Video: No third term for Rajapaksa – It’s clear as cutting a piece of cake

MONDAY, 01 SEPTEMBER 2014
There are no provisions legally for President Mahinda Rajapaksa to contest a presidential election for the third time says the Member of the Central Committee of the JVP Attorney at Law Sunil Watagala.

Responding to a question posed by a journalist at a media conference held yesterday (31st) Mr. Sunil Watagala said, “There is a debate going on in the legal sector at present. The government is scared of this debate. There is an interpretation ordinance act in Sri Lanka. According to this Act no laws can be made that would influence the past. The 18th amendment constricted democracy and cast away law and order in the country. When bringing in this amendment an important thing was forgotten to be included. The President took oaths according to the 17th amendment. As such, he could be in his position as President only a second time according to clause 31.2 of the Constitution. It is very clear like cutting a piece of cake that the incumbent president cannot contest the presidential election a third time.

If not the interpretation ordinance act has to be torn apart. There were instances when the interpretation ordinance act was notoriously used to wriggle through the law. This Act was used to bring casino act by deleting ‘casino’ and inserting ‘associated facilities’ instead. However, the interpretation ordinance act clearly states no laws can be made that would influence the past. As such, there is a drastic conflict between this Act and the 18th amendment. It is the interpretation ordinance that would come out victorious. It has created a turbulent in the legal sector.

According to the existing law the incumbent president cannot contest for the third time. People in UPFA expecting Mr. Mahinda Rajapaksa to contest a third time is a serious error. Hence, we tell the people in the country to be alert. The government is attempting to continue its path of constricting democracy, casting away law and order and act against the Constitution. As the existing law is very clear a referendum cannot be held. The Constitution states a referendum cannot be held for such a legal matter.”