The current crisis is a complicated issue consisting of an economic and political crisis. The dollar shortage, forex crisis, depreciation of the currency, high cost of living, crisis in the health sector could be considered as integral parts of the economic crisis. Conflicts that emerged within the ruling party and in the Opposition in Parliament have paved way for the political crisis.
“Political parties are often defined as power oriented organisations aiming at governmental responsibility without accepting a share in the burden of running a Government” (quoted from Political Parties in Western Democracies by KLAUS VON BEYME) Director Institute of Political Science – University of HEIDELBERG). Strategies adopted by political parties to achieve governmental responsibility seemed to be varied according to the political vision adopted by political party concerned. It is a fact that political parties represent their own missions and visions in Parliament, although they pretend that they represent the aspirations and interest of the people.
In Parliamentary Democracy political parties elected by people to the Parliament are being divided into two groups as the Ruling party and the Opposition. In a Coalition Government it is quite inevitable that its stakeholders could be split into several groups based on their party interest and their own individual interests as well. It is quite obvious there could be splits as well as conflicts within the frame work of a coalition as well as within the political parties concerned who held partnership in the coalition, This situation is applicable to the Ruling party as well as the Opposition.
Each group divided is trying their level best to drag the Government to various directions of what they think as strategy to achieve their own objectives instead of working together within a common agenda to achieve the true aspirations of the people as per the mandate given by them at Parliamentary and Presidential elections.
This is what exactly is happening within the Ruling party and in the Opposition in Parliament at present. This situation could be considered as inborn deficiency in Parliamentary Democracy. It has paved a comfortable way for the ongoing political crisis in this country.
There is no solution to the ongoing political crisis other than giving up of splits and conflicts that has emerged from partisan politics, unite together to reinstate the stability needed to resolve all other crisis. In that context solution to political crisis remains with Parliament and Parliamentarians. Political stability is absolutely necessary to resolve all other ongoing crisis in this country, without which as pointed out by IMF and Head of the Central Bank, any tangible solution to the ongoing crisis is impossible.
President Gotabaya Rajapaksa has already disclosed his willingness to work together with the Opposition based on a common agenda subject to the concurrence of all political parties who represent people of this country in Parliament and also to amend the Constitution in order to prune down some Executive powers of the President, and empower Parliament to some extent.
His attempt in this regard had been rejected by Opposition parties at the inception due to the fact that Opposition is not prepared to sacrifice partisan politics for the sake of unity and stability required to resolve the crisis. At this juncture acceptance of above offer and disclosure his confidence and commitment to resolve the crisis by Prime Minister Wickremesinghe is commendable.
Opposition
The Opposition in Parliament agitates relentlessly that people have rejected the Government hence it has no right to continue further in power. Within the context of Parliamentary Democracy it is not possible to conclude in advance people have rejected the Government that they have elected two years ago for a period of five years unless public opinion on Government is tested at an Election. It is also not possible at this stage to dissolve Parliament and go for an Election due to the fact that there is no constitutional provision to do so as per Article 12 of the Twentieth Amendment to the Constitution. Article 12 states “President shall not dissolve Parliament until the expiration of a period of not less than two years and six months from the date appointed for its first meeting unless Parliament by resolution requests the President to dissolve Parliament”. On the other hand Government is not in a position to incur billions of Rupees being expenditure required to conduct an Election amidst ongoing crisis. Political parties who represent the people of this country are responsible individually and collectively to resolve this issue amicably.
Aragalaya movement is considered as another facet of political crisis. Aragalaya movement has failed so far to disclose to the General Public what sort of mechanism they have in their hands to take over the Government and run it after ousting incumbent President. Although this movement claims it demonstrates peaceful protest, the reality behind it seems quite contrary, due to the fact that overall behaviour of protesters reflects their refusal to resolve the conflict in peaceful manner by means of constructive and amicable discussions with parties concerned. Massive shouting caused by protesters relentlessly in front of Presidential Secretariat and Temple Trees, occupying Galle Face Green arbitrarily for their activities depriving General Public to use it freely as usual, causing insults, invectives and provocations against Government cannot be considered that Aragalaya conducts peaceful protest. In fact it is a protest that generates hatred feelings among the masses against Head of the State and the Government. It contributes immensely day by day to tarnish the image of this country internationally, discourage tourism and foreign direct investments, aggravating thereby economic crisis like adding fuel to fire.
Contributory factors for ongoing economic crisis seemed to be varied from factors which fall within the ambit of present Government, factors beyond its ambit that took place under past regimes, and global factors. The impact of Covid-19 pandemic on global economy as well as Sri Lankan economy, Ukrainian War are considered principal factors that took place globally. Impact of mismanagement of economy by previous regimes as well as present regime as pointed out by President on certain issues could be considered another important factor. The current economic crisis could be considered as an outburst of combined pressure imposed by all those factors on present Government. Delay in supplying appropriate quantity and quality of both organic and chemical fertiliser at correct time on the part of those who managed the project concerned, lack of consensus of some members of Cabinet of Ministers on IMF issue and lethargic attitude of administrative bureaucracy to take prompt action on organic fertilizer project are considered some salient factors which contributed to a great extent to aggravate crisis situation. The need of the house is not to fight against each other to gain political advantage but to find ways and means to resolve the crisis.
