Showing posts with label Constitutional Council. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Constitutional Council. Show all posts

Saturday, 13 July 2024

Displeased with All Sides


I decided to express my views about Sri Lanka’s politics right now. I’m displeased with all sides. I feel that when Gotabaya Rajapaksa came to power, the qualities of all the political parties deteriorated further from its already bad state. This is a serious problem that must be rectified. Sri Lanka needs to be saved from its destructive politics.


I’ll begin with President Ranil Wickremesinghe. I think he’s doing a good job with Sri Lanka’s economic recovery and engagement with the international community. After taking office in July 2022, he was able to end the queues and increase the amount of Sri Lanka’s reserves. The 5 year graph on the Trading Economics website shows reserves increasing from 1.82 billion US dollars in July 2022 to 5.37 billion US dollars in May 2024. In March 2023, Sri Lanka secured an IMF program with the third tranche approved last month. Ranil initiated reforming of State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs) that’s ongoing which is a welcome move due to the drain SOEs have on the country.


The reason why I’m not very enthusiastic about Ranil is because of his politics. I don’t like him teaming up with the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP), the party of the Rajapaksas who consist of most of his government. These are individuals who were part of Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s government. It was not good to see Ranil and his government delaying the local government elections last year which still hasn’t been held. I don’t like Ranil’s handling of human rights issues, including the targeting of protestors. It was distressing to see the controversial Online Safety Bill passed earlier this year.


Ranil acted shamefully in an address to Parliament last November where he accused some members in the Constitutional Council (an independent body) of sabotage. He appointed Deshabandu Tennekoon as the Inspector General of Police (IGP) in February via the Constitutional Council. The current IGP had been ordered by the Supreme Court to pay compensation for violating a person’s fundamental rights a few months prior to his appointment. This appointment was strongly condemned by the Sri Lankan Collective Against Torture (SLCAT).


The Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa stated that this appointment was unconstitutional. Five votes are required to approve a President’s nomination. Sajith pointed out that there were four yes votes, two no votes and two abstentions. The Speaker of Parliament can only have a casting vote when there’s a tie and he voted for this appointment. It seems that the Speaker abused his power by equating the two abstentions as votes against the appointment.


Sajith Premadasa leads the main opposition party the Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB). They are a breakaway party of Ranil’s party the United National Party (UNP). I have not been pleased with the conduct of Sajith Premadasa and the SJB. It’s disappointing to see him embracing populism including plans for it if the SJB comes to power. When he met with the Norwegian Ambassador a few months ago, he spoke of SJB’s plans for a “populist government”. At this year’s SJB May Day rally, Sajith mentioned “populist” as one of the changes an SJB government would make to the IMF agreement.


Sajith has been teaming up with the independent group of the SLPP that eventually became the breakaway party the Freedom People’s Congress (FPC). I did not support Sajith backing Dullas Alahapperuma from that group in the 2022 Parliamentary vote for Sri Lanka’s new President. I provided my views on this in the article “Thoughts on Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s Resignation & Aftermath”. Even though these individuals are no longer officially with the Rajapaksas, I’m not convinced they are against the Rajapaksas now. I wonder if they broke away from the Rajapaksas due to not getting the power they wanted. It’s worth noting that Dullas Alahapperuma attended the book launch of “Nine: The Hidden Story” by Wimal Weerawansa. At this event, Wimal made wild accusations against the US including being responsible for Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s exit from power.


One example of Sajith collaborating with FPC MPs is having Nalaka Godahewa as an economic advisor. Nalaka had previously been an economic advisor to Gotabaya Rajapaksa and a founding member of Viyathmaga. His tenure as Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission of Sri Lanka (SEC) a decade ago was controversial and faced corruption allegations.


The SJB is opposing everything the government is doing for the sake of opposing. My point isn’t to defend the government or to dismiss all criticisms of the SJB. The SJB is correct to speak out against the bad governance that’s going on. The problem I have is their constant opposition to economic recovery initiatives. When it came to the 21st Amendment to reduce presidential powers following Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s exit, they voted for it. I would have liked to see them similarly vote and participate in some of the economic recovery efforts. They were previously with Ranil and can easily find common ground with him on this front. I think it was immature of them refraining from voting in Parliament for the IMF agreement in April last year. This is despite previously calling for IMF assistance.


