ස්වාධීන කොමිෂන් ගැන ජනාධිපතිනියගේ වැදි බණ
The President has lectured the Constitutional Council that commission members must be honest, impartial and free of corruption charges, while objecting to some nominees and saying Human Rights Commission members she appointed stay until March 2003. Ivan contrasts this with her own appointments: an acting Elections Commissioner during her own election, Sarath N. Silva as Chief Justice while under inquiry, Harry Jayawardena and Sripathi Suriyarachchi. He proposes a parliamentary committee to hear objections, criticises Faiz Mustapha’s conduct as HRC chairman, and argues the old commissions lapsed under the 17th Amendment.
හොරගල් ඇහිලීම
Ivan assesses the manoeuvring between President and Prime Minister after the 19th Amendment was withdrawn. The President may dissolve Parliament after 5 December but has promised not to, and a crossover government or a bid to replace Ranil Wickremesinghe as UNP leader through another prime minister faces numerical and LTTE obstacles. He notes her wish to change the system so she can stay in politics until a child takes over, and says Wickremesinghe is staking everything on peace and the Oslo aid conference.
ගොයම කන්නේ වැටත් නියරත් නම් කළ හැක්කේ කුමක් ද?
Almost a month after the Constitutional Council sent the President its list of nominees for the independent commissions, she has not approved it, leaving the system in disarray. The editorial recalls that the 17th Amendment came from civil-society pressure and was distorted and rushed through in a day, but insists the President is constitutionally bound to approve the list promptly. It says Parliament must resolve the crisis, if necessary with enabling legislation.
චන්ද්රිකා + රනිල් ඒකත් ජයසිරී මංගලම්
With the 19th Amendment blocked, Ivan sees a stalemate that could push Chandrika Kumaratunga and Ranil Wickremesinghe into a temporary political marriage: he to protect the peace process, she to halt inquiries into corruption and crimes linked to her security division and to secure her family’s political future. A second section argues she has turned to wrecking the peace process and defends talks with Prabhakaran. A third questions Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva’s handling of complaints against himself and his alliance with Hemantha Warnakulasuriya.
හිරවූ තත්ත්වය
The Supreme Court ruling on the 19th Amendment has created a sense of instability, but the editorial argues that neither side can prevail: the President can obstruct the government but not topple it, and with the Tamil alliance’s 16 MPs the government has 130 seats, not 114. It urges both sides to use the deadlock to reach consensus on the executive presidency, national policy, the peace process and minority rights.
රනිල්ට වැරදුණේ කොතැන ද?
After the Supreme Court blocked the 19th Amendment strategy, Ivan assesses Ranil Wickremesinghe’s leadership. He compares the goals and power bases of J.R. Jayewardene, Ranasinghe Premadasa, Chandrika Kumaratunga and Wickremesinghe, and argues that the Prime Minister missed the chance, just after his election victory, to use his mandate to force the President into constitutional reform. He praises his resolve on peace but faults his reliance on personal friends rather than the cabinet and his failure to explain his goals.
අඳුර ආලෝකයක් කරගත නො හැකි ද?
The Supreme Court has ruled that the 19th Amendment needs both a two-thirds majority and a referendum, which only the President can call, opening a new political crisis. Ivan notes the irony of the 1978 constitution now hampering its UNP authors while the SLFP and JVP defend the executive presidency. He calls for an interim all-party government to agree on constitutional, electoral and party reforms, the ethnic question and national policies, followed by a clean election.
ඔලුවෙන් සිටුවා ඇති ස්වාධීන කොමිෂන්
Ivan argues that the government’s proposed 18th Amendment, shielding the Constitutional Council from fundamental-rights suits, ignores the real flaw in the 17th: Jayampathy Wickramaratne’s redraft for the President left her the power to nominate holders of key posts. He recounts the civil-society origins of the reform and the JVP and UNP roles in its passage, notes Priyani Wijesekera as its first victim, and proposes public vetting of Council members, barring them from legal practice and letting the Council investigate complaints against senior judges.
19 වැනි සංශෝධනය
The government seeks a 19th Amendment to remove the President’s power to dissolve Parliament after one year, while the President resists. The editorial supports the change, citing France, but warns against repeating the hasty 17th Amendment and lists further defects to fix: the President’s right to hold cabinet portfolios, presidential immunity and the distorted Constitutional Council. It urges a transitional programme that does not make the opposition fear a two-thirds majority.
ජේ.ආර්. ගේ “ගෝල්ඩ් රොලෙක්ස්” චන්ද්රිකාගේ පතේ පිලිප්ස්”
Ivan recalls an acquaintance who contrasted J.R. Jayewardene’s showy gold Rolex with the far costlier Patek Philippe worn by Chandrika Kumaratunga, and traces the Bandaranaike family’s modest finances from the Maha Mudaliyar to the 1956 election loans. He describes a phone call in which the President spoke of the watch, a gift she planned to auction, and his article leading her to hand gifts to the Treasury. He then recounts his failed efforts to obtain ministers’ and the President’s asset declarations.