2
I have in my speech on the Second Reading of this bill
explained that we had asked for the amendment to Clause 24 although it has been explained to the Ad Hoc Group on two
occasions that the original Clause 24 is a codification of what
is inherently necessary to a colonial legislature and that the
courts are extremely unlikely to question whether the
President, Council or officers of the Council have exercised
such powers lawfully.
It is
This amendment will achieve the objective of
subjecting the exercise of the Legislative Council's house keeping and investigatory powers to the courts scrutiny. also the overriding clause under which the "usage and practice"
and the "resolution of the Council" under Clause 15 must
operate.
une
une of the comments made by the Bar Association and
the Law Society was that the combined effect of clauses 15 and 24 resulted in an ambiguity.
It was said that clause 24, which ousts the
jurisdiction of the courts where this Council has exercised its
powers "lawfully", gave rise to ambiguity as to the powers given to the Council to decide on matters of privilege under
Clause 15.
In fact, a careful reading of both clauses reveals no ambiguity and no inherent inconsistency. Clause 15 is concerned with rights relating to matters of evidence. The intention of this clause is to enable unusual questions, if no specific provision has been made which offers a solution, to be
resolved by looking at the usage and practice of this Council
both before and after the enactment of the Bill.