* Is concealing the establishment of the 13th Amendment and Provincial Councils through the erroneous English text of the Constitution a "Federal Trap" or a "Constitutional Breach"?

* Is concealing the establishment of the 13th Amendment and Provincial Councils through the erroneous English text of the Constitution a "Federal Trap" or a "Constitutional Breach"?

1. Constitutional amendments to increase the tenure and number of judges were presented for the first reading in Parliament by the Minister of Justice on 18.08.2026. 2. An unprecedented social discourse regarding these legal amendments can be observed in society. 3. Several linguistic discrepancies exist between the official text of the 1978 Constitution and its English version. Addressing one such discrepancy—the difference between Article 83(ආ) (Sinhala text) and Article 83(b) (English text)—the Chairman of the Election Commission notified the Secretary to the President on 11.08.2025 to correct it. 4. According to Article 83(ආ) of the Constitution, amending Articles 30(2) and 62(2) (i.e., reducing or increasing the presidential term and the duration of Parliament to less or more than 6 years) requires the approval of the people through a referendum, followed by the certificate of the President under Article 80 of the Constitution. (The English text of the Constitution states that a referendum and presidential certification are required only if Articles 30(2) and 62(2) are amended to exceed over 6 years). 5. Considering the context of Article 83, the discrepancy between the Constitution and its English version has exerted a decisive impact on constitutional amendments. Lawyers submitting facts to court erred by making submissions based on the erroneous English text of Article 83(b) during both the bill stage of the 13th Constitutional Amendment and the 19th Constitutional Amendment introduced in 2015. This amounts to a constitutional fraud, raising a legal situation where the legal doctrine Fraud omnia vitiate - Fraud omnia vitiat (fraud vitiates everything) applies, rendering acts done through fraud null and void. 6. Consequently, the 19th and 13th Constitutional Amendments are activities based on Supreme Court determinations obtained without presenting correct legal sources (constitutional provisions) to the Supreme Court. Whether these constitutional amendments can be considered laws under Article 80 of the Constitution up to now may or may not be determined by the Supreme Court during the 22nd Constitutional Amendment. 7. The serious legal issues arising from these discrepancies between the Constitution and its English version will be resolved through petitions filed in the Supreme Court against the 22nd Constitutional Amendment Bill. Accordingly, the public will also understand whether the 13th Constitutional Amendment and Provincial Councils were established via the erroneous English text of the Constitution, and whether it constitutes a "Federal Trap" and/ or a "Constitutional Breach." Attorney-at-Law Aruna Laksiri Unawatuna B.Sc (Col), PGDC (Col) Coordinator, Dr. Tilaka Padma Subasinghe Memorial Legal Education Programme. * Translation of the article : ඉංග්‍රීසි භාෂාවෙන් ඇති වැරදි ආණ්ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථා පිටපතෙන් 13 සහ පළාත් සභා පිහිටුවා ඇති බව 22 සංශෝධනයේදී යටපත් කිරීම ෆෙඩරල් උගුලක්ද/ ආණ්ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථාව බිඳ දැමීමක්ද? https://neethiyalk.blogspot.com/2026/08/13-22.html?m=1