Policy-based approach to governance is best from Cabinet system
Political discussions today, center around the issue of who would be the likely candidates at the Presidential Elections scheduled for the end of next year. There is, however, little or no discussion, as to what policies are desirable for the country, after the election of a new President in 2019.
Seventy years after independence and nearly 90 years of adult franchise, this country is chasing after individuals rather than well thought out and well crafted policies, to take Sri Lanka and its people to the next level of development. This symbolizes the gradual deterioration that has set into the political value system of the country over the years.
One reason that has contributed to such a decline in the political culture and consequently, governance, is the focus on personalities, rather than on policies. In the days following independence, our political leaders had strong policies and a vision for the country, and strove hard to win over the populace to their line of thinking. In more recent times, the leaders ceased to lead and tended to follow what they thought was what the people wanted.
It did not take long thereafter, for opportunism to take precedence over the best interests of the people and consequently, one finds many politicians holding governmental positions and Ministerial portfolios, whichever Government came to power, even if the Governments followed diametrically different policies. Naturally, the country suffered as a result and some of the situations faced by the people today can be attributed to such loose political morality.
If one examines our recent political history, it is very evident that the rot set in from the time the Executive Presidency was installed. After this all powerful institution came into being, the individual who held the position of President, dwarfed the rest of those who held office as Ministers, thus reducing them to a shadow of what they were as Ministers under the Soulbury and Republican Constitutions. Hence, the famous lament of former Prime Minister Ranasinghe Premadasa, during the tenure of former President J.R. Jayewarddence, that he did not have even the powers of a peon.
Even some of the failures of the present Government could be attributed to the powers vested in the Executive Presidency. Despite the passage of the 19th Amendment, the President remains the Head of Government, as well as the Head of State. The Executive President is still able to exercise executive power and take individual decisions, without being constrained by and benefiting from collective decision-making of the Cabinet of Ministers.
Many of the concerns raised by those who supported the change of January 8,2015, are due to the failure of the two parties in Government to iron out differences of policy, with regard to the main issues of Governance. One clear instance of this is that of the abolition of the Executive Presidency.
The central platform of the 2015 change was the abolition of the Executive Presidency, to which both President Maithripala Sirisena and Ranil Wickremesinghe subscribed and reaffirmed at the funeral of the late Ven. Maduluwawe Sobitha Thera. President Sirisena seems to have backtracked on his stance and remains tight-lipped on this matter. There is an urgent need, from a national perspective, for the two main parties to arrive at a common policy stance on this issue.
The Presidential system supports individualization over policy-based decision making. In a Cabinet-based system of governance, there is a collective decision-making process, with the wisdom of the several pooled together to come to a collective decision. Those who come to such a decision are bound by the principles of collective responsibility and are accountable for such decisions.
In a Presidential system of Government, the President is guided by a set of anonymous advisors who are not accountable for their advice. The President, finally, takes a decision, with or without such advice. The theory of 'two (or more) heads are better than one', does not apply to this system.
When the late J.R. Jayewardene introduced the institution of the Executive Presidency, he said that, the Executive Presidency would ensure it would not be subject to the whims and fancies of Parliament. However, subsequent events have shown that the Executive Presidency can, sometimes, be subject to the whims and fancies of the individual holding the office of the Executive Presidency.
The continuing indifference to a policy-based approach to Governance has facilitated opportunism among politicians, to the detriment of the welfare of the people. That is why the change in alliances of politicians is almost always from Opposition to Government, and not vice versa. If memory serves me right, the last time a politician took a principled stand was, when Gamini Jayasuriya gave up his Ministerial portfolio, over his disagreement to the IndoLanka Accord of 1987.
It is time the country moved to a policy-based approach to governance, as opposed to an individual, centric approach, which precludes adequate dialogue and discussion. ( javidyusuf@gmail.com)