Proposals
It has been observed that several proposals have been made by protesters, some organizations of professionals, civil societies, NGOs and the Opposition in Parliament as solutions to the crisis, namely Interim Government, fresh Government sans Rajapaksa family, National Government representing all political parties in Parliament.
It may also be noted that implementation of any of those proposals should be made through Parliament, subject to the approval of the majority of members in Parliament and in accordance with procedure set out in that regard in the Constitution.
There is no provision in the Constitution that members of Parliament or protesters could expel Executive President as and when they wish on their own due to the fact that Executive President has been elected by majority of people of this country for a period of five years through Presidential Election. Articles 38, 39 and 40 in Chapter 07 of the Constitution describe under what circumstances vacation of office by President would be effective. Unless in compliance with the procedure set out in Articles 38, 39 and 40 removal of incumbent President by protests is considered unconstitutional and impracticable as far as President secures support of the majority of members of Parliament.
Executive Presidency is a vital mechanism needed to run the country in a crisis situation like this where ruling party and whole Parliament including Opposition have been scattered into multiple groups based on partisan politics and as a result lack of unity and strength with them to proceed based a common agenda which would be beneficial to the people of this country.
It is a fact that political parties in Parliament have failed so far miserably to reach to a common understanding, unite themselves together and to build up effective mechanism to resolve the crisis based on an agenda acceptable to all of them. In a recent debate leader of the Opposition has disclosed Parliament has become a talking shop (Katha Sappuwa).
President J. R. Jayewardene has once defended Executive Presidency as follows: “Executive President will be elected directly by the people and is not dependent on the Legislature during its period of existence for a specific number of years. Such an Executive is a strong Executive, not subject to the whims and fancies of an elected Legislature, not afraid to take correct but unpopular decisions because of censure from its Parliamentary party” (quoted from Autobiography of JRJ).
Article 30(2) in Chapter VII of the Constitution provides “The President of the Republic shall be elected by the People and shall hold office for a term of six years”.
Article 30(1) in same Chapter states “There shall be a President of the Republic of Sri Lanka who is the Head of the State, the Head of the Executive and of the Government and the Commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces.” As per Article 30(2) it is only people should elect the President through an election. Neither Parliament nor the Opposition or Protesters authorized to do so.
The President has already disclosed to the Public that he has determined to resolve the present crisis. President has already admitted certain lapses that took place in the process of decision making and implementation of same in respect of certain projects. In that context let him prove his ability to resolve the crisis.
The Leader of the Opposition has claimed that President should resign and handover the Government to the Opposition as he is capable to resolve the crisis and restore normalcy of the country. However credibility and trustworthiness of his claim is questionable due to following facts.
Has the SJB got necessary strength, capacity and competency to take over the Government?
There is no provision in the Constitution that incumbent President who is elected by majority of people for a period of five years and being Head of the State and Head of Executive could hand over the Government so abruptly to Leader of the Opposition at a critical situation like this, deviating from the procedure required to be followed in the Constitution for change of Government and removal of Executive President.
The answer to the first question is negative due to the fact that SJB has no majority support in the Parliament and the Opposition he leads has been divided and scattered into several fractions hence it lacks unity, strength and competency required to take over the Government and to bail out the country from ongoing crisis. This presumption has already been confirmed by refusal of offer made by President to accept post of Prime Minister, by leader of Opposition, prior to appointment of Wickremesinghe for that post.
The answer to the second question is also negative due to the fact that if Executive President vacates his office abruptly at this juncture, there would be an anarchy. There is no provision in the Constitution to remove the President abruptly other than in Compliance with procedure set out in Article 38, 39 and 40 of Chapter 07 of the Constitution, as far as President secures majority of members of Parliament in his favour. If majority support of the members of Parliament is not there Presidency would be automatically defunct, paralyzed and finally demise.
It may be noted that the Legislature (Parliament) is not authorised to perform Executive functions as per Articles 4(a) and (b) in Chapter One of the Constitution. Executive Functions are vested in President exclusively. There is no provision in the Constitution enabling Parliament to play the role assigned to Executive President under Article 30(1) in Chapter VII of the Constitution as above referred to.
However, it does not mean President is empowered to act irresponsibly. Article 42 in Chapter VIII of the Constitution states “The President shall be responsible to Parliament for the due exercise, performance and discharge of his powers, duties and functions under the Constitution and an any written law, including the Laws for the time being relating to Public Security”.
In that context the image created by Opposition that President can act as absolute dictator like Hitler is nothing but an exaggeration to misdirect masses against incumbent President.
In the above context any attempt to oust the President at this stage other than by an act in compliance with the procedure required to be followed in the Constitution in that respect without any appropriate replacement for ousted President in hand seems to be a futile and unconstitutional exercise. It would serve no purpose other than dragging this country from present crisis situation to an anarchy.
The writer is a retired Executive Director – BOI and HRM Consultant on Fiscal Reform Program -ADB