I’ll now mention issues I have with both Ranil and Sajith. Dr. Nihal Jayawickrema mentioned in his article “The Constitutional Council – Is It Under Threat?” of Ranil stating that the Constitutional Council is an “executive body” and Sajith stating that it’s “part of the legislature”. They are both incorrect as the Constitutional Council is an independent office of seven parliamentarians and three civil society members who approve or reject the President’s nominations to head state institutions. I don’t like the fact that both Ranil and Sajith have a group of SLPP members with them. It seems to me like they’re trying to compete with who has more SLPP parliamentarians. I want to see a government formed with no SLPP members of any faction including under different names like the FPC.


A growing force is the National People’s Power (NPP). The main party in the NPP is the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) led by Anura Kumara Dissanayake. I’m concerned that the NPP will come to power. While the JVP is a legitimate political party now, they were previously responsible for two insurrections. This brings risks of them governing in a brutal, violent and oppressive way. I don’t agree with their communist ideology which I feel could derail Sri Lanka’s economic recovery and make the situation even worse. Sri Lanka already has a bloated public sector and I could see the NPP expanding that.


I wish to see the SJB re-integrated with the UNP and the UNP being headed by neither Ranil nor Sajith. I think this fighting between the SJB and the UNP is not in Sri Lanka’s best interest and could enable the NPP to win at the coming elections. It’s my view that the UNP’s policies are more sensible than the SJB’s, but the UNP has many influential figures who reflect what’s wrong with Sri Lanka’s politics such as Akila Viraj Kariyawasam, Palitha Range Bandara, Wajira Abeywardana, Ravi Karunanayake and Sagala Ratnayaka. A rejuvenated UNP should not have such persons in leadership. One person in the UNP who I think may be suitable to lead the party is Deputy Leader Ruwan Wijewardene.


A re-integration of the two parties could bring the best qualities from them. The economic recovery and reforming of state owned enterprises that the UNP is currently involved in should continue. The SJB is rightly against the bad human rights policies of the government that the UNP is engaging in. Having the two parties together could bring back sensible human rights policies. I want the UNP to take a stand against the Rajapaksas like they used to.


Elections are coming up with a Presidential election later this year followed by a Parliamentary election that’s likely to be held next year. We need to elect a stable government with sound policies who will focus on delivering system change that the protests two years ago were calling for.
Posted by at 1 comment:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Friday, 28 September 2018

Sri Lankan Twitter Showcase: September 2018


On the Internet, people discuss and share happenings of Sri Lanka. One platform where this occurs is on social media. I decided to showcase a collection of tweets about Sri Lanka from the social media website Twitter covering the month of September 2018 in sequential order. If you don’t use Twitter or are unfamiliar with it, you can still read this post. The tweets (a message of 280 characters or less) are featured on this blog post. I selected a group of tweets that I like. Issues covered include politics, economics, pictures and positive occurrences. I’m including positive occurrences as there is usually more talk about the negative occurrences than the positive ones and hearing positive news can make us feel good.

This is a good picture of Matara by Kalani Kumarasinghe. Sorry, but the image embedding doesn't do it justice. I recommend clicking the picture link above to see it properly.


I think this is a good statement from Finance Minister Mangala Samaraweera. What ultimately matters is if the government takes these reforms and how successful they are if carried out. I am of the opinion that Mangala is one of Sri Lanka’s better ministers so that gives some hope.


These statistics show economic growth of Sri Lanka, particularly since the start of the 21st century.

This is a good point made by Dr. Asanga Welikala at his recent Verité Research talk titled “The Presidential Term Limit After The Nineteenth Amendment”.


This is an image of Sri Lanka’s GDP per capita as shared by Daniel Alphonsus who got the figures from English economist Angus Maddison. The reason this is different to the previous Sri Lankan GDP per capita figures that showed GDP decreasing from 1960 to 1978 is because that one was in comparison with the rest of the world. This shows tremendous growth Sri Lanka has undergone and gives hope that as the GDP per capita has gone up in the past, it will go up again in the future to bring benefits to Sri Lanka.


It’s good to see technology being used to work on dengue prevention and control.


These are interesting statistics regarding CIABOC. It’s good that they are getting these complaints. I hope that CIABOC will get more complaints and that it will get more effective in the fight against corruption.


