• Supreme Court rejects Bureau of Rehabilitation bill
• Sumanthiran slams the government for the ineffective 22nd amendment and calls it an absolute fraud.
President Ranil Wickremesinghe was puzzled at the beginning of the work as regards the fate the 22ndamendment. He was virtually facing a critical situation which way the 22nd amendment to the constitution would swing which envisages the pruning of presidential powers. At the initial stages a sizeable section of the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramunaparliamentary group opposed reinventing the 19th amendment in a different form with some salient features from the now defunct legislation. The 19thamendment created an independent Constitutional Council to oversee vital government appointments and banned dual citizens from entering parliament or holding cabinet portfolios. The 22nd amendment was brought to parliament several of these provisions incorporated in it and therefore faintly resembling the 19th amendment. This was a demand by the people who gave continuing momentum to the Aragalayawhich pushed Gotabaya Rajapakse out of office. All the party leaders at that stage were trying to amend the system which was in place, stressing that a change was necessary to rid the country of the bane of corruption. As a move towards democratising the system, Gotabaya Rajapaksa initiated the 22nd amendment with the help of Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe. Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe backed the reintroduction of the 19th amendment since parliament will enjoy enhanced powers in the administration. After a series of discussions, the government presented the draft legislation titled the 22nd amendment to the constitution. The Supreme Court has cleared the 22nd amendment, subject to several alterations that mayhave come in at the committee stage of the debate in parliament, to pass it with a two-thirds majority but without a referendum. The Supreme Court states that the bill complies with the provisions of Article 82 (1) of the constitution and requires it to be passed by a Special Majority specified in Article 82 (5) of the constitution.
Clause 2 of the bill contains provisions inconsistent with Article 3 read together with Article 4 (b) of the constitution, and as such may be enacted only by the Special Majority specified in Article 82 (5) of the constitution, and upon being approved by the people at a referendum under Article 83.
The need for a referendum, however, will be eliminated if the proposed Articles 41 (a), 41 (a) (6), and 41 (b) (4) in clause 2 are suitably amended to remove the deeming provisions contained therein. Clause 3 of the bill contains provisions inconsistent with Article 3 read together with Article 4 (b) of the constitution and as such may be enacted only by the Special Majority specified in Article 82 (5) of the constitution and upon being approved by the people at a referendum under Article 83. However, the necessity of a referendum shall cease if the proposed Articles 44 (2), 44 (3), 45 (1), 46 (1), 43 (7) (a), 48 (3), and 50 in Clause 3 are suitably amended by deleting the reference to “the president acting on the advice of the prime minister” and replacing it instead with “the president acting in consultation with the prime minister and if the provisions of Articles 47 (2) (a) are restored, and proposed Articles 47 (2) are restored in clause number 3.
Ten parties including the Secretary of the Vinivida Foundation Attorney-At-Law Nagananda Kodithuvakku, Dr Gunadasa Amarasekara, lawyer Nuvan Ballantudawa, Tissa Bandara Ratnayake, HDJ Kulatunga, and BP Dahanayake, have filed petitions challenging the bill. The petitioners claimed some clauses of the bill violate provisions and fundamental human rights guaranteed by the constitution. Therefore, they have requested the Supreme Court to give a decision where if it is necessary to pass the clauses included in the bill, it should be passed by a two-thirds majority vote in parliament plus a referendum. The Supreme Court has given the methodology to make the 22nd amendment to the constitution workable without going before the people. The court has proposed several alterations to make the legislation consistent with the salient clauses of the constitution that deal with sovereignty.
Although it is less effective than the 19th amendment, people believe a lukewarm piece of legislation is better than nothing. The problem lies with SLPP parliamentarians who have opposed legislation that enhances parliamentary power. President Wickremesinghe may not be keen on clipping the powers of the incumbent at a time when he is holding the highest position in the land, but he allowed the process which began with the Argalaya to continue in the best interests of the country.
In these circumstances, it was up to Parliament to arrogate appropriate legislative functions to create the necessary checks and balances in the system. A majority of the SLPP membership at one stage was indulging in blatant divisive politics by clinging to their decision to oppose the enactment of the 22nd amendment.
By opposing the proposed legislation, it will drag the country into a worse situation than before. It may be because several individuals want to use the current situation to achieve their ambitions. The opposition blames Basil Rajapaksa, who is manoeuvring and manipulating his loyalists in the SLPP to create an unpleasant situation in the country with the sinister aim of climbing the political ladder and being a dual citizen. However, democratising the system may enable the country to present its case more effectively to international lenders such as the International Monetary Fund, World Bank, and ADB that Sri Lanka relies on democracy and needs assistance to maintain its economy at a reasonable level to sustain the democratic nature of its government. Parliamentary authorities initially put off the debate since there was unfounded opposition to the legislation and eventually decided to take it up on the 20th of October.
