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, November 30, 2018
Sri Lanka: Chaos in Parliament and Crisis in Polity
Parliamentary and Presidential Elections are Necessary
( November 29, 2018, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) The
sittings in Parliament during the last two weeks have been symptomatic
of a deep crisis in parliamentary democracy, and in the political system
in general. These are undoubtedly leader-made, and not at all
people-made crises. The culpable key leaders can be identified as
Maithripala Sirisena (the President), Ranil Wickremesinghe (dismissed
PM), Mahinda Rajapaksa (former President and newly appointed PM) and
Karu Jayasuriya (the Speaker).
The situation contrasts considerably, for example, to the last two weeks
in France where the ‘Yellow Jacket’ groups broke into the streets,
burnt vehicles and property, and had violent confrontations with the
police over the issue of high petrol prices. Undoubtedly, the situation
in SL Parliament particularly on 16 November was despicable where some
UPFA MPs indulged in violence, while the Speaker came with a police
force like a ‘paramilitary leader’ to conduct a parliamentary session at
his will. All these culprits again do not represent the average
citizensof the country where they goon with their day-to-day activities
peacefully, although deeply worried about the future.
People and their Representatives
In any democratic country, presidential or parliamentary, there can
emerge a considerable gap between the people and their representatives.
The same applies to elected Presidents, as in the case of Sri Lanka.
Although elected by the people, the representatives can get easily
alienated from the people, particularly as the time goes by. In
developed democracies there are several ways of ameliorating the
situation.
In the US, there are midterm elections for both houses to gauge and
rectify the situation. The term of the US President is also for four
years and not five or six. In Australia, the term of the House of
Representatives (HR) is only three years and not four or five. There are
state elections to reflect the intermediary situation and caution any
government. The recently held Victorian state election is one example
where people friendly progressive Labour policies were overwhelmingly
approved, instead of neoliberal trickle down policies of the Liberal
commonwealth government.
Although the term of the House of Representatives in Australia and New
Zealand is three years, there can be elections before, as required.
Another approach to address the people’s grievances is to evolve
bipartisan policies on important matters. After the significant
political change in January 2015 this possibility was abundantly there
in Sri Lanka, but the two parties, the UNP and the SLFP, terribly failed
in this endeavour.
Although called the mother country of all parliaments, some of the above
devices are not available in the United Kingdom unfortunately. UK is
not a proper federal or a devolved system, to gauge people’s thinking
from those elections. The term of the House of Commons is five years
(not four or three) and now quite artificially fixed (since 2011),and
the House of Lords is still a feudal institution. This is one reason why
the issues like Brexit are now terribly deadlocked. Therefore, if Sri
Lanka is going to take inspirations or examples only from the UK, it is
going to be a terrible mistake.
Fixed Term is a Bad Idea
Sri Lanka is a country in democratic transition. Much more important
underlying factor is the economy (its health and prosperity).
Considering the high population, ethnic polarity and political
diversity, political will of the people could easily shift from one side
to the other. In such a context, a fixed term parliament is utterly a
bad idea and could create enormous crisis in the political system as
evident today. You don’t need a fascist or a similar movement to do
that. The structural collapse can easily eventuate such a crisis,while
people remaining passive and uninterested in parliamentary gimmicks.
Let us take some examples. Maithripala Sirisena won the presidential
election in January 2015 with a 51.28% island wide vote. However when
his party,the SLFP, contested the local government elections in February
2018, it was only 12.1%.
At parliamentary elections in August 2015, Ranil Wickremesinghe’s UNP
could obtain 45.66% of votes. However, at the local government
elections, it came down to 29.42%. These are examples of how people’s
choices could shift overtime or from time to time. During these two
elections, August 2015 and February 2018, the JVP votes increased from
4.87% to 5.75%, while the TNA votes decreased from 4.62% to 2.73%.
It is noteworthy that the new party of the SLPP, under MR’s
leadership,could obtain 40.47% of votes at the February 2018 elections.
If the SLFP vote is also counted (12.1%), it might be argued that a
SLPP/SLFP candidate even could win a future presidential election.
However that is not necessarily the way the people make their election
choices. Holding on to power at present, without a clear majority in
Parliament, might disillusion the people of Rajapaksa intentions or
objectives. The best option would be to resign to allow a new temporary
caretaker government.
Mockery of Parliament
Whatever the criticisms one may have on President’s decision to dissolve
parliament because of its apparent arbitrary and partisan character, a
general election might still be the best option for the country given
the above conditions. Even after the much desired change or ‘revolution’
in January 2015, the UNP could not obtain a clear majority in
Parliament in August 2015. They could form a stable government only with
the support of the President and some sections of the SLFP, although
the UNP had implicit conditional support from the TNA (and the SLMC).