It’s good to see a story of a whale shark being rescued. It’s interesting to note that whale sharks are not harmful to humans.


This is a good example of the Right to Information (RTI) law functioning with all the work on appeals by the RTI Commission.


This is a great photo of Nuwara Eliya taken by Rovin Shanila featured on the Sri Lankan Trends Twitter account.


The Sri Lankan economy functions in a way where the government sets prices for certain goods. As it’s very unfortunate that prices of goods frequently rise, it’s worth noting that there are also some price reductions such as this one.


It’s good to note that Sri Lanka is celebrating Right to Information week this week of writing as recounted by Director General of Government Information, Sudarshana Gunawardana. It's also worth noting that today (28th September) is International Right to Know Day.


This is information of the Amendment to the Penal Code which was passed earlier this year that increased the minimum age of criminal responsibility as reported by the Verité Law Twitter account (part of think tank Verité Research).


M.A. Ratnasiri shares recent contrasting facts alongside the New York Times of Sri Lanka’s paper the Daily News. It’s good to know that the Daily News went online before the internationally acclaimed New York Times.


It’s good to see a beach clean-up effort by the EU in Sri Lanka, UN agency UNOPS and the Government entity Marine Environment Protection Authority.


At the end of last week, two MPs were temporarily suspended from Parliament. I suspect that this is a result of the new Parliamentary Standing Orders adopted in April.


This is from Asoka Obeyesekere (Executive Director of Transparency International Sri Lanka). My suggestions are Priyan Dias, Nishan de Mel and W.A. Wijewardena.

I hope you enjoyed reading my selection of tweets on Sri Lanka. I am on Twitter at https://twitter.com/sumith90 in case anyone is interested. I would enjoy hearing people’s thoughts on any of the issues and happenings featured here.  
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Saturday, 23 July 2016

Impact of the 19th Amendment One Year On

Picture of the Sri Lankan Flag

This post is about the 19th Amendment to the Sri Lankan Constitution which occurred a little over a year ago when it was passed on the 27th of April 2015. Before I mention the 19th Amendment, I will give some background to Sri Lankan Politics of the current decade that relates to it.


In 2010, Sri Lanka’s then President Mahinda Rajapaksa passed the 18th Amendment to the Sri Lankan Constitution which made the President far too powerful and leading Sri Lanka towards dictatorship. The biggest problems of the 18th Amendment were its removal of the two-term limit for Presidents allowing him/her to contest indefinitely and bringing independent commissions under the President. Sri Lanka’s current Government led by President Maithripala Sirisena introduced and passed the 19th Amendment. Its changes include restoring the two-term limit & the power of independent commissions as well as further reducing presidential powers & increasing the power of the Prime Minister.
When Sri Lanka received independence from Britain in 1948, Sri Lanka, then known as Ceylon had a Parliamentary system of Government with the Prime Minister being the Head of Government and the Queen as the Head of State. This changed in 1972 when Sri Lanka became a Republic with the President replacing the Queen as Head of State. The President’s role was a ceremonial one. This changed in 1978 when Prime Minister J.R. Jayewardene introduced a new constitution combining both the Head of Government and the Head of State in an Executive Presidency, which he then assumed. The Prime Minister’s power became significantly less, at times appearing to be a ceremonial role. The role of the Prime Minister since the Executive Presidency in Sri Lanka, especially relating to each of those Prime Ministers is a complicated issue deserving of an article of its own. However, what I am interested in is how the 19th Amendment changed the role of the President and the Prime Minister as well as its impact on the country.


The 19th Amendment was originally intended to abolish the Executive Presidency, but it seemed less likely that it would be carried out after the election of President Maithripala Sirisena. Prior to the 19th Amendment’s passing, there was a report that the 19th Amendment would create a dual executive system. Since the 19th Amendment reduced the powers of the President and increased the powers of the Prime Minister, there is a possibility that the 19th Amendment did in fact result in Sri Lanka having a dual executive system. I hope that this article will give information on this topic via people’s contributions on whether this is the case allowing us to make our own conclusions.


