A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
(Full Story)
Search This Blog
Back to 500BC.
==========================
Thiranjala Weerasinghe sj.- One Island Two Nations
?????????????????????????????????????????????????Friday, July 28, 2017
Government’s new strong-arm approach
In view of the
CPC strike the army and the STF were deployed at the Kolonnawa and the
Muthurajawela oil storage facilities on Wednesday. Many persons armed
with clubs etc were seen threatening and attacking the strikers at
Kolonnawa. (File photo)
By C. A. Chandraprema-July 27, 2017, 9:51 pm
Last
Wednesday, for the first time in living memory, the military was
deployed to distribute fuel in the wake of the Ceylon Petroleum
Corporation strike. My generation has seen many things in our lifetimes,
civil war, terrorism, suicide bombings, World War II scale military
debacles, piles of dead bodies – the whole works, and we thought we had
seen it all and that in the interval between now and our death, we would
not see anything that we had not seen earlier and that life would be at
the very worst, seeing a repetition of what we had seen earlier. But
the present government has proved us wrong. They have shown us many
things that we never thought we would see in our lifetimes. A Chief
Justice sacked with just a chit from the Presidential secretariat, the
majority group in parliament which votes against the budget and holds
separate political rallies, denied the leadership of the opposition on
the basis that they are a part of one of the governing parties and other
strange and new things.
It was also the first time that we had seen the military deployed to
distribute fuel in the wake of a strike. We had seen the military
deployed to run the passenger transport on the roads in the wake of the
forced CTB strike that the JVP induced in 1989. But that was not a
strike by legitimate trade unions, but a strike that was enforced by
terrorists at the point of a gun. What we saw on Wednesday was however
normal trade union action. This is not to say that trade unions cannot
be unreasonable. We have seen some very unreasonable strikes in the
past. During the Chandrika Kumaratunga government, there was a month
long postal strike demanding the removal of the head of the Department.
During the Rajapaksa government we have seen strikes by midwives in
opposition to nurses and vice versa. Then there was that strike by
university teachers in 2012 demanding that 6% of the GDP be allocated to
education.
So there has been no shortage of unreasonable trade union action.
However, the CPC strike last Tuesday was based on three demands – not
leasing the Trincomalee oil tank farm to India, handing over the
Hambantota bunkering facility to the CPC and the modernisation of the
Sapugaskanda refinery. None of these were based on parochial interests
which often motivate trade unions. For example, even though the 2012
university teacher’s strike was sold to the public as a demand for more
money to be allocated for education, the actual reason why the
university teachers engaged in the strike was to win more personal perks
which included an allowance to educate children of university teachers
in private schools. However there were no such hidden demands in the CPC
strike last Tuesday.
It was all over a matter of policy. The CPC in particular has been
watching bits and pieces of their institution being sold off over the
years. The lubricants division was sold off to a private company. Some
of the filling stations were sold off to the Indian Oil Company. One of
their demands was that the Hambantota port bunkering facility be handed
over to the CPC – which given the potential it has, was a reasonable
demand especially view of the fact that the CPC has been depleted of
income earning assets over the years especially under the previous UNP
government of 2001-2004. The way the government met the CPC strike was
to send the military in to forcibly enter the CPC premises and to take
over the distributive functions. Striking workers were arrested by the
police and bundled into trucks to be taken away to the hoosegow.
They were granted police bail later in the night but the arrested
workers had complained to visiting opposition parliamentarians that they
had been assaulted by the police and by pro-government thugs as well.
There is, in fact, video footage and newspaper pictures of thugs armed
with clubs chasing after workers. This strong arm approach to strikes
does not come in isolation. At the same cabinet meeting that decided to
approve the 99 year lease of the Hambantota port, the other important
decision that was made was that all Provincial Council elections will be
held on the same day. For all practical purposes, that will be a way of
heading off the elections to the three PC elections in the NCP,
Sabaragamuwa and the East which will stand automatically dissolved in
early October this year. If these elections were held and the government
either lost or came close to losing, that would have sealed their fate.
A defeat at any election at any level – whether local government,
provincial or national will effectively end the government’s ability to
govern.
The fact that Cabinet has taken a decision that all PC elections will be
held on the same day does not necessarily mean that the elections will
be postponed. A cabinet decision cannot postpone a PC election – the
Constitution itself will have to be changed for that. Article 154E of
the Constitution states: "A Provincial Council shall, unless sooner
dissolved, continue for a period of five years from the date appointed
for its first meeting and the expiration of the said period of five
years shall operate as a dissolution of the Council." According to this
provision, the Sabaragamuwa, North Central and eastern PCs will cease to
exist after early October. Unless the Constitution is changed, there is
no way that the terms of the existing councils in those three provinces
can be extended.
The government has a two-thirds majority in Parliament so they can amend
the Constitution. However, the sticking point is that if they try to
Amend Article 154E of the constitution so as to extend the original term
for which the PC was elected, there is the possibility that the Supreme
Court may interpret it as an infringement of Article 3 of the
Constitution, which speaks of the franchise. Article 3 is an entrenched
provision on our constitution which cannot be amended without a
referendum in addition to the two thirds majority in parliament. Any
move that impinges in any way with the right to vote is interpreted as
an infringement of Article 3 and hence necessitating a referendum. This
is also why the government has not been able to abolish the executive
presidency. Turning the elected president into a non-elected president
will be interpreted as a impinging on Article 3 and therefore needing a
referendum.
If not for this Article 3, which keeps popping up in the most
inconvenient fashion, any provision relating to the president in the
constitution can be amended with only a two thirds majority in
parliament because none of those provisions are entrenched. Now, if the
government in its eagerness to put off the impending provincial council
elections seeks an interpretation from the Supreme Court that such
postponement does not impinge on the franchise, that may have a knock on
effect on the provisions relating to the executive presidency as well
and place President Sirisena’s job in jeopardy.
According to Section 10 of the Provincial Councils Elections Act, No. 2
of 1988, once the dissolution of a provincial council takes place under
Article 154E of the Constitution, the provincial Councils elections law
kicks in and within a week of such dissolution, the Commissioner shall
publish a notice of his intention to hold an election to such Council
and call for nominations. After the nominations proceedings are over,
according to Sections 20 and 22 of the Provincial Councils Elections
Act, the district returning officers will fix the date of the poll. One
way for the government to postpone holding the PC elections would be to
suitably amend the provisions of the PC Elections Act instead of the
constitution. The need of the government is avoid holding an election,
not to extend the terms of the existing PCs.
The only way to extend the term of a PC is to amend the Constitution but
by fiddling about a little with the PC elections law No 2 of 1988, it
will be possible to postpone holding elections to a council that has
been dissolved. This in fact seems to be the likelier scenario. Thus we
may be in for a period when PCs stand dissolved when their five years is
up in accordance with the constitution, and then there will be no
provincial councils in those three provinces, just as there are no local
government institutions. In fact, the government does have an excuse
for putting off elections to the PCs, too, because they are planning to
bring in a new Constitution, and can claim that it will make more sense
to hold elections to the PCs once the constitutional reforms are in
place. Thus, we will become the only nation on earth to have good
governance without elections.