Justice Muria strikes out major parts of amendment

There was another major blow suffered by the government in court today. Also before Justice Muria was the matter of the Amendment to Supreme Court Judicature Act.  Muria struck out certain parts in which the government tried to ban international arbitration on legal matters even when the respective parties had already agreed to them. Senior Counsel Eamon Courtenay believes that this judgment played an important role in the BCB ruling.

Eamon Courtenay, Attorney

eamon Courtenay

“Mr. Philip Zuniga and other attorneys challenged the amendment to the Supreme Court of Judicature Act dealing with mandatory sentences for contempt and for imprisonment and that type of thing. On that case, Mister Justice Muria struck down certain sections of the act that the government had passed and he said that some parts of it was unconstitutional. I just took a quick look at it—it was over fifty pages long so I didn’t get a chance to read it. But from what I read, if I read it correctly, he struck down that part that gives the government power to issue these injunctions; to restrain international arbitrators from proceeding with international arbitrations. So it seems to me that this second judgment on the constitutional challenge is a very important ones because what Mister Justice Muria he seems to be saying is that even though the judiciary will respect the right of the parliament to pass laws, again like the Barry Bowen case, you cannot pass a law that is contrary to the constitution. So we have to read it and digest it and see exactly where that leads us. The entire reason behind this amendment was misplaced. You can’t have arbitration agreements agreed to go to arbitration then when people are proceeding with arbitration, you then pass a law at home to say I will injunct you to prevent you from doing what we agreed and if you don’t obey it I will send you to prison.”