|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
| Wednesday, 31 March 2004 |
 |
|
 |
News | |
| News Business Features Editorial Security Politics World Letters Sports Obituaries
|
by Wasantha Ramanayake The Supreme Court yesterday extended the interim order restraining the proposed launch of the Mahapola Instant Lottery Ticket until the final determination of a Fundamental Rights application filed by the Development Lotteries Board. The Court, sequel to an application by the petitioner the Development Lotteries Board (DLB) also stayed the operation of the Lottery Management Services Agreement entered into between the Mahapola Higher Education Scholarship Trust Fund (MHESTF) and the fourth respondent GTECH Lanka (Private) Ltd., Colombo 10, until the final determination of the application. In terms of the interim order the fourth respondent was restrained from taking any steps in pursuance of the agreement. The Bench comprised Justices Dr. (Mrs.) Shirani Bandaranayake,T.B. Weerasuriya and Nihal Jayasinghe. The Petitioner cited the Mahapola Higher Education Scholarship Trust Fund (MHESTF), Secretary to the Ministry of Commerce and Consumer Affairs and Trustee to the Fund Harsha Wickremasinghe, Trustee to the Fund Saman Ediriweera, GTECH Lanka (Pvt) Ltd., and the Attorney General (AG) as respondents. Counsel Sanjeewa Jayawardane for the petitioner Board submitted that first and fourth respondents MHESTF and GTECH Lanka (Pvt) Ltd. entered into the Lottery Management Services Agreement. In terms of the agreement the fourth respondent GTECH Ltd. had the right to manage the Mahapola Instant Lottery Ticket which was due to be launched on March 23, on of the MHESTF. The counsel argued that the agreement empowering the fourth respondent to conduct the lottery on behalf of the MHESTF was contrary to the law which only permitted the National Lotteries Board and the petitioner DLB to operate through third parties, in violation of the petitioner's rights. He submitted that in terms of the agreement, only four percent of the net income after effecting various payments would used to attain its principal objective i.e. to provide higher educational facilities to youth. The counsel submitted that the fourth respondent's holding company GTECH Corporation had a highly dubious international reputation for operating lotteries in a corrupt manner and the purported agreement had been entered into without the lawful mandate of a properly constituted Board of the first respondent MHESTF and also lacked transparency. The Counsel for the fourth respondent raised the preliminary objection that the first respondent was not a state organ and the DLB could not complain of executive and administrative action that infringed its rights. The counsel counted that in terms of the agreement, a minimum of ten percent would be allocated for higher education. He also submitted that the MHESTF could appoint a third party to conduct a lottery on behalf of the MHESTF. Sanjeewa Jayawardane with Priyanthi Gunaratne and Prasanna Abeysekera instructed by Sudath Perera Associates appeared for the DLB. Avindra Rodrigo appeared for GTECH Lanka (Pvt) Limited. Hearing was fixed for May 12. |
|
News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security
Produced by Lake House |
