Why the LG electoral system was hastily changed

by C.A.Chandraprema-August 26, 2017

The drama that took place both within and outside Parliament last week in relation to the amendments brought to the local government elections law highlights more than anything else the profound political crisis faced by the government. In 2012, the local government elections law was changed by the Rajapaksa government in response to the long standing demand that the method of election of people’s representatives should change to enable the people to have an identifiable representative for each ward or constituency and also to ensure a stable administration or government as the case may be. As such the 2012 law provided for local representatives to be elected from the wards on a first past the post basis, and for 30% of the representatives to be elected on the principle of proportional representation.

The representatives on the proportional representation principle, would be selected from among the ‘best losers’ in the wards so that even under the proportional representation quota, emphasis would be given to those who got the most votes in a particular ward. This system would have ensured a stable administration for a party that wins the LG institution. However this system was not liked by the smaller parties like the JVP and the ethnic parties like the SLMC because it gives preponderance to the two main political parties. However until last Thursday, that was the system under which the next LG elections were to be held.

 Last week the government was to take up an amendment to the local government elections law to make some technical corrections in the law as suggested by the Elections Commission. This LG elections law Bill was not meant to change the substance of the new local government elections law that had been introduced in 2012. However, last Friday the government suddenly presented to Parliament 50 new amendments to the amendment to the Local Government elections law to be made at the committee stage. The JVP was completely with the government on the new amendments. These were changes that had never been gazetted in the LG elections amendment Bill. Therefore, no one was able to even challenge the constitutionality of these proposed amendments in the Supreme Court.

 Gerrymandering without the label

 The yahapalana government has been teaching the people of Sri Lanka a lot of new things that no government in the past had ever practiced. It’s only the good governance government who knew how to sack chief justices with just a chit from the presidential secretariat. Now they have taught Sri Lanka how to use parliamentary procedure to gazette one Bill and to pass a completely different Bill by introducing changes at the Committee stage in parliament. The government can prevent proper discussion and even judicial review of the intended reforms by not including the most important parts in the original Bill and keeping it back till the committee stage in parliament! The effect of the amendments to the local government elections law which was passed last Friday has been to stand the local government elections amendments of 2012 on its head. If the purpose of the 2012 amendments was to introduce a new electoral system in place of the proportional representation system, the effect of last Friday’s amendments was to reintroduce the proportional representation system through the back door without any public discussion at all. 

 The JVP was an enthusiastic supporter of the new electoral reforms that were introduced by the government at the committee stage. While the JVP leader was praising the new amendments that were sprung on parliament, Dinesh Gunawardene was saying that it was all very well for the JVP to sing the praises of the new system because they would have been studying the proposals with the government at Temple Trees, but that the Joint Opposition has not seen these new proposals or had the time to study them.  Anura Kumara Dissanayke said in parliament that any electoral system should be a reasonable reflection of the public support for various political movements at the local government, provincial council or parliamentary level. The old proportional representation system consisted of the number of MPs being decided on the basis of proportional representation and the individuals who were to represent the people were decided by the preferential votes they get.

 Dissanayake explained that under the proposed system, each party will get the number of seats they would get in a proportional representation system and who the individual people’s representatives will be is decided on several criteria including whether he wins the ward or is in a list of representatives to be elected. The apportionment of seats will be 60% on constituency/ward basis and 40% on the basis of the proportional representation. Therefore argued Dissanayake, while the positive aspects of the proportional representation system is preserved, the need of the people to have someone to represent them at the electorate level is also addressed and the preference vote is eliminated. Dissanayake contended that a more reasonable electoral system has been prepared by these new proposals that came in through the back door.

 Dinesh Gunawardene said that the 50 new amendments which included a completely different electoral system had been given to the Joint Opposition only on Friday morning. Gunawardene said that the Elections Commissioner had said that he cannot say how this this new system will work in practice. Gunawardene charged that the only critera applied is to see how the government can survive politically. Dullas Alahapperuma asked Minister Faizer Mustapha whether he admits that no SLFP parliamentairans have been informed about these changes that have been made? Mustapha said poker faced, that no SLFP parliamentarian has so far not asked for a clarification! The explanation given by Mustapha indicates the extent of the government’s perfidy in this matter. Wimal Weerawansa pointed out that the original amendment gazetted was 15 pages and the amendments to the Bill also ran to 15 pages. Half of what they want is brought through the Bill and the rest through committee stage amendments to the Bill.