There is a long list of events that amounts to the distortion of
‘parliamentary democracy’from the appointment of Ranil Wickremesinghe as
the PM in January 2015 with only 42 MPs, to the recent holding of
Parliamentary sessions without Standing Orders and arbitrarily declaring
‘No Government’ by the Speaker, KaruJayasuirya. The repeated
recognition of the TNA leader as the Leader of the Opposition was
another distortion that the Speaker had previously committed. Another
deviation from democracy was the freezing of elections for local
government and then provincial councils. Both the UNP and the SLFP are
culpable for this distortion.
It is in this series of distortions that the appointment of Mahinda
Rajapaksa as the PM took place on 26 October with only 95 members in
Parliament, hoping that the number would grow. The result has yet been a
badly fractured hung Parliament which might justify the dissolution of
Parliament politically.
Other Distortions
There are other aspects to the distortions in the parliamentary system
emerging from largely the electoral system. The abolition of the ward
system has been a root cause of such distortions, in addition to the
dreadful preferential competitions at elections. Not only that the
so-called representatives have got alienated from the constituencies,
but also have won elections on the strength of money and physical force.
Women were the most disadvantaged. The situation has also created sort
of a class distinction within all political parties between ordinary
party members/supporters and the rich political elite/groups.
While the ordinary members/supporters are marginalized in the nomination
processes, the rich political elite/groups overwhelmingly obtain
nominations again and again. There is no wonder why the age composition
of MPs and leaders in general is quite high across political parties.
The deteriorated educational standards is also a common predicament. No
rational person would argue that there should be legally sanctioned age
or educational limitations for MPs. However, those should come
naturally, if the system is healthy and democratic.
The freezingout of independent candidates is another major predicament
of the present electoral system. If one wants to contest independently,
then he or she has to give nominations in a group (with a higher
financial deposit) which is the very negation of one’s independence. Sri
Lanka in good old days of parliamentary democracy had a good number of
independent MPs who could bring sanity into parliamentary debates and
political party rivalry. Often the Speaker of Parliament was selected
from one of them on a bipartisan basis. This is no longer the case and
the recent Speakers have been behaving strongly in partisan manner.
Role of the Speaker?
The most extreme of this pattern is the behaviour of the present Speaker
purely for political reasons. Let me add an anecdote or two. When I was
in Colombo in August, a ‘leftist’ friend of mine (you can guess),who is
very close to political planning unfortunately now on behalf of the UNP
told me that they intend to put forward Karu Jayasuriya as the next
common candidate and asked my opinion, believing I would still continue
to support such an effort. I disagreed and said,‘if it is a common
candidate, the person should be from a nonpartisan basis and preferably a
woman.’
Therefore it is no wonder why Karu Jayasuriya is behaving in the manner
he does now in Parliament, conducting mock parliamentary sessions and
countering the President in all executive matters. His fervent effort
appears to get the support of the so-called ‘international community’
aka some Western countries, utilizing their misgivings about the newly
appointed Mahinda Rajapaksa as the PM.
It has been my position and understanding, as expressed previously, that
the removal of RW and the appointment of MR are constitutional, and
also conventional even under a nominal Head of State, when a Parliament
falls into a perilous hung situation. However, the MR’s appointment is
politically controversial and not sustainable under the given
composition of the present Parliament. The prorogation of Parliament has
been less controversial constitutionally. I have also given my
interpretation on the dissolution of Parliament, right or wrong, and
this matter is now before the Supreme Court. There is no doubt that when
all three steps or President’s ‘trump cards’ came one after the
other,the people or even the so-called experts got confused and divided.
I am not at all a rebel and has never been in sympathy with any
insurgency (or violence), North or South, even in my young days. My only
deviation could be that I don’t mince my words and often relish in
polemics and sarcasm! I am for orderly progress in both the economy and
democratic politics. I am also not hesitant to change my overt political
or policy positions in advocating progress under given circumstances.
Conclusions
Thedissolution of Parliament is something that the political parties
should have tolerated for the reasons given in this article. As the
matter has been referred to the Supreme Court, the Speaker and the
political parties in Parliament should have waited for its final verdict
without having ridiculous sessions, although it may be true that the
apparent time taken by the SC is too longfor the impatient and
acrimonious politicians to tolerate. The most damaging from a democratic
and a political stability perspective is the mock sessions conducted by
the Speaker in Parliament with the connivance of the UNP, the TNA and
the JVP.
It is hoped that the present instability and chaos should end sooner
than later, and both parliamentary and presidential elections should be
held peacefully one after the other, in that order, to end the
stalemate, although even that might not be a complete resolution to the
underling crisis. WijeyadasaRajapakshe’s speech today in Parliament is
most welcomed. In agreement with all parties, there can be a new
caretaker government, perhaps Lakshman Kiriellaor someone like that as
the temporary PM before the elections.
There is a strong need for independent candidates and voices to emerge
at both elections, with considerable number of women candidates. In
terms of the expression of views, on the present situation, ‘critical,
independent and objective interpretations’ are most essential, without
supporting any of the present leaders