මේ මොහොතේ කළහැක්කේ කුමක්ද?
Contrasting the prosecution of Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalithaa with the removal of Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake, Ivan compares India, whose leaders built a nation and a democracy, with Sri Lanka, where independence brought ethnic, religious and caste conflict. With a presidential election near, he weighs the idea of a common candidate against Ranil Wickremesinghe’s own bid and his promise to abolish the presidency, and floats the idea of a third social movement for system change, inviting readers to write to a dedicated email address.
අශීලාචාර 18 පරාජය කිරීම
Following up the previous column, Ivan tests Sarath Silva’s argument against the constitution. Transitional provisions in Chapter XXI of the 1978 constitution, including Article 160, show how J.R. Jayewardene was specially made eligible, and the Eighteenth Amendment, rushed through on the wave of war victory, has a technical flaw that is not easily corrected. Seeking a favourable ruling from the Supreme Court would put the judges in a trap; opposing injustice is a human duty, and all who want change should unite to defeat the Eighteenth.
සරත් සිල්වාගේ කාල බෝම්බය
Ivan, no admirer of Sarath N. Silva, nevertheless takes seriously the former Chief Justice’s argument that Mahinda Rajapaksa cannot contest a third term. Silva’s thesis, set out in nine points, is that the Eighteenth Amendment, passed in 2010 after Rajapaksa had already been sworn in for his second term, cannot give him a right to a third term that he did not have when re-elected. Ivan compares term limits under presidential systems in France, Brazil and elsewhere and argues that what matters is honouring the people’s sovereignty.
ජවිපෙ ප්‍රහාරයට පිළිතුරක් (ලංකා පුවත්පතේ පළවූ විවේචන දෙකට පිළිතුරකි.)
Ivan answers two attacks in the JVP paper Lanka by a writer calling himself ‘Kasakaraya’ (the flogger), who branded him a fraud and accused him of preparing the ground for Ranil Wickremesinghe as he had for Chandrika Kumaratunga in 1994. Calmly, he replies that he began writing books in prison after 1971, recalls Ravaya’s 25th anniversary, explains that the Kaha Pati campaign arose from the violent North Western provincial election of 1999, and states that his aim is not to install any leader but to win a framework for changing the political system.
කළයුත්තේ කුමක්ද?
Quoting Mao that falling into a pit teaches the mind, Ivan asks whether Sri Lankan society learns from its disasters. After defeating Wijeweera’s rising and then Prabhakaran, the country had a chance for an Asoka-like turn from war to reconciliation, but the victor was blinded by triumph. The crisis has taken a new form, hidden behind an illusion of development built on infrastructure and debt. The Rajapaksa government has lost its moral right to rule; the opposition’s first task is a common programme agreed through open negotiation.
දර්ශනයේ දුප්පත්කම
A reply to C.A. Dissanayake’s Ravaya article defending limited constitutional reform, which Ivan links to Dr Jayampathy Wickramaratne’s thinking. He questions who ‘Dissanayake’ really is, rebuts his account of J.R. Jayewardene’s Second Amendment to the 1972 constitution, which created the presidency, and argues that the executive presidency changed the whole character of Parliament: the old MP elected by a small constituency served the people, while today’s MPs, chosen under preferential voting, depend on money and patronage.
නව ආණ්ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථාවක් ඉලක්ක කොටගෙන ඒකාබද්ධ විරුද්ධ පක්ෂ ව්‍යාපාරයක් ඇති කරගැනීම
A seventeen-point plan for a joint opposition movement with one aim: a new constitution. Parties would unite around a common programme rather than a common candidate, keep that unity until the constitution is drafted and passed within an agreed time, decide by consensus rather than majority vote, agree first on principles and then on a programme, launch it at a public rally, take it to the main towns, and if necessary negotiate with the President.
නව ව්‍යවස්ථාව හා පොදු අපේක්ෂකයා – 9
Part 9 turns to the opposition’s idea of a common presidential candidate who would deliver a new constitution within six months. Ivan questions whether the Seventeenth Amendment belongs in a new constitution, shows that some constitutions were written quickly but most were not, and argues that instead of a common candidate the opposition needs a common programme, agreed by all parties and set before the public, with a timetable for a new constitution; only this can prevent the slide into anarchy.
ව්‍යවස්ථා සම්පාදනයේ දකුණු අප්‍රිකානු ආදර්ශය (ව්‍යවස්ථාවක් හදාගැනීමේ ප්‍රශ්නය-8)
Part 8 holds up South Africa as a model. After de Klerk freed Nelson Mandela in February 1990, multi-party talks from 1991 agreed a two-stage transition: an interim constitution, elections in 1994, and a constitutional assembly given two years to draft a final text, with wide public participation through theme committees, which the new Constitutional Court then tested against agreed principles before approving it.
ලිඛිත ව්‍යවස්ථා ඇති රාජ්‍යයක් ඇතිවීම (ව්‍යවස්ථාවක් හදාගැනීමේ ප්‍රශ්නය-7)
Part 7 traces how written constitutions arose as the grip of theology broke in Europe. Ivan sets out ten principles of the liberal idea of the nation-state, from popular sovereignty and the separation of powers to equality before the law, protection of minorities and a secular state, then contrasts Britain’s unwritten constitution and parliamentary sovereignty with the American constitutional convention, now 228 years old, and India’s constituent assembly, which built a constitution for a vast and diverse nation.