සැසි වාරය කල් දෑමීම ප්‍රජාතන්ත්‍රවාදයට පටහැනියි
The editorial condemns the prorogation of Parliament to evade a no-confidence motion when the opposition had become the majority, likening it to postponing an election in the face of certain defeat and calling it a grave political crime. It criticises the Prime Minister for repeatedly promising debate on 16 to 18 July and denying any plan to prorogue, and urges MPs to stand up for Parliament against the President’s arbitrary act.
විධායක ජනාධිපති ක්‍රමය අහෝසි නොකරන්නේ නම්, වහා ප්‍රතිසංස්කරණය කළ යුතුය
Ivan argues that the five proposed independent commissions cannot restore democracy unless the executive presidency is abolished or drastically reformed. Recalling N.M. Perera’s warning that a hostile parliament would paralyse the system and Colvin R. de Silva’s description of it as a constitutional dictatorship, he sets out eight reforms, including ending the President’s power to dissolve or prorogue Parliament at will, giving the Prime Minister the power to name the Cabinet, simplifying removal of a President, and handing key appointments to a Constitutional Council.
අර්බුදය ජයගැනීමට විපක්ෂයට හැකිවේද?
Ivan explains that under parliamentary convention a government that loses its majority should resign, but the President can dissolve Parliament after its first year and prorogue it for two months, powers Premadasa used against impeachment. He expects her to play for time by delaying the no-confidence debate and negotiating through intermediaries, argues that an election would favour a divided government’s opponents, and says a new majority could amend the presidency if two-thirds stood together.
විශ්වාසභංගය හා ඊට පසු
The editorial says the PA’s fall is inevitable, driven by the call for an all-party government for reform, though S.B. Dissanayake is pushing a UNP-SLFP national government instead. It calculates that even if the JVP and Sihala Urumaya abstain the government could fall with three defections, predicts that the EPDP and CWC would then back any new government, and foresees a showdown in which Parliament, like that against Charles I, could curb the presidency unless the President behaves like D.B. Wijetunga.
ප්‍රජාතන්ත්‍රවාදී ප්‍රතිසංස්කරණ සඳහා සර්ව පාක්ෂික ආණ්ඩුවක්
The PA is close to collapse: SLFP factions are feuding, most of the SLMC and NUA are drifting away, and S.B. Dissanayake has demanded the President give up the Finance Ministry while promoting a national government under Ratnasiri Wickremanayake. The editorial notes the UNP deal with Rauff Hakeem, the no-confidence motion against Mahipala Herath and the stay on impeachment, and urges an all-party interim government to enact reforms rather than a UNP-dominated one.
පාර්ලිමේන්තුව හා විධායකය අතර ගැටුමක් නොවැළැක්විය හැකි යි
The crisis over the Chief Justice has cost the government its majority, and after Parliament prevailed over the courts on impeachment, the piece expects the President to try to control Parliament. It argues that Parliament represents popular sovereignty more fully than the President, that proroguing it would risk anarchy, and that neither courts nor executive should interfere in its internal affairs, since Parliament created the presidency and can abolish it.
සරත් එන්. සිල්වා මහතා අධිකරණය කෙරෙහි ඇති කර තිබෙන විනාශය සුළුපටු නැත
As impeachment proceedings open, Ivan traces the crisis to Sarath N. Silva’s appointment while two disbarment complaints, one by Ivan himself, were pending, despite warnings from Chief Justice G.P.S. de Silva and senior lawyers. He recounts how Silva halted those inquiries, packed the bench hearing challenges to his appointment, narrowed fundamental rights jurisdiction, and was linked by phone records to Rohana Kumara, alleged mastermind of the Wijekoon murder, and to a fraudulent petition for the gunman Nupul Kumara.
උසස් තනතුරුවලට පුද්ගලයන් පත් කිරීම
The Sarath N. Silva crisis shows the need for a system that prevents unsuitable appointments to posts such as Chief Justice. The editorial contrasts US Senate scrutiny of judicial nominees and South Africa’s constitutional body that shortlists three names, says the President appointed a man about to be disbarred in order to control the courts, and calls for his removal and for the proposed independent judicial commission to be enacted.
Performance that does not match words
The LTTE has rejected the existing social contract and is fighting for a new one and a new state. Since the end of that could be the break-up of the country, the government tried to crush the rebellion by war, and having found that hard has had to offer to amend the contract instead.
කතාව දෝලාවෙන් ගමන පයින්
Any settlement with Prabhakaran requires renewing the social contract with real power-sharing, but the government’s fine words on devolution are contradicted by its conduct. Moving from Hobbes to Rousseau and modern pluralism, the editorial lists how the President denies power to ministers, the judiciary, the Elections Commissioner and the Auditor General, meddles in the Kataragama Basnayake Nilame election and the cricket board, and strips Colombo’s UNP council, so Tamils cannot trust her promises.