A referendum on the bail provision in the proposed anti-corruption bill

The Supreme Court has ruled that if Article 17 of the proposed Anti-Corruption (Amendment) Bill is to be passed in its current form, it must receive the approval of the people through a referendum, in addition to a special majority in Parliament. This conclusion by the Supreme Court, stating that the relevant article is contrary to the Constitution of Sri Lanka, was officially announced to Parliament by the Speaker last Tuesday (22).

Fifteen special petitions were filed before the Supreme Court challenging the constitutionality of various articles of this Bill, which was presented to introduce several amendments to the Anti-Corruption Act No. 9 of 2023.

Article 17, which was decided to require a referendum under Article 83 in addition to a special majority under Article 84(2) of the Constitution, aims to limit the power of the Magistrate's Court to grant bail for certain bribery and corruption offenses that are assessed by the Director-General of the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption as exceeding the prescribed limit. As a result, due to the Magistrate's lack of power to grant bail, a suspect would have to remain in remand custody and would have to go to the High Court to obtain bail. Even if they go to the High Court, bail can only be obtained in exceptional circumstances.

This decision was delivered by a three-member Supreme Court bench comprising Messrs. Shiran Gunaratne, Mahinda Samayawardena, and Sampath Wijeratne. The bench concluded that the proposed provision obstructs the exercise of the people's judicial power and is therefore contrary to Article 4(c) of the Constitution, which must be read with Article 3. Furthermore, the Supreme Court pointed out that this decision is further affirmed by Article 13(2) of the Constitution, which states that the deprivation of a person's liberty must be subject to effective judicial control in accordance with the law.