Will Constitutional Court take on legislative branch again?

Most of the content of the proposed amendment is not unexpected. It includes doing away with appointed senators, allowing relatives of MPs and politicians to be able to run for the upper House, and permitting MPs and members of political parties to run for the Senate even a day after resignation. 

 

What is unexpected, however, is the new proposal to terminate existing appointed senators even before their terms are over – as opposed to the earlier understanding that the current lot of appointed senators would be allowed to serve their full terms.

 

The decision has caused a stir amongst appointed senators.

 

Opponents of the move are |petitioning the Constitutional Court to prevent the third reading from taking place this Saturday and to rule whether such a move is constitutional or not. But for the court to issue a verdict may be a long-term issue now while the more immediate one will be whether the court will issue an injunction halting the third reading, and whether the court has the authority to do so.

 

It appears that while the Constitutional Court has the authority to rule whether an action is constitutional or not, it doesn’t have the authority to issue an injunction, unlike the Administrative Court and Civil Court.

 

What happened last year regarding a move to amend Article 291 of the charter – whose third reading was halted after the court issued a ruling – was in fact an anomaly.

 

 There’s also the question about what authority the court has to interfere with the work of the legislative branch as, constitutionally speaking, charter amendment is under the jurisdiction of Parliament.

 

Sources say this time Parliament will not defer the third reading in order to avoid a confrontation. 

 

The government will use its majority vote in Parliament to push for the amendment this Saturday, even if the Constitutional Court issues an injunction. This also means the majority in Parliament will not heed the charter court’s view whether such an amendment is constitutional or not as well.

 

 The conflict between the judicial and legislative branch is pronounced and the Constitutional Court will also likely insist that their view is binding on all organisations in the Kingdom. Thus, without a doubt, a clash lies ahead.

 

What is unclear at this stage, however, is whether Parliament will dare to present the disputed amended article for royal endorsement. In this case, the burden will fall upon His Majesty, as the King will have to decide whether to endorse it or not.

 

 This is a time when both sides’ nerves will be tested: the majority in Parliament versus the Constitutional Court. 

 

And let us not forget, if the court doesn’t issue an injunction by Saturday to try to prevent Parliament from going through with the third reading, there will be no more opportunity to rule whether amending the particular article of the charter is constitutional or not – because it will be too late.