President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s interview with Bloomberg news last week was cathartic. He admitted he is a failed President, that the country should have gone to the International Monetary Fund six months to one year earlier and the difficulties of trying to survive in a crony political culture.
The President has become notorious for admitting failure. It was not that long ago that he confessed to the nation about his agriculture folly. His phenomenal error last year to ban the use of synthetic fertiliser and agro chemicals boomeranged spectacularly on the country’s once thriving agriculture sector, threw the tea industry into disarray, skewered the economy and turned the lives of 22 million people upside down.
Gotabaya Rajapaksa however soldiers on, devoid of remorse and the predicament of a hapless nation which has become his experimental guineapigs. Rather than take accountability the President’s salvation has been self- appeasement. He told Bloomberg that he will see his tenure out. ‘I have been given a mandate of five years and I will not contest after that’.
‘The President can resign’, explains President’s Counsel Jayampathy Wickramaratne. ‘There can be a stop gap president and this can even be someone who can be brought in from outside on the national list’. A new president can complete the remaining presidential tenure.
During the Bloomberg interview the President did a volte face on the executive presidency reiterating the position which he has held on it all along. ‘What is this executive (powers) of the president’? he questioned. My personal opinion is that if you have a presidency he must have full powers. Otherwise abolish the executive presidency and go for a full Westminster style parliament’.
President Gotabaya’s position on the executive presidency is no different to what it was when he was driven to bring in the 20th amendment except that soon after the incidents of the 9th of May, a beleaguered President who was cornered and desperate for survival pledged to abolish it. After a meeting with Ranil Wickremesinghe two days after the violence of the 9th, the President said he is ready to abolish the executive presidency after there is stability in the country. He also said he will empower parliament by bringing back the 19th amendment.
‘The aragalaya put a lot of pressure on the President’, points out Mr. Wickramaratne. ‘It led to the resignation of Mahinda Rajapaksa and it appeared there will be some change in line with what the people want. But Ranil Wickremesinghe came and took the job of Prime Minister without any conditions, not even that which reflects the demands of the people. He is alone in parliament and a prime minister in a Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) government. He gave the President some breathing space which he used to consolidate himself. People who were in hiding have been able to come out and protestors are being arrested’.
It also emboldened the President to renege on his word to strengthen parliament.
‘It is clear from the interview with Bloomberg that the President is no longer committed to abolishing the executive presidency’, says Mr. Wickramaratne.
Sri Lanka’s economic and political fate are indelibly tied to each other despite attempts by the government to divorce the two. A while back SLPP general -secretary Sagara Kariyawasam pushed Prime Minister Wickremesinghe to resolve the economic crisis before the political one. He had the 21st amendment in mind when he made this comment.
‘We need international assistance from multilateral agencies and individual countries who are not going to going to throw in money if there isn’t going to be political change. The SLPP is oblivious to reality’.
The effect of the executive presidency on Sri Lanka has been diabolical. According to Mr. Wickramaratne it’s a case of one person taking decisions as opposed to a collective discussion through a parliamentary process. ‘Take the bans on glyphosate, synthetic fertiliser and even the one country, one law task force. All have been the result of executive decisions. The prime minister and government can be defeated at any time but not the executive president’.
The 21st amendment meanwhile is in abeyance. ‘It appears the government is still unable to make up its collective mind. We need a strong 21st A and it needs political will’, elaborates Mr. Wickremaratne.
Although the draft of the 21st A was to be presented to the Cabinet of Ministers at the start of last week it was not, possibly in view of the pending resignation of Basil Rajapakse from government. A significant provision in the draft of the 21st A is the one on dual nationality which the former finance minister and his camp in parliament opposed because it struck a close chord with his own status as a Sri Lankan /American national and presenting the Bill in parliament would have led to further divisions in the SLPP. In any event, the 21st A can give succour to Basil Rajapaksa either way. If it is defeated the 20th amendment will prevail and it will allow him to return to parliament. At a press conference to announce his resignation Basil Rajapaksa stressed that he is leaving the government but not politics, an indication that he is likely to continue to be a thorn in the side of a future government. If the Bill succeeds and Basil Rajapaksa had to resign it would have given him a legitimate reason to quit in humiliation. But now with a proactive resignation he has saved himself the humiliation of being kicked out of parliament. With Basil Rajapaksa out of the way there is room for the Bill to be presented in parliament and for it to go through the motions including potential challenges to it in the Supreme Court. While the Bill will require a two thirds majority for it to pass in parliament the question of whether or not it requires a referendum too will have to be determined by the Supreme Court.
