Sep 12, 2010

Constitutional amendments

The Rajapaksa government is set to carry out much awaited amendments to the 1978 Constitution. The Supreme Court is to give its comments on the proposed amendments and the parliament is scheduled to discuss them on September 8. The need for constitutional amendments, particularly with a view to exercise some form of parliamentary oversight on the executive presidency, had figured as a major issue in almost all elections. President Rajapaksa had been sounding leaders of most of the political parties including the opposition United National Party (UNP) on this issue ever since he was elected for a second term. However, till now he had not been able to push through the amendments as the ruling United Peoples Freedom Alliance (UPFA), with 144 seats, fell short of two thirds majority in the 225-member house.

However, towards the end of August, the president managed to win over the support of the opposition Sri Lanka Muslim Congress (SLMC) which has 8-members in parliament. The surprise U-turn of the SLMC, which had been opposing President Rajapaksa all along, shows the declining fortunes of political opposition. The proposed amendments are likely to be passed in parliament with the committed support of 154 members in the first week of September.

The proportional representation system of voting makes it difficult for any political party or alliance to gain two thirds majority in the house. Thus the amendment of the constitution will be a politically significant achievement for President Rajapaksa. One of the proposed amendments allows the election of the president for third term in office; this will provide President Rajapaksa scope to be elected a third time. Thus consolidation of the president’s political power now appears to be almost complete.

Under the 1978 constitution, the President enjoys enormous powers including the unilateral dissolution of parliament and declaration of emergency. He also has powers to appoint judges, heads of armed forces and police, election commissioners and secretaries to the government etc. In a state of emergency, the President can even promulgate emergency regulations to override laws enacted by the parliament. Sri Lanka has a long history of emergency since 1970 mainly triggered by war against Tamil separatists. Even though the war ended in May 2009, the emergency continues to be in force. This has caused concern to civil society organisations both at home and abroad.  

In a bid to ensure some form of control over President’s powers to make appointments to high office, the parliament adopted the 17th Amendment to the Constitution in 2001. This makes it mandatory for the president to act on the recommendations of a 10-member Constitutional Council (CC) while making appointments. However, so far there had been no attempt to enforce the 17th Amendment in letter and spirit. One of the amendments proposed now, aims at replacing the CC with a five-member Constitutional Advisory Committee (CAC). The name of the proposed amendment would suggest advisory rather than mandatory nature of its role. This could defeat the fundamental purpose of the 17th Amendment.

Sri Lanka’s credibility has suffered over allegations of humanitarian excesses and human rights during the war, particularly in its last lap. Given this background its reputation as a democracy now depends entirely upon how President Rajapaksa handles enormous powers vested in him in the next decade and a half, assuming he is elected for a third term.

SEP 2010