The Supreme Court has ruled that the state budget issue should continue in Parliament even if the Speaker of the Parliament is not removed.
The Supreme Court ruled in the constitutional case filed by the MDP seeking a solution to the impeachment of the Speaker of the Parliament.
The Supreme Court ruled that even if the no-confidence motion against the Speaker of Parliament does not proceed, the work on next year's budget should continue. At the same time, the swearing-in of the President-elect, the issue of approval of ministers, and the duties required by the Constitution and the law must proceed, the ruling said.
According to Article 32 of the Finance Act, the budget for the coming year must be submitted to Parliament before the end of October of the current year. The budget must be passed before the end of November.
However, the budget has not been passed in Parliament to date.
The Supreme Court ruled in the constitutional case filed by the MDP seeking a solution to the impeachment of the Speaker of the Parliament.
The Supreme Court ruled that even if the no-confidence motion against the Speaker of Parliament does not proceed, the work on next year's budget should continue. At the same time, the swearing-in of the President-elect, the issue of approval of ministers, and the duties required by the Constitution and the law must proceed, the ruling said.
According to Article 32 of the Finance Act, the budget for the coming year must be submitted to Parliament before the end of October of the current year. The budget must be passed before the end of November.
However, the budget has not been passed in Parliament to date.