Rumour is rife that the departure of Basil Rajapkse from the government will pave the way for business moghul Dhammika Perera to enter the spotlight. Perera, one of the richest men in Sri Lanka whose net worth is reportedly USD 4. 56 bn, is a Rajapaksa and Wickremesinghe crony whose business empire spans a spectrum of industries including financé and tourism. The gazetting of Perera’s membership in the SLPP parallel with the creation of a ministry of New Technology and Investment Promotion has fuelled speculation of an imminent swearing in of him as a cabinet minister. But already there is growing opposition to him joining the government because of allegations of billions in unpaid taxes and his role in bringing container loads of waste to the country from Britain, which he has denied. Yesterday there was a protest opposite his residence near the Colombo Museum. More crucially is the conflict of business interests with those of his functions as a legislator.
Raising its concerns about Perera’s potential entry into government the Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) said that according to media reports Dhammika Perera was not a member of the SLPP until a few days ago and that in any event his name was not included in the list of persons qualified to be elected as Members of Parliament, in terms of Article 99A of the Constitution (the “National List”) or any of the district lists submitted by the SLPP for the Parliamentary Election held in August 2020. ‘Dhammika Perera has business interests in several public and private limited companies covering several important sectors in the economy. Decisions made by Mr. Perera as a legislator, and possibly as a future Minister, would have a significant and direct impact on these companies and sectors, which creates a direct conflict of interest. These conflicts of interest are not resolved simply by Mr. Perera resigning from official positions held within the companies as he would nonetheless stand to gain significant financial benefits. These circumstances make it all the more important why the citizens of Sri Lanka should have known of the potential of Mr. Perera being appointed to Parliament when they voted in the Parliamentary Election held in August 2020. Additionally, if businesses in which Mr. Perera has an interest in, enter into or continue with contracts “made by or on behalf of the State or a public corporation”, this could be a violation of Article 91(1)(e) of the Constitution. CPA’s position is that in terms of the Constitution, only a person whose name was included in one of the district nomination papers, or the national list submitted by a political party or independent group, is entitled to be nominated to fill such a vacancy in the membership of Parliament’.
The CPA went on to note that the UNP, United People’s Freedom Alliance / People’s Alliance have on previous occasions made similar appointments to Parliament. ‘These political parties hide behind Section 64 (5) of the Parliament Elections Act No. 1 of 1981, which authorises them to appoint “any member” of the political party to fill such a vacancy. CPA states that the said provision of the Parliament Elections Act violates the clear and unambiguous provisions of the Constitution, particularly Article 99A and Article 101(H). Section 64 (5), although clearly unconstitutional, remains valid only because the Sri Lankan Constitution does not allow the Supreme Court to review the constitutionality of legislation once passed by Parliament. The CPA thus calls on the SLPP and all other political parties to respect the provisions of the Constitution and the franchise of the people. CPA also calls upon all political parties representing Parliament, to take steps to amend Section 64 (5) of the Parliament Elections Act, to dispel any doubts about whether it is in line with Article 99A and Article 101(H) of the Constitution’.
It has been more than one month since the attack on protesters at the GotaGoGama protest site in Galle Face in what has come to be accepted as state backed violence. Despite prima facie evidence the key suspects who instigated the violence are still at large. The Attorney General directed the police to arrest 22 people linked to the attacks but so far only a handful of small timers have been arrested and remanded while the big names remain elusive. Among those who are still at large are former minister Johnston Fernando and Senior DIG Deshabandu Tennekoon.
The retention of Minister Prasanna Ranatunga after his conviction for extortion will lead to a further erosion of the integrity of the cabinet and government in the eyes of the people of Sri Lanka and the international community. For the people of Sri Lanka this is one case which underscores the need for the system change they are calling for. Last week the Colombo High Court sentenced Ranatunga who is the Minister for Urban Development and Housing to two years RI suspended for five years after he was found guilty of threatening and extorting 64 million rupees from a businessman. Ranatunga has appealed against his sentence to the Court of Appeal. Until this process, which could take years especially if it goes beyond to the Supreme Court, is concluded Ranatunga is effectively at liberty. The Prime Minister will be reluctant to dismiss Ranatunga as it will make him unpopular in an opposition government. But the moral and ethical onus on the President to dismiss Ranatunga is a compelling one.