Attempt to head off 1977 style electoral rout

 It is quite clear why the government has now suddenly reversed their earlier decision to hold the LG elections according to the LG elections law of 2012 and brought an amendment to revert to the old proportional representation system (albeit without the preferential vote system). The simple reason is that the government is convinced that they will have to face elections in the next few months and they wanted to stave off a complete 1977 style rout at the LG elections under a system that tilts towards a first past the post system. One of the disadvantages of the first past the post system was that it tends to amplify victory or defeat depending on what the trend is, and it is clear that the government is on a losing streak. Readers will remember that earlier, the government was determined to hold the LG elections on the 2012 hybrid system which places emphasis on getting as many votes as possible in the wards or constituencies.

 The calculation at that stage was that when the SLFP vote is split between MS and MR, the undivided UNP will easily be able to emerge as the largest group by default even in constituencies where the SLFP was traditionally strong. This in fact was the possibility that was dangled in front of the SLFP/UPFA dissidents who were supporting MR. As time went on and things changed, the confidence that a divided SLFP will deliver victory to the UNP has obviously waned. In fact it seems to have come to a situation where members of the government were feeling so insecure that they feared that the anti-government vote may have increased even in traditionally UNP constituencies. Under the first past the post system which was to operate in the various wards of LG institutions, getting just one vote more than the next candidate was enough to get him elected and the feeling that the anti-government candidate may get that extra one vote was increasing.

 There was also the factor that at all future elections the votes of the yahapalana camp will be split among its various constituent parties with the JVP, Mano Ganesan’s party and other allies contesting separately. Thus while the pro-government vote will be fragmented, the anti-government vote would have remained in one solid block with the Joint Opposition. This factor could have led to a complete rout for the government under the hybrid electoral system that had been legislated for with regard to the LG elections. Hence they have now reverted to the old proportional representation system where a party even in defeat will get a respectable number of seats to be able to survive. The JVP too supported the proportional representation system because that is the system that ensured its survival.

 Govt. attempt to dodge elections aborted?

 It is clear that the government had earlier planned to continue till 2019 without holding any election. The LG elections could be put off on technicalities and their intention from the very beginning was to put off the provincial council elections that were to come due in 2017 and 2018 until 2019. From a point of view of political strategy this did make sense though it was not democratic. Since President Maithripala Sirisena obviously wanted to contest again as the presidential candidate, he would have to go to the polls again as an undefeated candidate. If between now and the end of 2019, the LG and PC elections are held and Sirisena’s group gets wiped out at the polls, that would put an end to his hopes of being able to lead the yahapalana coalition again at the next presidential election.

 The next presidential elections have to be held before 9 December 2019. However, due to the revolt within the SLFP Central Committee against the move to extend the terms of the Sabaragamuwa, North Central and Eastern provinces till 2019 through the 20th Amendment, any plans that the government may have had of being able to avoid holding elections till the next presidential elections, evaporated. There is now less than five weeks till the Sabaragamuwa, North Central and Eastern  PCs stand automatically dissolved and the government has run out of options in seeking to avoid holding that election. As we pointed out last week, the government will be looking at an unmitigated electoral disaster if the Sabaragamuwa and NCP elections are held first because the yahapalana coalition lost both these provinces at the presidential and parliamentary elections held in 2015. Furthermore, when an election is held in a restricted area, the likelihood of Joint Opposition activists descending on the two provinces in their numbers was also a distinct possibility.

 Hence the idea now seems to be that it will be less disastrous to hold the LG elections which will be held island-wide and will keep all Joint Oppostion activists busy in their own areas. Furthermore, an islandwide election will enable the UNP to win in areas where they have been traditionally strong so that it will not appear to be a one horse race. However at this stage, anything that the government does is likely to work to their disadvantage. The most important consideration is what impact an islandwide election will have on the political prospects of MS who hopes to contest the presidency again? Whether the next election is restricted to three provinces or whether it is held islandwide, will not really make much of a difference to MS because the likelihood is that he will fare poorly in either case. If he loses badly, that will be the end of his ambitions of being able to continue in the presidency.

 Now with the hasty passing of the LG elections law, and the restoration of the proportional representation system, we seem to be headed towards holding the LG elections first before the PC elections. Either way, elections are on the cards and the SLFP rump led by President Sirisena will have to think fast of a survival strategy if they are to have any hopes of continuing in politics after the next LG poll. The options they are left with may be to contest in alliance with the UNP perhaps under the Swan symbol so that the extent of their defeat could be disguised. In any event, the LG or PC polls whichever comes first will be a make or break event for the yahapalana government and a make or break event for Sirisena’s SLFP as well. If the government loses the next election to the opposition, they will be reduced to a cipher overnight even while remaining in power nominally until the next presidential and parliamentary election.