I decided to ask several notable people in Sri Lanka about this to get information on the subject and to present differing perspectives on the same issue. I thought that doing so would allow us to learn about the impact of the 19th Amendment, giving us the ability to think about this issue ourselves. I will be providing quotes from 6 Sri Lankans as well as from the paper “19th Amendment - The Wins, the Losses and the In-betweens” written 1 year ago in June 2015 by Nishan de Mel and Gehan Gunatilleke of Verité Research. The question I asked these 6 Sri Lankans is: "In the year since the 19th Amendment was passed, how do you think it changed the role of the President & Prime Minister and what impact do you think it had on Sri Lanka?"


On the issue of the current roles of the President and Prime Minister, Attorney at law and founder of the Citizens’ Movement for Good Governance (CIMOGG) Elmore Perera says “Without seeking the total abolition of the Executive Presidency, the 19th Amendment sought an arrangement for the coexistence of an Executive President and a Prime Minister. In a welcome display of Judicial Independence, the Supreme Court held that several provisions in the proposed 19th Amendment required the approval of the people at a referendum. Without seeking such approval, all such amendments were dropped and a mere shadow of the original Bill was presented to Parliament.” Economist and former Deputy Governor of the Central Bank of Sri Lanka W.A Wijewardena says on the Presidency, “President is still the Executive President in the interim period and therefore there is no real feeling about the dilution of the powers of the President.” Jehan Perera, Director of the National Peace Council in his thoughts on the President’s role as well as that of the Prime Minister is more positive as he says “Prior to the 19th Amendment, the power of the President was overwhelming in relation to the Prime Minister, which is what prompted R Premadasa to say that when he was Prime Minister he was like a peon. Prior to the 19th Amendment the President had the power to appoint the Cabinet on his own, and also to dissolve Parliament at his will after one year. The 19th Amendment has permitted the President and Prime Minister to work together on a basis of equality. This has been helpful to the sustenance of the coalition Government in which the two main parties are working together.”


Journalist and Media Personality Savithri Rodrigo says on the President’s role that “while the 19th Amendment ensures the elimination of authoritarian dictatorships, there still remains almost a tacit power that the post of President implies. The general citizen is unaware that the President is not 'God' anymore, a sentiment that will take some time to dissipate.” Regarding the joint role of the President and the Prime Minister she adds “However, on the footing of practical governance, there's much more discussion and even a process of 'agreeing to disagree' in governance decisions as was seen in the recent appointment of the Central Bank Governor, which again is a refreshing change.” Dhananath Fernando, Chief Operating Officer of public policy think tank Advocata Institute says “The role of the President and Prime Minister I am not very convinced. But personally I feel at least PM is somewhat responsible for the Parliament compared to previous Government. The composition and the calibre of the Parliament comes secondary regardless of what political flags they host.”
The 19th Amendment did change the relationship between the President and the Prime Minister. Elmore Perera says “One year after the 19th Amendment was passed, one of the few things that is clear is that the President and Prime Minister cannot survive, one without the other.” As the President and Prime Minister come from different political parties with different ideologies A.C. Visvalingam, President of CIMOGG says “The "cooperative(?)" tug-of-war between the President and the PM is also something in the nature of a safety feature.” The Verité Research paper said the following on the President’s and Prime Minister's role in Cabinet appointments: “While the President is constitutionally bound to obtain the advice of the Prime Minister when appointing Cabinet Ministers, he may change the composition of Cabinet portfolios without any advice or consultation. Under Article 43(3), the President is free to make changes to the composition of Cabinet portfolios as he sees fit. For instance, it is possible for the President to remove a Cabinet Minister’s portfolio and reassign that particular portfolio to another Minister without consulting the Prime Minister. The President is, however, bound under Article 46(3)(a) to obtain the advice of the Prime Minister when removing any particular Minister from office.” (Nishan de Mel and Gehan Gunatilleke, “19th Amendment - The Wins, the Losses and the In-betweens”, Verité: 2015)
On positive issues of the 19th Amendment, W.A Wijewardena mentions the following “The independent commissions have been appointed and they have already started to show their colours. For instance, the HR Commission and Police Commission on a number of occasions have shown that they are really independent and stood by people through their action.” and “The leadership in COPE has been given to Opposition with 10 Opposition members as against 7 Government party members.” Jehan Perera says the following on the positive issues “Due to the 19th Amendment's restriction of the power of the Executive, and the setting up of independent commissions to overlook key state institutions, the abuse of power is less, and with it the polarisation in society is less.” A.C. Visvalingam says “There is no question in my mind that the election of President Sirisena, the abandonment of the monstrous provisions of the 18th Amendment, and the passing of a few important articles that constitute the 19th Amendment have given us a goodly quantum of freedom from the fear of terrible reprisals.”