On Wednesday, Prime Minister Dinesh Gunawardene and the leader of the SLPP, Mahinda Rajapaksa, convened a meeting of the SLPP membership to discuss the issue. A section of the membership opposed the move to bring in the 22nd amendment since they voted for the 20th amendment to give more powers to the President, curbed by the 19th amendment during the Yahapalana regime. Some were against the dual citizen provision, which bans dual citizens from entering parliament. Others expressed their reservations about the proviso which gives the president the power to dissolve parliament within two and a half years following the conclusion of a parliamentary election. The matter came up for a brief discussion in parliament on Thursday. Opposition leader Sajith Premadasa said they would support the 22nd amendment despite its failure to fulfil the aspirations of the people as expected. “It is slightly better than the 20th amendment, so we decided to support it despite the shortcomings,” he said. He, however, put forward the condition that the president’s eligibility to dissolve parliament after two and a half years after its elections should remain. The ban on dual citizens should also remain intact without tampering with it at the committee stage. The decision to appoint civil society representatives has changed for the better, and it comes into effect with the concurrence of the prime minister and opposition leader. The Minister of Justice was warned not to try to change these provisions at the committee stage and trigger a chaotic situation.
Although if Basil’s loyalists and others made a concerted effort to prevent the amendment before the vote, the bulk of SLPP members had already decided to support it. The amendment, in Sagara Kariyawasam’s viewpoint, was a bit illogical and ridiculous. It was he who told the President the other day that a majority of the SLPP members would oppose it. However, Sagara was proved wrong. Political analysts believe that the President was aware that the majority would fall in line and remained calm and collected amidst whirlwinds of opposition against him. Wickremesinghe’s dilemma was over since the amendment received a thumping majority. His anxiety at the beginning has fizzled out with the majority towing his line. In the final count, forty-four members from both sides of Parliament were not present for the vote. Prominent among them were former Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa, Minister Prasanna Ranatunga, Sagara Kariyawasam, Rohitha Abeygoonewardene, Pavithra Wanniarchchi, and Johnston Fernanando. The TNA was absent, and G.L. Perlis happened to be overseas. Except for Mahinda Rajapaksa, all other Rajapaksa family members voted in favour of the amendment.
Now the assessment is that the majority of the SLPP members feel that it was a futile attempt to toe the Rajapaksa line in the emerging political scenario, which is marked by a significant watershed in the voting pattern.
The latest reports, however, indicate that Basil Rajapaksa has not given up on his political project. To the chagrin of many, he is now ready to make a comeback. As Chamal Rajapaksa pointed out, he also should renounce his US citizenship if he needs to get involved in local politics.
Although the House approved the 22nd amendment without reservations, TNA Parliamentarian M.A Sumanthiran called it an absolute fraud, expressing his views during the debate. He said people were not expecting what he called “constitutional tinkering.”
He said many members voted for the 17th amendment to the constitution, and the same members voted for the 18th and 19th amendments. The same members voted for the 20th amendment, and today they are ready to vote for the 22nd amendment.
“They are like a pendulum swinging from one end to the other. Every time they say that they made a mistake and voted for the latest amendment, what type of a parliament is this? No wonder if the people are asking to do away with the 225 members.
Tinkering has happened since the 17th amendment. This is not even tinkering. This is an absolute fraud. It doesn’t alter the Presidential power, but it retains all the power as it is. Not only Parliament, but the Supreme Court also swings like a pendulum. In the 19th amendment, they permitted certain amendments without a referendum. The same Supreme Court now says you need a referendum.
The government calls this a first step towards abolishing the Presidency. They have said this since 1994. This is an absolute fraud. “
Besides all this it appears the government has fulfilled the conditions of the International Monetary Fund and taken several steps in that direction. However, this scenario has to a greater extent raised worries among the general public who feel the pressure of taxation on top of the ever-rising cost of living. The governor of the Central Bank, Dr Nandalal Weerasinghe, has also pointed out there is no way out of the crisis other than adhering to the IMF condition of increasing the personal taxes of the people. The new tax regime which the government proposes comes amidst rising disillusion by the people at the lack of initiative on its part to recover money and assets allegedly stolen by the Rajapaksas and for not taking active steps to streamline loss making State Owned Enterprises.
President Ranil Wickremesinghe had this to say about the economic management:
An important step in Sri Lanka’s debt restructuring program took place last week. A team under the Minister of State for Finance participated in the Annual (October 07) meeting of the International Monetary Fund (IMF). In that instance, a meeting was convened by the IMF, with the lending and international private institutions in Sri Lanka. Over 75 persons participated both in person and through zoom technology. The main objective of this meeting was for the three main countries that have granted loans to Sri Lanka, namely Japan, China and India, to come together on a common platform to discuss the future steps in the formulation of concessions.
