If there was no provision to dissolve parliament as what you say the SC would have given a ruling against dissolution. There is a provision (sec 33) relied by MY3 to dissolve parliament and at the same time there is another section (70) which states about two thirds in parliament for dissolution. Now you understand, so don't repeatedly keep on saying that there is no provision. So, when the interpretation can take two different directions what do you do????????????????????????????????????????@ranferdi wrote:@soileconomy wrote:No body knows exactly the constitution with the changes.even supreme court who interprets the constitution cannot give a correct ruling at this junction.@ranferdi wrote:@samaritan wrote:SC is to deliver its verdict on 7th December and it is likely that the parliament will be dissolved, b'cos the 19th Amendment consists of ambiguous provisions. In such a situation (constitutional crisis) its prudent to refer the matter to people thro' a general election as sovereignty rests with the people.
But it is very clear that UNP seems to be highly allergic to face a general election but there is no other alternative.
The intended book to be published by the President elaborating on what he had to go through the past nearly 4 years with his so called yahapalanaya partner is to be released in January 2019. The copies of english translation should be circulated among the diplomatic corps and international agencies in order to highlight that there is another side to the story.
If the parliament is dissolved the CSE will react positively.
When constitution doesn't have provisions to declare early elections by president its contradictory to refer to people because the mandate was given to PMs to represent people.
MY3 is playing with fire and being a cunning fox, He says he couldn't work with Ranil and UNF, But he came to power with support of UNF. If he left with iota of decency he should have declared Presidential elections and explained people the situation.constitution
So dissolving the parliament could be the best practical solution
When there is no provision to dissolve parliament early and when it is clearly states the government has mandate upto 5 years and option to Pres to dissolve by 4.5 years what else needs to be cleared.
The real problem lies with strange President who says he don't like pri-minister that is why he dissolved cabinet.
If MY3 has left with iota of decency he should have been resigned and declared presidential elections. Then he has option to tell his side of story and ask for re-election.
The answer is to refer it to the people who are sovereign and who ever forms the govt should correct the anomaly in the 19th A to the constitution. Hope you will now at least try to understand the position.