl.values.hits}}
Chief Justice Jayantha Jayasuriya
Chief Justice Jayantha Jayasuriya yesterday named a five-judge Supreme Court bench to hear several Fundamental Rights petitions challenging the signing of the Millennium Challenge Corporation Compact (MCC), Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) and Acquisition and Cross Servicing Agreement (ACSA).
The judges named to the bench are Justices Buwaneka Aluwihare, L.T.B. Dehideniya, Murdu Fernando, S. Thurairaja and Gamini Amarasekera.
Three petitions were filed in the Supreme Court against the US agreements by the Government Medical Officers’ Association (GMOA), three Buddhist monks, namely Angulugalle Siri Jinanda Thero, Bengamuwe Nalaka Anunayake Thero and Madegoda Abhayathissa Thero, and Attorney-at-law Dharshana Weraduwage.
The Attorney General, President Maithripala Sirisena, Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, Foreign Affairs Minister Tilak Marapana and Finance Minister Mangala Samaraweera have been named as respondents.
The petitioners sought interim relief preventing the Minister of Finance from signing the MCC agreement and halting the implementation of the SOFA and ACSA agreements.
The petitioners allege that these agreements erode the territorial integrity of the country and thus impinge on the people’s sovereignty, giving overwhelming benefits to the US and its military personnel, which hurts Sri Lanka’s national interest along with the rights of all citizens and future generations.
The petitioners cite the US’s history of expansive and highly penetrative investment campaigns in Third World countries and say there is a serious danger of Sri Lankan interests being denied in favour of those of the US and claim that the US will exert power in order to secure its own interests, weakening Sri Lanka in the process.
The petitioners want Court to declare that the MCC, SOFA and ACSA gain mandatory parliamentary approval, as required by Article 157 of the Constitution, if they are to be pursued.
They are also seeking a declaration that the purported agreements have no legal power until they are presented before and approved by Parliament.
Furthermore, the petitioners are seeking an interim order staying or suspending these agreements until the final hearing and determination of their application.
