Turn referendum into confidence vote
The political turmoil is shaking not only the government but the opposition parties and the other groups. What could be made of the referendum the President has called is the practical question — and what Ivan wants made of it is a vote of confidence.
දෝෂාභියෝගයක් කැඳවා ගැනීම
Ivan compares how Presidents Jayewardene, Premadasa and Wijetunga handled Parliament, noting that Wijetunga let the narrowly elected People’s Alliance govern after 1994. President Kumaratunga, with the weakest parliamentary base of all, ruled more harshly than Jayewardene, and her treatment of Rauff Hakeem turned the government into a minority. By proroguing Parliament without telling the Cabinet as a no-confidence motion loomed, and floating a referendum, he argues she is inviting an impeachment backed by two-thirds of MPs.
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.
ඇති කරන්නට යන ව්යවස්ථා ක්රමයට ආවේණික සීමා
Ivan welcomes the proposed Constitutional Council and five commissions but says they lack any mechanism to monitor holders of high office once appointed. He cites cases where no one acted: a complaint to Court of Appeal President Palakidnar about Sarath N. Silva, an alleged assault attempt by a Supreme Court judge, a High Court judge accused of abusing a young domestic worker, and Lenin Ratnayake still in service, and faults the Attorney General, Elections Commissioner and Auditor General, proposing an ombudsman-type body under the Council.
වඩා වැදගත් ප්රතිසංස්කරණ දිනා ගැනීමයි
What matters in the crisis is not who wins but whether reforms are secured. The government has refused even to enact the five commissions the JVP demanded as its price for opposing the no-confidence motion, so the task falls to the opposition, which can do it only through an all-party government. The editorial criticises the JVP for failing to commit to joint action, or to press its own demand to abolish the presidency, when the opposition has the numbers.
Giving more teeth to constitutional council
A constitutional council with the power to recommend people for the top posts, with five independent commissions under it, would be a significant step towards taking the administration out of politics. What it would need to be worth having is set out here.
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.
Possible scenarios after no-faith motion
With the political crisis where it is, the need for an all-party government dominates the discussion. The question that comes next is how the PA’s own members will act if the government is defeated on the no-confidence motion.
අලුත් හෙට දිනක්
The piece argues that the crisis can only end well through an all-party government focused on essential reforms, which the government’s rejection has made the basis of the no-confidence motion. It asks the main opposition to set out clearly the nature of the government it would form, how the presidency would be reformed, what beyond five independent commissions it proposes, how it would settle the war, how power would be shared and for how long, since such a chance may not recur.