Thoughts on President Sirisena's Shocking Betrayal

Last month, the Sri Lankan President Maithripala Sirisena sadly began degenerating into a greedy

power hungry politician. This noticeably started on the 26th of October 2018 in his shocking move

where he unconstitutionally sacked Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and appointed former

President Mahinda Rajapaksa as Prime Minister. This was followed by him proroguing Parliament on

the following day. Two weeks later, he made another unconstitutional move on the 9th of November
where he dissolved Parliament and called for general elections to be held in January. The dissolving

of Parliament has been temporarily suspended by the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka whose final

judgement is scheduled to be delivered of the 7th of December. It is very distressing to see the

President brazenly violate the Sri Lankan Constitution and betray everything he stood for. In this

article, I’ll be giving some of my thoughts on the President’s behaviour.

Violating His Own Restrictions

In April 2015, the 19th Amendment to the Constitution of Sri Lanka was passed in Parliament. The

President was one of the key people responsible for the 19th Amendment. Some features of the 19th

Amendment include the restoration of the two-term limit for Presidents and the removal of the

President’s ability to sack a Prime Minister & to dissolve Parliament until the first four and a half
years of its term. Having done the last two actions, he has violated the very restrictions he was
instrumental in bringing about.

Unethical Conduct  

I think this conduct is very unethical as the President purported to remove the man who helped him

win the Presidency and appointed the very man he contested against. In November 2014, Maithripala

Sirisena who was then the Health Minister in the Mahinda Rajapaksa government, crossed over to

the opposition to be the Common Candidate to campaign against his former boss. Defeating

Mahinda Rajapaksa seemed very difficult then and it was achieved on 8th January 2015. The

President even said in 2015 after former President Rajapaksa got nominations to contest in the 2015

general elections that if the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) won, he wouldn’t appoint Mahinda

Rajapaksa as Prime Minister. What President Sirisena did is a betrayal of his mandate of good

governance, accountability, reconciliation, media freedom among other issues. He was elected to

usher in a new era to Sri Lanka and had the potential to be a good President, but he has sadly

reverted to the lowest level of political indecency.

Since the 26th of October, he has been acting in such a disgraceful way. He has been getting

involved in and supporting a very bad form of governance. Incidents include the forceful taking over of

state media by those loyal to Mahinda Rajapaksa, apparent bribery as United National Party (UNP)

MP Palitha Range Bandara claims that he was offered $2.8 million USD to crossover and the

disrupting of Parliamentary proceedings by many United People’s Freedom Alliance (UPFA) MPs. I

don’t believe the appointments to the role of Prime Minister and the Cabinet by President Sirisena

were constitutional, but even if you put aside the constitutionality of his actions, it’s very distressing to

see his reactions following the no-confidence motions passed against Mahinda Rajapaksa and his

purported government. Firstly, it’s him not accepting the first no-confidence motion. He requested the

first clause stating that the appointments were illegal to be removed which was adhered to resulting

in a second no-confidence motion being passed. He again did not accept the second no-confidence

motion. This is disgusting behaviour to request for something, have it granted and then not do what

you promised.

Party Centric Thinking

An issue I had with President Sirisena was that he had been focusing too much on his party the

SLFP which got into conflict with his mandate and his working relationship with Ranil

Wickremesinghe & the UNP. It is my perception that those actions led to this moment. I wish he
had been an Independent President, that is being a President with no party allegiances. I think this

arrangement would have resulted in him accomplishing more, making more sensible decisions and

not reuniting with Mahinda Rajapaksa.  

The Need to Abolish the Executive Presidency

The President’s actions to me are a reason why the Executive Presidency should be abolished. It

shows that the powers of the Sri Lankan President can easily corrupt those who come in with good

intentions. This is despite the fact that President Sirisena himself was responsible for reducing

presidential powers. In fact, founder of the Citizens’ Movement for Good Governance (CIMOGG),

Attorney-at-Law Elmore Perera who contributed in 2016 to my article “Impact of the 19th Amendment

One Year On” said the thought provoking words in my correspondence with him that I didn’t include

there, “It was widely agreed that 35 years of experience had shown that the Executive Presidency

had contributed immensely to several of the ills that plagued the country.”

The Presidential system enables Governments to be formed where the President and the Prime

Minister are from two different parties. This results in the two leaders getting into conflict with one

another, which happened in the relationship between Maithripala Sirisena and Ranil Wickremesinghe

despite the fact that they came together on the same platform. I am in favour of a ceremonial

President which Sri Lanka did have from 1972 to 1978. I think that a ceremonial President would not

get into conflict with the Prime Minister, as the President in this situation wouldn’t be a member of a

political party. I further think that an Executive Prime Minister would have less opportunities to abuse

his or her position than an Executive President.

Conclusion

These are very sad and difficult times for Sri Lanka, which is so disturbing as the cause of these

problems comes from the President elected against the type of governance he has been currently

practicing. I am pleased that the actions of Maithripala Sirisena and Mahinda Rajapaksa seem to be

getting weakened and remain confident that the status quo in Parliament prior to the 26th of October

can be restored. It’s encouraging to see activism against the actions of the President by many Sri

Lankans. This activism gives hope that it can drive our country further once we are out of this mess.