Supreme Court reference by the Opposition and it's hurdles
The Supreme Court reference filed by the Opposition asking the high court to interpret happenings in Parliament on June 5 may face some hurdles despite an expedited approach anticipated by the Opposition.
The Attorney General Pila Niningi has filed motion to set aside court orders issued by a single judge Derek Hartshorn at the Supreme Court earlier this month.
The orders made on July 19, essentially request all procedural matters and the substantive hearing to be heard on August 1st.
This morning the Attorney General's lawyer Dane Mel asked a single Supreme Court Judge Thomas Anis to use his inherent powers and set aside the orders by Justice Harstshorn made on July 19.
They filed a motion to set aside the orders on July 22.
He said in the interest of justice this should be considered and lawyer for the Speaker Robin Kawat has agreed with this request
The essential point raised was that parties would be prejudiced if all the matters including the substantive hearing are heard by the full Supreme Court bench on Augusts 01.
The Attorney General has a pending application to dismiss the reference and the lawyers want that to be dealt with prior to the hearing on the substantive matter.
Opposition's lawyer George Kult has opposed the motion to stay the orders by Justice Hartshorn saying the motion must be properly brought before the court and that previous orders must remain with all hearing be heard on August 01.
He said in the interest of justice this should be considered and lawyer for the Speaker Robin Kawat has agreed with this request
The essential point raised was that parties would be prejudiced if all the matters including the substantive hearing are heard by the full Supreme Court bench on Augusts 01.
The Attorney General has a pending application to dismiss the reference and the lawyers want that to be dealt with prior to the hearing on the substantive matter.
Opposition's lawyer George Kult has opposed the motion to stay the orders by Justice Hartshorn saying the motion must be properly brought before the court and that previous orders must remain with all hearing be heard on August 01.
Justice Anis has considered the arguments saying he understands its a very difficult situation.
He ruled that a full bench should hear the motion by the Attorney General at 9am to Monday 29 July and all parties to file and serve written submissions before or by close of business on the Thursday 25 of July.
This bench should rule whether the dates set by Justice Hartshorn should remain in force or be vacated.
The opposition were initially satisfied with the orders by Justice Hartshorn which ultimately meant they could get a decision on the substantive hearing before Parliament sits again in September- describing the courts approach as an expedited one.
He ruled that a full bench should hear the motion by the Attorney General at 9am to Monday 29 July and all parties to file and serve written submissions before or by close of business on the Thursday 25 of July.
This bench should rule whether the dates set by Justice Hartshorn should remain in force or be vacated.
The opposition were initially satisfied with the orders by Justice Hartshorn which ultimately meant they could get a decision on the substantive hearing before Parliament sits again in September- describing the courts approach as an expedited one.
Earlier the Opposition filed an application to amend the reference and it came before Justice Derek Hartshorn.
He ruled that the Supreme Court rules are silent on whether anyone bringing a reference to court can amend the application after granting of legal standing.
Justice Harshorn said the application to amend the reference should be heard by a full court bench.
Considering this may prolong the hearing of the substantive issues in the reference, the Opposition withdrew the application to amend the reference.
No comments