Rajapakshe falls between two stools

TSUNDAY, AUGUST 27, 2017

he relatively swift and somewhat unceremonious dismissal of the Justice and Buddha Sasana Minister on Wednesday is one more in a somewhat long line of ministerial sackings, and another bizarre episode gripping the Government in general and the UNP in particular. The former Finance and later Foreign Minister escaped this ignominy only by a whisker a fortnight ago by resigning before getting the boot.

The now former Minister Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe dug in his heels and held his ground as his party hierarchy ganged up and rallied the troops to go for his blood. The ostensible crime he had committed was to have spoken against the party and violated principles of Cabinet ‘collective responsibility’ but, the real reason was his sudden outburst on the controversial Hambantota harbour agreement signed by his Government.

The former Minister did himself no favours by saying that it is the President who can sack him – something that therefore pitched his party (UNP) leadership directly in a battle of pride with the President (SLFP). Mr. Rajapakshe, a self-made lawyer is no greenhorn in politics. He ought to have known he had signed his own political death sentence by taking that provocative position in an environment where the two coalition partners don’t see eye-to-eye.

Since Independence, the country has seen resignations, crossovers and sackings of MPs aplenty. In 1959, Prime Minister S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike wanted to expel five MPs found guilty by a one-man Bribery Commission but he was assassinated before action was taken. The Civic Disabilities law was introduced only in 1965. In 1975, an entire party (LSSP) was expelled from the Cabinet and Government. Somewhat more recently, Ministers M.D.H. Jayawardene, Cyril Mathew and Ronnie de Mel were sacked from their portfolios by President J.R. Jayewardene for criticising the party. So, Mr. Rajapakshe now joins that illustrious and not-so illustrious list. To accuse him of stalling corruption investigations against the former Mahinda Rajapaksa Government is an unfair allegation making him a scapegoat for the sins of others within his party. As Minister of Justice he may have been less pro-active in the prosecution of the corrupt, but his role was only in the adjudicating process and not in the investigations being handled by another department.

The fact that influential political persona in his own party were hand-in-glove with the nefarious characters of the past Government is an open secret. Business deal-makers, government contractors and even those wanting to launder ill-gotten monies of those in the former Administration, having a cosy partnership with some UNP Ministers is what has put the party at odds with the President – and the country.

Cabinet’s ‘collective responsibility’ is an essential prerequisite for effective governance maybe, however much it stifles the free expression of Ministers. Parliament allows a ‘conscience vote’, not so the Cabinet. During the Cabinet discussion on the move to strip former Prime Minister Sirimavo Bandaranaike of her civic rights four Ministers expressed their opposition to the exercise. One of them was then front-line Minister, Gamini Dissanayake. He was ostracised for what he did by his leader, President J.R. Jayewardene for several months. Even so, Mr. Dissanayake made no public comment on the stance he took.

Mr. Rajapakshe has had to pay the price for what SLFP Ministers in the Cabinet are doing on a regular basis. Just a fortnight ago, and immediately after the Cabinet approved the 20th Amendment to the Constitution giving Parliament powers of dissolved Provincial Councils (in a veiled bid to postpone PC elections), SLFP Ministers went public opposing the Cabinet decision. Apparently, what is sauce for Mr. Rajapakshe is not sauce for the SLFP Ministers. Conversely, the UNP- run CCEM (Cabinet Committee on Economic Management) was accused of by-passing Cabinet ‘collective responsibility’ by taking decisions without the Cabinet’s knowledge.

What Mr. Rajapakshe said in one of his interviews was absolutely right i.e. “the country is bigger than the government”. He was removed for his public posturing on the Hambantota agreement. But then, under fire, he wilted. He began backtracking without sticking to his position in a bid to save his portfolio.

In the process, he has fallen between two stools; that of his twin portfolios and the moral high ground he took.