During this meeting, the IMF and Sri Lanka pointed out the need for a common platform. India and China have informed us that they will examine the issues further and respond accordingly. These two countries have also informed the possible need for bilateral discussions in this regard. Many other countries also participated in this meeting, including the attendance of the Assistant Secretary of the United States Treasury. All this was possible due to the implementation of the decisions taken in consultation with the IMF. There is an aspect of the income of the Government of Sri Lanka which needs to be noted. In 2015, during a visit to Sri Lanka the IMF representatives underlined the need for a surplus in the primary budget. Therefore, it was provided for 2017-2018. However, it was reduced in 2019 due to the Easter Sunday bombings. However, there were no serious repercussions. The IMF was optimistic that Sri Lanka would be able to increase its revenue since there was a surplus in the primary budget. At that juncture, Sri Lanka’s income was between 14.5% – 15% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP). However, it was agreed that Sri Lanka could gradually increase this to 17%-18%. However, in November 2019, the country’s taxes were drastically reduced, with the Government revenue decreasing to 8.5%. In this context, the IMF set aside the agreements and declared that it was unable to provide the agreed assistance. That year the Government lost approximately Rs. 600-700 billion as revenue. Simultaneously, the country had to face the Covid-19 pandemic. These issues are the main factors that led to the collapse of Sri Lanka’s economy. The IMF advised the need for a surplus in Sri Lanka’s primary budget. It was agreed to since the country needs the support of the IMF. It was also decided to increase the country’s income from 8.5% to 14.5% of the GDP.
However, it is a difficult task to accomplish immediately, it is envisaged to achieve this by 2026. Initially, a decision had to be taken on how the income is to be increased. Money was printed due to the decrease in income. During the past two years, Rs. 2300 billion has been printed, resulting in inflation rising to 70% – 75% and even more in respect of food inflation. These increases need to be controlled while securing income. Therefore, during the discussions with the IMF, a new tax system has been proposed. The IMF informed that even the export industries would be required to pay taxes. The IMF pointed out that in countries with an export economy, the related industries were liable for tax. The IMF also upheld that Sri Lanka’s primary export economy is based on the plantation industry. During British rule, taxes were charged from every plantation sector, including tea, coconut and rubber. Therefore, if the country has to move towards that goal, taxes will have to be paid. The export sector has now questioned this aspect and the related concerns are to be submitted to the IMF. The second issue is regarding the personal tax structure. The majority of tax revenue is through indirect taxation. The majority of the country’s citizens, even those below the poverty line, had no choice but to pay indirect taxes. The direct tax revenue is 20% and 80% has been derived from indirect taxes. The IMF which particularly had reservations in this regard were of the view that the amount of tax obtained through direct taxes should exceed 20%. The IMF noted that otherwise this would not be successful and ordinary citizens would need to pay taxes. Therefore, according to this framework, and also to achieve the goals of 2026, the Treasury and the IMF discussed the possibility of limiting the taxation from those who have an income of Rs. 200,000, which, however, did not materialize. Eventually, this resulted in the decision to levy income tax on people earning over 100,000. Today, this has become a vital concern among the citizens. Against this backdrop, without this tax system, the desired goal will not be achieved. The agreed goal is to achieve 14.5% – 15% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) revenue by 2026. If Sri Lanka withdraws from this program, IMF assistance will not be received. Without IMF certification, the support of these international financial institutions such as the World Bank, Asian Development Bank, and the countries that have been supported financially will not be forthcoming. If that happens, the country will be back to the era of queues. Tougher times ahead will have to be faced. Therefore, these loans need to be obtained and embark on a debt-restructuring program. These decisions are not being taken willfully, but are being done reluctantly. However, these decisions will be reconsidered periodically. In the same manner as conducting the debt restructuring program successfully, if a bountiful Maha season is achieved as expected, it will help in reducing economic pressure.
Measures to increase the country’s foreign reserves have also been discussed and once all these steps have been implemented the country can move forward. The country at this juncture is facing a difficult period. Expectedly tough decisions have to be taken during these difficult times. I undertook this challenge when no one else was willing to come forward. Therefore, it is my responsibility to explain the background of the related issues and the Government is also ready to discuss this further if required.
Be that as it may, the Wickremesinghe administration was resorting to unpopular moves every now and then to keep the youth struggle-Argalaya against the rulers at bay. Initially, the Ministry of Law and Order was ill-advised by the police to declare High-Security Zones under the provisions of the Official Secrets Act to which the President put his signature without much thought. The Attorney General said it had gone through sans his approval and the state was in a hurry to withdraw it, but could not do so until the return of President Wickremesinghe from Japan.
The second misdemeanour was the Bureau of Rehabilitation Bill, which was shot down by the Supreme on the premise that the bill as a whole was unconstitutional.
The court said the authorities should remove the words “ex-combatants,” “violent extremist groups,” and “any other” (“a group of persons”) and said it could only be used against drug addicts.
Safeguarding the rights of the people is a paramount task of the judiciary, and in this instance, it has risen to the occasion, making it a victory for the law-abiding citizenry.
