Conflict in governance- Two possible options for the country

Recent pronouncements by President Maithripala Sirisena that the 19th Amendment (19A) to the Constitution was the cause of conflict within the Government, has triggered a debate as to whether this Amendment, enacted by the Yahapalana Government, is detrimental to the country.

While the conflict within the Government is damaging to the country, is to state the obvious, attributing it to 19A is erroneous and misleading.

This becomes clearer when the origins and history of the process leading to the enactment of 19A is examined. Several years before the Presidential Election of January 2015, the late Ven. Maduluwawe Sobitha Thera began an islandwide campaign for the abolition of the Executive Presidency, the strengthening of the Independent Commissions ( IC), Reform of the Electoral Process and several other proposals designed to strengthen democracy.

The mandate received by President Maitripala Sirisena and the Yahapalana Government on January 8, 2015 was the direct outcome of the programme on which the late Ven. Sobitha Thera-led civil society campaigned since 2012.

The 19A was enacted in pursuance of the mandate given at the January 2015 Presidential Election, to abolish the EP and restore the ICs. However, 19A's original draft had to be revised for two reasons.

The first was because the Supreme Court directed that some of the provisions of 19A, in its original form, would have to be passed with a two- thirds majority and a Referendum. Since the 100- day Government did not have a majority in Parliament, it was decided to amend the provisions that required a Referendum, in a manner so as to avoid the need for a Referendum.

These amendments were moved in Parliament by the then Justice Minister Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe.

Also, the Opposition which had the majority in Parliament, wanted many of the provisions changed, in return for their support to pass 19A.

President Maithripala Sirisena himself, had to spend two whole days in Parliament, negotiating with his party members, who comprised the Opposition, to persuade them to support 19A, resulting in a near unanimous vote in favour of 19A.

The Government too, had to agree to several amendments moved by the Opposition, in return for their support to pass the Bill. These Bills too, changed the character of the original 19A in a substantial way.

The 19A was, therefore, only a transitional or interim measure towards the ultimate goal of abolishing the EP, which task had to be completed, either by this Gove r nment or a f uture Government.

It must be remembered that 19A was initiated during the honeymoon period of the two main components of the Government, namely President Maithripala Sirisena and the Ranil Wickremesinghe-led United National Party (UNP), when they were part of a like minded alliance.

The strength of the relationship between the two at that time could be judged by the fact that, when President Sirisena wanted to reduce his term of office from 6 years to 4 years, it was Prime Minister Wickremesinghe who suggested it be made 5 years.

Unfortunately, as time went on, the relationship between the President and the PM broke down, creating two power centres and causing conflicts in governance. Nobody bargained for such a breakdown in the relationship between the two, at the time 19A was passed.

One possible reason (there could be others as well) for such a breakdown could be traced to the origins of the Sirisena- Wickremesinghe a l l i a n c e. When the 2015 Presidential Elections was called, it was a hastily cobbled political formation that came into being.

The number of Parliamentarians who broke away from the Mahinda Rajapaksa Government, to back Sirisena, were only 8 or 9. Hence, the balance of political forces within the Alliance was heavily weighted in favour of Wickremesinghe.

Additionally, the UPFA politicians who drifted towards Sirisena, after his assumption of office as President, had no loyalty or commitment to the goals of the Yahapalana Government. In fact, they had strenuously worked against the programme that President Sirisena himself presented to the people at the 2015 Elections.

With the President’s pre-January 2015 loyalists being few in number, the newcomers from the UPFA began to exercise greater influence on him and began to undermine the very programme of work, which President Sirisena had obtained a mandate for.

A case in point is the issue of the EP. The post- January 2015 UPFA supporters of President Sirisena continuously articulated and propagated the view that the SLFP Central Committee would take the final decision on whether the EP should be abolished and that, President Sirisena would have to abide by it.

While PM Wickremesinghe and his MPs always expressed their respect for and publicly acknowledged the President as the Head of Government, the post-2015 supporters of the President publicly criticised the UNP segment of the Government and in particular, PM Wickremsinghe .

This too, contributed to the increasing strain in relationship between the two parties. It was after the Local Government Elections that the UNP MPs publicly started hitting back at the President, despite efforts by the PM to restrain them.

It is, therefore, abundantly clear that, it is not 19A itself that is the cause for the conflict in Governance, but it is the breakdown of the relationship between t he t wo par t i e s of t he Yahapalanaya Alliance.

It is difficult to escape the conclusion that both parties have not made sufficient efforts by themselves, or through intermediaries, to prevent the continued estrangement from developing into a rift t h at has hamstrung the Government's effectiveness.

There is plenty of unfinished business, which the Yahapalana Government has been mandated by the people, to complete during its tenure, such as Constitutional Reform, Electoral Reform as well as economic issues that effect the dayto- day life of the people, Reconciliation and a host of other issues.

It would be unrealistic to expect that all this can be done before the Presidential Election scheduled for the end of the year. However, it is imperative that Governance is kept on even keel, at least for the next few months, until the next Government is formed.

There are two options available to address the present conflict in Governance. The first is for President Sirisena and PM Wickremesinghe to sit down and adopt a working plan for the next few months. They can come to an agreement, as to how to deal with the issues that continually give rise to conflict.

Or, they can simply decide that only Governance issues that have the consent of both parties will be dealt with in the remaining period of the Government.

If this cannot be achieved, the 2nd option is available to President Sirisena to get the country out of the logjam that the Government is facing. He is constitutionally empowered to call for a Presidential Election before the end of the year, if he decides to offer himself as a candidate.

As the SLFP has already announced that he is their Presidential candidate, this should not pose a problem for him. Additionally, with the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) yet to name their candidate, he has a reasonable chance of getting the backing of Mahinda Rajapksa, to be the common candidate of the SLFP and SLPP.

One of the above scenarios has to emerge, if the country is to manage the immediate challenges faced by the Government. The ball is now in the court of President Sirisena and PM Ranil Wickremesinghe, to ensure that the crisis situation ceases, in the National Interest. ( javidyusuf@gmail.com)