PacLII Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback

Vanuatu Law Reports

You are here:  PacLII >> Databases >> Vanuatu Law Reports >> 1988 >> [1988] VULawRp 17

Database Search | Name Search | Recent Decisions | Noteup | LawCite | Download | Help

Constitution, In re; application by the Speaker of Parliament [1988] VULawRp 17; [1980-1994] Van LR 393 (16 December 1988)

[1980-1994] Van LR 393

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF
THE REPUBLIC OF VANUATU

CIVIL JURISDICTION

Civil Case No. 159 of 1988


IN THE MATTER OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF VANUATU

AND:

IN THE MATTER OF
AN APPLICATION BY THE SPEAKER OF PARLIAMENT OF VANUATU

Coram: Chief Justice Cooke
Mr S. Hakwa for applicant


JUDGMENT

[CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - PRESIDENT - PARLIAMENT]

Today the 19th day of December 1988, Mr Hakwa, Attorney General, Counsel for the Speaker of Parliament applied ex parte to the Court for certain Orders relating to the speech made by the President of the Republic to Parliament on the 16th day of December 1988, when he purported to dissolve Parliament. Before dealing with the matter in issue I am of the opinion it would be in order for me to set out the only powers of the President under the Constitution in view of the purported powers which the President considers he possesses.

They are:-

1. Article 16(4) states:-
2. Article 26 states:-
3. Article 36 states:-
4. Article 37 (3) states:-

From the provisions of the aforementioned Articles it can be seen that the powers of the President are specific and limited. These are the only powers the President possesses. He, the President, cannot assume powers or can he contend he has implied powers in so far as his powers are so clearly set out in the Articles mentioned.

Therefore the action of the President on the 16th day of December 1988, when at the end of his speech to Parliament he purported to dissolve Parliament is illegal and unconstitutional for the following reasons:-

(1) I am informed by Mr Hakwa, Counsel for the Speaker that Parliament did not pass any resolution as required under Article 26(2) and the affidavit of the Speaker filed confirms this; and,
(2) An affidavit has been sworn by the Prime Minister and filed in the Court that the Council of Ministers did not advise dissolution as required under Article 26(3) of the Constitution.
Why the President assumed a power not given to him under the Constitution is difficult to understand. In my opinion it is abundantly clear to anyone from the provisions of the Constitution that the President did not possess the power to dissolve Parliament as he purported to do on the 16th day of December l988.

The Court therefore holds that such purported dissolution to be illegal and unconstitutional and in no way affects the present life of Parliament duly elected by the people of Vanuatu.

It also follows that the further action by the President such as the swearing in of an interim Government following the illegal and unconstitutional dissolution of Parliament is an unlawful act and again in no way affects the life of Parliament.

The first Order which the Speaker seeks is that the purported declaration dissolving Parliament made in Parliament on the 16th day of December by President Sokomanu was and is unconstitutional, unlawful and is invalid and of no effect is therefore granted.

The Second Order applied for is dismissed as it is clear from Article 34(2) of the Constitution that the Court cannot entertain the application being a matter for the Electoral College.


16 December 1988.

FREDERICK G. COOKE
CHIEF JUSTICE



PacLII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback
URL: http://www.paclii.org/vu/cases/VULawRp/1988/17.html