Constitutional court upholds omnibus licensing law as necessary for public safety and public interest under Article 25.

[*123] 1961 December 8

(FORSTHOFF, P., TRIANTAFYLLIDES and MUNIR, JJ.)

(November 17, December 8, 1961)

IN THE MATTER OF ARTICLE 144 OF THE CONSTITUTION,

AND

IN THE MATTER OF A REFERENCE BY THE DISTRICT COURT OF NICOSIA, IN CRIMINAL CASE No. 8788/61, NICOSIA POLICE and CHRISTOS CONSTANTINOU OF KAIMAKLI.

(Case No. 116/61)

Municipal Motor Omnibuses Law, Cap. 242 — Section 3 not unconstitutional as being contrary to Art. 25 — Licensing necessary for the “public safety” and “in the public interest”.

At the hearing of criminal proceedings instituted before the District Court of Nicosia, by the Nicosia Police, against a certain Christos Constantinou of Kaimakli, for allegedly plying for hire a motor omnibus within the municipal limits of Nicosia, contrary to sections 3 and 9 of the Municipal Motor Omnibuses Law, Cap. 242, counsel for the accused raised a question of alleged unconstitutionality of section 3 of Cap. 242 which, in accordance with the provisions of Art. 144 of the Constitution, was referred to this Court, as follows:-

“Whether, having regard to Article 25 of the Constitution, section 3 of the Municipal Motor Omnibuses Law, Cap. 242, is wholly, or partially unconstitutional”.

Held : The provisions of section 3 of the Municipal Motor Omnibuses Law, Cap. 242, were not contrary to, or inconsistent with, Art. 25, as the licensing of “omnibuses” within the municipal limits of towns was necessary in the interests of “the public safety” and “in the public interest”.

L. Clerides for the Applicant.

P. N. Paschalis, Counsel of the Republic, for the Republic.

Cur. adv. vult.

December, 8. The Decision of the Court was read by:

FORSTHOFF, P. : The Court declares—

The provisions of section 3 of the Municipal Motor Omnibuses Law, CAP 242, are not unconstitutional as being contrary to, or inconsistent with, Article 25.

This is a reference from the District Court of Nicosia dated the 22nd August, 1961, and made under the provisions of paragraph 1 of Article 144 of the Constitution during the [*124] hearing of criminal case No.8788/61. It was received in the Registry of this Court on the 5th October, 1961, and was heard on the 17th November, 1961.

The question, as reserved for the

decision of this Court, is as follows :-

“Whether having regard to Article 25 of the Constitution s. 3 of the Municipal Motor Omnibus Law Cap.242 is wholly or partially unconstitutional”.

Section 3 of the Municipal Motor Omnibuses Law, CAP 242, provides that no omnibus, as defined in section 2 of that Law (other than omnibuses the property of the Government), shall ply for hire within any municipal limits unless the owner thereof shall have obtained a licence for such omnibus so to do from the municipal council concerned.

Paragraph 2 of Article 25 provides that the exercise of the right safeguarded by paragraph 1 thereof may be made subject to such formalities, conditions or restrictions as are prescribed by law and are, inter alia, “necessary only in the interests of….the public safety….or in the public interest”.

The Court is of the opinion that the licensing of “omnibuses”, as defined in section 2 of CAP 242, within the municipal limits of towns is necessary in the interets of “the public safety” as well as “in the public interest” generally. The “public safety” and the “public interest” generally might well suffer if, having regard to the present day traffic problems, adequate control through such licensing could not be exercised in modern towns and cities.

The Court is, therefore, of the opinion that the provisions of section 3 of CAP 242 are not contrary to, or inconsistent with, Article 25 of the Constitution.

If, in the exercise of the powers vested in it by section 3 of CAP 242, a municipal council acts contrary to any of the provisions of the Constitution or of any law, or in excess or in abuse of such powers, it is open for any person adversely and directly affected by such act to have a recourse to this Court under Article 146 of the Constitution in respect thereof.