In India, the statute is published only once in a government notification called "The Gazette of India" published by the Directorate of Printing, Department of Publication under the Ministry of Urban Development.
Once the Supreme Court or the High Court declares a specific provision of a statute as invalid, the section becomes operationally invalid thereinafter. The Parliament is not required to specifically repeal it through a motion or make a publication to this effect. The courts would consider that provision as no longer effective and would abstain from applying it to cases before it.
In Indiana (US) and the US Supreme court:
The Supreme Court of Indiana has said that if a statute is unconstitutional it "is no law, and cannot be used to give appellee a right of action against appellant." And again, in passing upon an amendment to a statute which was held to be unconstitutional, the court said in Carr v. State,3 "An act which violates the Constitution has no power and can, of course, neither build up or tear down. It can neither create new rights nor destroy existing ones. It is an empty legislative declaration without force or vitality."
In accordance with the views expressed above it is held in Indiana that a repealing act which is unconstitutional can have no effect upon the statute sought to be repealed and the previous statute remains the law as though the legislature had not made any attempt to change it.
Does this position of the law apply in Tanzania?
Once the Supreme Court or the High Court declares a specific provision of a statute as invalid, the section becomes operationally invalid thereinafter. The Parliament is not required to specifically repeal it through a motion or make a publication to this effect. The courts would consider that provision as no longer effective and would abstain from applying it to cases before it.
In Indiana (US) and the US Supreme court:
The Supreme Court of Indiana has said that if a statute is unconstitutional it "is no law, and cannot be used to give appellee a right of action against appellant." And again, in passing upon an amendment to a statute which was held to be unconstitutional, the court said in Carr v. State,3 "An act which violates the Constitution has no power and can, of course, neither build up or tear down. It can neither create new rights nor destroy existing ones. It is an empty legislative declaration without force or vitality."
In accordance with the views expressed above it is held in Indiana that a repealing act which is unconstitutional can have no effect upon the statute sought to be repealed and the previous statute remains the law as though the legislature had not made any attempt to change it.
Does this position of the law apply in Tanzania?
