Home
| Databases
| WorldLII
| Search
| Feedback
Chuuk State Court |
CHUUK STATE SUPREME COURT
TRIAL DIVISION
Cite case as Chuuk State Supreme Court v Umwech (I), [1996] FMCSC 4; 7 FSM Intrm. 600 (Chk. S. Ct. Tr. 1996)
CHUUK STATE SUPREME COURT and SOUKICHI FRITZ, in his capacity as Chief Justice, Chuuk State Supreme Court,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
MARCELLINO UMWECH, in his capacity as
Governor of Chuuk State,
Defendant.
_________________________________________________
CSSC - CIVIL NO. 113-96
FINDING OF FACT AND CONCLUSION OF LAW
Richard H. Benson
Special Trial Division Justice
Hearing: September 23, 1996
Decided: October 2, 1996
APPEARANCES:
For the Plaintiffs:
Mark Sokkappa, Esq.
P.O. Box 187
Weno, Chuuk FM 96942
For the Defendant:
Wesley Simina, Esq.
Chuuk Attorney General
P.O. Box 189
Weno, Chuuk FM 96942
* * * *
HEADNOTE
Constitutional Law Chuuk - Executive Powers
For the Chuuk Governor to veto a bill he must both disapprove it and return it to the house in the legislature in which it originated
within ten days of it being presented to him. Otherwise it becomes law in like manner as if he had signed it. Chuuk State Supreme Court v. Umwech (I), [1996] FMCSC 4; 7 FSM Intrm. 600, 601 (Chk. S. Ct. Tr. 1996).
* * * *
COURT'S OPINION
RICHARD H. BENSON, Special Trial Division Justice:
This case was heard on September 23, 1996 on the sole issue of whether to grant the plaintiffs declaratory judgment that "Chuuk State Legislature No. 3-19-95 cannot be applied to the plaintiffs." The plaintiffs contend that when Act 3-21 became law, State Law 3-95-19 no longer applied to them.
The testimony received and arguments made were only as to whether Act 3-21 became law. It is uncontested that Act 3-21 was enacted by the Chuuk State Legislature and presented to the Governor for his consideration on July 22, 1996. It is also uncontested that more than ten days remained on July 22 before the legislature would adjourn sine die. Thus the Governor had ten days within which to act. Chk. Const. art. V, § 14(a). The Chuuk Coution pron provides that for the Governor to veto a bill he must both disapprove it and return it to the house in the legislature in which it originated within ten days of it being presented to him. Otherwise it becomes law. Id.
Based on the testimony received and after considering the arguments of counsel, I make the following finding of fact: The Governor did not return Act 3-21 to the legislature with his disapproval and objections within the ten days permitted by the Constitution of the State of Chuuk, article V, section 14(a). Based upon this finding I make the following conclusion of law: Because of the failure set out in the finding of fact, Act 3-21 became law in like manner as if signed by the Governor. Id.
If so advised, the plaintiffs may by motion assert their right to declaratory judgment based on this ruling.
PacLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.paclii.org/fm/cases/FMCSC/1996/4.html