Regarding negative issues of the 19th Amendment, W.A Wijewardena says “The size of the Cabinet has swelled beyond imagination raising costs for the citizens.” A common criticism of this amendment I’ve heard is the issue of the Constitutional Council. Dr. A.C. Visvalingam says “Probably the worst feature of 19A is the composition of the Constitutional Council, which is packed with strong politicians and weak civilians.” Elmore Perera’s thoughts on this issue is “Rather than restoring the independence of the several nominally independent commissions, the stranglehold of the politicians was strengthened by increasing the number of Parliamentarians in the Constitutional Council from 3 to 7, whilst reducing the Civil Society representation from 7 to 3.” It seems that there is a risk of the 7 MPs on the Constitutional Council making politically motivated decisions which could lead to political appointments that are unsuitable.


On the amendment’s impact to the citizens of Sri Lanka, Dhananath Fernando says the “actual impact for the citizens is zero. The priority of the people was not this. It is true the 19th Amendment was a promise under 100 day programme and many more yet the impact is zero for a citizen. It does not mean 19th is a bad move. The real impact could have been made by making the independent commissions more dynamic.” Savithri Rodrigo’s thoughts on the citizen's impact are “the regular citizen is yet to understand, realise and acknowledge the cascading impact the 19th Amendment will have on the country's citizenry, eventually.”
It’s worth noting that the full effects of an amendment like this takes time. Dhananath Fernando says “It was a wise move undoubtably with a long term thinking. The benefits of such amendments cannot be seen over night. But dilution of Executive Powers and establishment of independent commissions are strengthening the individual freedom and it is an assurance for some extent that the rule and law is equal for everyone.” Savithri Rodrigo echoes a similar sentiment saying “One year on is yet too early for any tangible ramifications to permeate to the people, although the very fact that the 19th Amendment was passed with an overwhelming majority in Parliament was surely a relief and a sure sign that the Members of Parliament themselves had had enough of the misuse of power, which lay primarily in the Executive Presidency.” Dr. A.C. Visvalingam says “On the whole, there seems to be an improvement, but we shall have to wait for one or two more years to make a reliable judgment.”
I will give my thoughts on one of the issues discussed so far. Regarding W.A Wijewardena’s comment on the swelling of the Cabinet, I think that this is one of the problems of the 19th Amendment. The 19th Amendment did limit the size of the Cabinet Ministers to 30 and Deputy & State Ministers to 40, but included a clause allowing a larger number of Ministers in case a National Government is formed, which this Government used due to forming one. It’s possible that more Ministers might be needed for a National Government, but I do think there are definitely too many Ministers. It seems to me that this reflects a common weakness among successive Sri Lankan Governments of their wish to have more Ministers than necessary. The 19th Amendment intended to restrict the number of Ministers, but ended up being used to accommodate a larger number of Ministers which is doing the opposite of what it set out to do.


There is one issue that hasn’t been mentioned so far which is the 19th Amendment’s impact on the Right to Information Bill. The 19th Amendment acknowledged the Right to Information as a fundamental right in the constitution, and thus the Right to Information Bill was passed recently in June 2016.

So, we had a variety of views on this subject from people born in a diverse range of decades spanning the 1930s to the 1980s. A special thank you to W.A Wijewardena, Jehan Perera, A.C. Visvalingam, Elmore Perera, Dhananath Fernando, Savithri Rodrigo and to Nishan de Mel & Gehan Gunatilleke who were authors of the Verité Research paper for their contributions. It can be seen that the Prime Minister’s influence has been increased, but it seems to me that it was done without making significant changes to the roles of both the President and the Prime Minister. The 19th Amendment wasn’t the bill it was originally intended to be which included the plan to abolish the Executive Presidency. Admittedly, it has some weaknesses, but even with them this was a significant moment in Sri Lankan Politics as it not only reversed the damage done by the 18th Amendment, but further reduced Presidential Powers. It is a noteworthy achievement as it was the President himself who was campaigning for this bill to be passed.
Posted by at 4 comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)