 Bar Association turns against its own creation    

 Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe made a defiant exit from the UNP and the government. I described this process as one of the government devouring its own backside, and indeed that is what it was. Two key stalwarts of the yahapalana coation gone in as many months, is doing much harm to the UNP. First they got rid of the only Minister who answered the phone and was receptive to the needs of the party backbenchers. Then they got rid of the only UNP minister who had the support of the Buddhist hierarchy. The reasons that led to the sacking of Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe on the basis that he did not direct the AG’s Dept. and the judiciary in such a way as to ensure that the cases against members of the former government were filed and heard as a matter of priority, is bound to be a cluster bomb which carries with it a series of after explosions.

 This is a case of directly interfering in the administration of justice. If a minister in the government directs the AG’s Dept and the judiciary which cases to hear or not to hear and which should be taken up first and which later, there would be no need for a legal profession at all. Those who are in the good books of the government will win their cases and those who are not will lose regardless of the legal defences they may have.  The sacking of Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe is by far the worst interference in the independence of the judiciary that we have seen in our lifetimes. When the yahapalana campaign was gathering steam after 2012, the SL Bar Association tilted towards the UNP. The person who was responsible for bringing about that tilt was Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe who became the President of the Bar Association while being a sitting UNP parliamentarian.

 Rajapakshe was succeeded by Upul Jayasuriya as the SL Bar Association President. When the yahapalana side won, Upul Jayasuriya became the Chairman of the BOI and Rajapakshe became a cabinet minister. Today both of them are out of the government and the Bar Association which complained that the independence of the judiciary was being harmed by the action that the Mahinda Rajapaksa government took to impeach the then Chief Justice Shirani Banadaranayake is now faced with a far graver situation than anything they experienced earlier.  In the case of Bandaranayake, there were embarrassing scandals involving her husband which is why she was quickly restored, given eligibility for a pension and then quickly sent into retirement within minutes rather than hours of being restored to her position. In the case of Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe there are no such black marks against him.

 It was clear by last week that the present powers that be of the SL Bar Association were feeling the heat of the unfolding events. Their decision to pursue Ranjan Ramanayake for making blanket allegations of corruption against both judges and lawyers is a sign that they feel compelled to take some action to control the monster that they themselves brought into the world.

 What Senanayake and Sinniah have proved

 The comments made by Lt. Gen. Mahesh Senanayake and Admiral Travis Sinniah after becoming the Commanders of the Army and Navy respectively, shows the primacy of the political leadership in a country and the virtual irrelevance of the military leadership. The leaders of the armed forces are like water – they take the shape of the glass they are poured into. If there is a tough political leadership, the military leaders become tough. If there is a wishy washy civilian leadership, the military leadership also becomes equally wishy washy. What we have now is a military leadership that is echoing the views expressed by yahapalana ministers. Because the yahapalana government has been arresting armed forces personnel on various allegations, both Senanayake and Sinniah have gone on record saying that even armed forces personnel who do wrong or commit crimes should be punished.

 They have thereby justified the title of my 2012 book "Gota’s War". Perhaps this is the period in which the extent to which the war victory was Gota’s achievement in particular and that of the Rajapaksas in general can be clearly seen. When the Rajapaksas were in power, the Generals were talking tough and the public could be forgiven if some of them thought that it was the Generals and the Admirals who were driving the war effort. The Rajapaksas were willing to fight so the leaders of the armed forces were willing to fight. The Rajapaksas talked tough so the leaders of the armed forces talked tough. However the leaders of the armed forces are unable to do anything independently of the political authority. Just tracing Field Marshall Sarath Fonseka’s own history will illustrate this point.

 Under the J.R.Jayewardene government Sarath Fonseka was fighting. Under Chandrika Kumaratunga he was basically retreating – it was he who prepared the plan to evacuate the Jaffna Peninsula in the face of the LTTE’s unceasing waves offensive in 2000. In effect this was a plan to flee in formation. Under the ceasefire initiated by the Ranil Wickremesinghe government, Fonseka was talking peace with the LTTE with regular meetings with LTTE leaders in the no man’s land between the front lines of the LTTE and the Army. Under Mahinda Rajapaksa he fought and won because the Mahinda Rajapaksa government had the resolve to fight and the will to win. Fonseka would never have won anything if not for the Rajapaksas. Indeed he would never have even become the army commander if not for the Rajapaksas.

 It is indeed one of the great ironies of our times that Fonseka has had to make common cause with those who ridiculed everything that he did when he was Army commander even saying that he was fit only to be the commander of the Salvation Army and that the Army was claiming to be going to Killinochchi while actually going only to Medawachchiya and that any bovine can fight a war. There was a saying that my dear departed friend General Cecil Waidyaratne never tired of repeating – a herd of camels led by a lion will be better than a pack of lions led by a camel. How true!

Posted by Thavam