The Supreme Court on Thursday began hearing petitions challenging the Anti-Corruption (Amendment) Bill placed before Parliament by the government.

A total of 14 petitions have been filed against the proposed legislation, Ada Derana and Hiru News both reported. The petitioners include former Minister Prof. G. L. Peiris and several other parties.

The petitions are being heard before a three-judge bench comprising Justices Shiran Gunaratne, Mahinda Samayawardhena and Sampath Wijeratne.

What the petitioners argue

The petitioners contend that certain provisions of the Bill violate fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution, including the sovereignty of the people, and that the legislation would curtail the public’s right to information.

They have asked the court to determine that if the Bill is to be passed, it must receive a two-thirds majority in Parliament and approval at a referendum — the highest bar the Constitution sets for ordinary legislation, and one the government has not indicated it intends to meet.

How this follows the TISL petition

The hearing comes two days after Transparency International Sri Lanka’s own challenge to the Bill. TISL filed its petition on 31 August, objecting to five clauses and likewise asking the court to rule that they require a referendum.

TISL’s objections centred on provisions that would let CIABOC’s Director-General decide whether to refrain from prosecuting accomplices without a magistrate’s authorisation; raise the state shareholding threshold triggering asset-declaration duties from 25 per cent to 50 per cent; remove the duty to declare the assets of cohabitants; give CIABOC discretion to redact declarations and criminalise other uses of them; and make “bail the exception and remand the norm”.

Neither Ada Derana nor Hiru said whether TISL’s petition is among the 14 now being heard together, or whether the court has consolidated the challenges. The Bill was placed on Parliament’s Order Paper on 19 August and would amend the Anti-Corruption Act No. 9 of 2023.

The second constitutional challenge before the court

The bench hearing the Anti-Corruption Bill is separate from the five-judge bench that concluded hearings on the 22nd Amendment on 2 September, with its determination going to the Speaker. Both matters turn on the same question of whether a referendum is required.

Update: hearing adjourned to Friday, and the petition count rises to 15

The court adjourned the further hearing of the petitions until Friday, 4 September, Ada Derana reported later on Thursday.

Counsel for the petitioners made their submissions in open court during the day, arguing that the proposed Bill would curtail both the fundamental rights of the public and the powers of the judiciary, and asking the court to determine that the Bill requires approval at a referendum to be enacted. Those submissions concluded on Thursday, with further submissions scheduled for Friday — the sequence indicating that the state’s response is yet to be heard.

Ada Derana’s later filing puts the number of petitions at 15, where its own earlier report, Hiru News and the Daily Mirror all gave 14. No outlet flagged the change or reported an additional petition being accepted, and the discrepancy is unexplained. The higher figure appears in the later report, which would be consistent with a fifteenth petition being taken up during the day, but neither report says so.

The three judges’ names are also rendered differently across outlets: Ada Derana writes Shiran Guneratne, the Daily Mirror Shiran Goonaratne. This article uses the spelling carried in our earlier reporting.

Not yet reported

Neither outlet named counsel for the petitioners or the state, or reported the Attorney General’s position on the Bill. Under the Constitution the court must deliver its determination on a Bill within three weeks of it being placed on the Order Paper unless the Speaker allows longer; no report has addressed that deadline, and none says how many further days of hearing are expected beyond Friday.

Sources