Court to deliver judgement on JR claim and strike out application
BY MELVILLE TITIULU
The High Court yesterday heard submissions into the opposition coalition’s Judicial Review claim and the strike out application filed by the Attorney General.
The Chief Justice, Sir Albert Palmer will deliver his judgement on the consolidated matters (JR and strike out application) on Monday, April 13, at 2 pm.
Claimants told the court that the issues to consider are whether or not the Governor General (GG) has the power to convene parliament. Namely; the express, implied and reserved powers of the GG.
Chief Justice Sir Albert Palmer asked claimant’s counsel, Mr Gabriel Suri as to who has the power to determine the date to convene parliament.
Counsel Suri said it is the Governor General who has power but denied that power to determine the date and time for convening of parliament.
He also said that the Governor General said the power is vested in the Prime Minister and Government.
That same question was put to the Attorney General Mr John Muria, by the Chief Justice, to which Mr Muria answered by stating that the power to convene parliament is vested with the Prime Minister.
Mr Suri however, submits that the Governor General was wrongfully advised by the Prime Minister and that the GG had not correctly performed his duty according to the law, hence, the JR is to correct that error of law.
The claimants submitted that the Prime Minister himself is not focusing his mind in convening parliament and that what the Prime Minister did was to set up a “political blockage’’.
Mr Suri made it clear that they are not asking the court to decide on the numerical strength but that they are in court to clear that blockade.
He further said that the MONC is a constitutional business and not a government business. However, a meeting cannot convene as the MONC was against the PM. Thus, creates an undesirable situation which affects the functions of parliament and government machinery.
Claimant’s Counsel Mr John Taupongi weighed in on this by stating that if the government machinery functions properly then why do we have other ministers acting or supervising two ministries.
“That’s not normal’’, he told the court.
As for the strike out application, AG Mr John Muria submitted that the pleadings of the JR claim fall into question and that the claimants’ arguments gave rise for grounds to strike out and that the proceedings is an abuse of the courts process.
Therefore, Mr Muria was of the view that no cure can relief these errors that are contained in the claimants’ pleadings based on non-justiciable questions, and thus invokes the jurisdiction of the court.
The AG also raised the issue of (locus standi) that the claimants lack sufficient interest and therefore the claim should be striked out for being non-justiciable and ‘prematurely speculative’.
In response, Mr Suri submitted that the cardinal principal for strike out only concerns the plain and obvious cases, whereas in the present case, real issues are raised for determination.
He further said that this case concerns ‘constitutional legal arguments’; hence, the court needs to hear them other than striking it out.
The claimants include Opposition Leader Matthew Wale, PFP Wing Leader Fredrick Kologeto, Independent Members Leader Manasseh Maelanga, and six political parties forming the new majority coalition of 28 MPs.
The claimants will be represented by counsels, Gabriel Suri, John Taupongi, James Ronnie Kaboke and Francis Waleanisia.
Respondents are the Governor-General, the Prime Minister, the Speaker of Parliament, and the Attorney General.
The Attorney General with his legal team represent the respondents.
For feedback, contact: [email protected]
Editor: [email protected]
