was conducted at the President’s behest-pm

It was President Maithripala Sirisena who telephoned him at 8.16 a.m. on September 19 and asked him whether he (President) should call a Cabinet meeting Mr. Sumanthiran stated that the President had informed him that he was willing to support the 20th Ame

In his counter reply to President Maithripala Sirisena, Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe said yesterday that it was President Maithripala Sirisena who telephoned him at 8.16 a.m. on September 19, and asked him whether he (President) should call a Cabinet meeting to discuss the 20th Amendment.

He was responding to the President who said that it was the Prime Minister who insisted on such a Cabinet meeting to be summoned hurriedly.

According to a statement from the Prime Minister’s office, Mr. Wickremesinghe said he informed the President that the civil society had made a request in this regard.

The Prime Minister said, “TNA MP M. A. Sumanthiran had also informed me of the President’s stand on the matter. Therefore, I told the President that it is appropriate to call the Cabinet and discuss it. I said that we should call that meeting on Thursday or Friday.

“A group of civil society representatives met with me last week to talk about what our government has done and failed to do. I informed them that our party had passed a resolution pledging to abolish the Executive Presidency in 2014 and that we would continue to agitate for the abolition of the Executive Presidency. They asked for a cabinet decision to support the 20th Amendment. On September 16, they handed over to me a draft bill which was to be referred to the Cabinet.

I pointed out to the civil society representatives that the 20th Amendment could not be passed in Parliament without the support of the other political parties.

I asked them to inform me of the views of other parties on this matter. On September 17, MP Sumanthiran told me that they had held discussions with the JVP on the abolition of the Executive system. He further stated that the President had informed him that he was willing to support the 20th Amendment.

I pointed out to Sumanthiran that the support of the United People’s Freedom Alliance would be needed for the resolution to be passed in Parliament.“mp Sumanthiran has made a public statement regarding this. No one has rejected that statement,” he said.

He said the Cabinet Secretary informed his secretary that the Cabinet meeting would be held at 3 p.m. on that date. “Thereafter, my secretary referred the draft that the civil society had given me to the Cabinet Secretary for use if needed. I called the UNP ministers at 2 p.m. and informed them of this matter. The discussion was very heated. Everyone was open and opinionated. There was no agreement regarding the 20th Amendment. Before I met the Cabinet, the President was informed that there was no agreement among the Ministers. At the beginning of the meeting, I informed the Cabinet Secretary in front of the President that there was no agreement among the Ministers, and that submitting the Cabinet Bill would be useless. I summed up the views of the ministers at that meeting. The ministers made various comments. We decided that it was appropriate to leave the final decision to each party. If there is a question regarding the statements of the members of the Cabinet, it should be discussed in the Cabinet. Failure to do so would violate cabinet tradition. Therefore, I will only show what happened here. Therefore, I will not insult anyone or make any remarks,” he said.