National Federation Party Counsel Jon Apted says the amendment provisions in the 2013 Constitution was deliberately drafted to shield it from amendments.
Apted highlighted this while supporting the State’s submission in the matter where Cabinet is seeking the Supreme Court’s opinion on the interpretation and application of the amendment provisions of the 2013 Constitution.
He says the Bill to amend the Constitution that was not passed in Parliament and received more than two-third may be presented to the President to assent and thereby amend the constitution so that a two-third majority will be sufficient to amend the constitution without referendum provision.
Apted says as a matter of efficacy test, the 2013 Constitution remains and they submit that the amendment provisions should be found ‘unenforcable’.
He further says the referendum is not desirable for financial and manipulation reasons.
The NFP Counsel says issues like this are divisive in nature and accommodation, as much as they are, are still fragile and things like a referendum that goes out to the public runs the risk of inviting those who wish to cause division to do so.
While responding to a question by Judge Justice Terence Arnold on referendum provisions in the 2013 Constitution, Apted says there is no referendum law and it proves the State’s case that the amendment was not supposed to be done.
