With no party enjoying a majority in the Parliament, now it’s a favourable alignment of forces in the political landscape for such a constitutional change and the JVP seems to have struck it at the most opportune time. Our political leaders in most instances have acted in their own interest and they are sure to do so this time as well, but it will incidentally do some good for the country if the result is going to be abolition of the executive presidency.
By Gamini Abeywardane
Abolition of
the executive presidency has surfaced in the political debate again. Since early nineties the matter has been
brought up many times in election promises -- first by Chandrika Kumaratunga in
1994, then by Mahinda Rajapaksa in 2005 and 2010, and lastly by Maithripala
Sirisena in 2015. Yet for all, none of them kept their promises and instead
displayed their duplicity by trying to enhance their power or stick to it as
long as possible.
The only
minor deviation from this trend was visible when Maithripala Sirisena agreed to
prune down some of the presidential powers by establishing independent
commissions and imposing a two term limit for a person to hold the presidency,
through the nineteenth amendment. However, it became possible as it happened
hot on the heels of the 2015 presidential election which was fought on the
broad theme of curtailing authoritarian trends and introducing good governance.
It was introduced within a few months of the election and there was hardly any time
for a change of mind by the head of state.
All that is good
evidence for one to believe that any changes to the executive presidency has to
be introduced only in the first part of one’s term and towards the latter part
any incumbent President will try to find ways and means to consolidate his
position and come back to power for a second term. However, this is the first
time that the idea of abolishing the presidency has come to the centre-stage
towards the end of a government’s term and has also become the subject of
discussion among the three powerful political leaders of the country representing
different political groups -- Maithripala Sirisena, Ranil Wickremesinghe and
Mahinda Rajapaksa.
Hidden consensus
JVP which
brought forth the idea in the form of a twentieth amendment proposal has been
in the forefront pushing the matter forward and discussing it with all relevant
stakeholders and the Tamil National Alliance. Although the UNP had initially
promised to abolish the executive presidency, towards the latter stages they
did not display much enthusiasm to do so. However, with doubts over Ranil
Wickremesinghe’s ability to win a presidential election and division of opinion
in the party on the selection of a presidential candidate the UNP has now begun
to look at the idea favourably.\
This matter
has special relevance and advantage for Mahinda Rajapaksa because by virtue of
the nineteenth amendment he is effectively debarred from contesting for a third
term. Thus, the only avenue available for him to become politically powerful
again is through a prime ministerial system and that is why he has told the JVP
leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake that he is in favour of abolishing the
executive presidency although he is not ready to support the proposed twentieth
amendment in its present form.
The joint
opposition led by Mahinda Rajapaksa has not so far reached any consensus on a
presidential candidate although Gotabhaya Rajapaksa has indicated his
willingness and intensified his campaign. There seem to be a lot of confusion
there as Rajapaksas themselves appear to be divided on the issue while the US
citizenship issue of Gotabhaya is still not resolved.
Then for Maithripala
Sirisena the idea can be much attractive as his position is weakening day by
day with little or no prospects for wining a second term. On the contrary he may
stand the chance of becoming the non-executive head of state in return if he
supports the abolition of the executive presidency. It would have been possible
for him to think of a second term if the political coup he staged with Mahinda
Rajapaksa had succeeded and there would have been some understanding between
the two to that effect, but now the scenario has completely changed and that is
why the proposed discussions between Sirisena and Rajapaksa on this matter has still
not materialized.
In this
situation the proposal is much likely to receive the support of the former
President Chandrika Kumaratunga, the TNA and all civil society groups that have
been clamouring for abolition of the executive presidency. However, the TNA
will not simply back it and naturally they will expect a solution to the
northern problem as well through the same constitutional amendment which
finally has to be approved by the people at a referendum. It can be a new
opportunity to resolve the northern issue because the same amendment can
include a devolution package and establishment of a Senate.
It can also
be an opportunity to modify or abolish the much maligned PR system of
elections. Opposition will come from minority political parties if there is any
attempt to abolish the PR system, but they may agree to a reasonable
modification to the electoral system with 30 or 40 percent PR and the rest on a
first-past-the-post system.
In the
current situation a return to the Westminster system of government can be personally
advantageous to all the main political leaders of the country. However some of
the vocal politicians currently in the joint opposition may not like the idea
because most of them do not have strong political parties that can
independently survive in a parliamentary system of government. Instead they
seem to be more comfortable with hanging on to a strong individual in the form
of an Executive President.
Opportune moment
With no party
enjoying a majority in the Parliament, now it’s a favourable alignment of forces in the political
landscape for such a constitutional change and the JVP seems to have struck it
at the most opportune time. Our political leaders in most instances have acted
in their own interest and they are sure to do so this time as well, but it will
incidentally do some good for the country if the result is going to be abolition
of the executive presidency.
Moreover
such a move will also ensure that the political power will remain in the hands
of these two or three groups and with the traditional political families. The
continuance of the presidential system with a two term limit will result in new
individuals and new groups capturing the political power in the country.
Therefore, it is very likely that all these three groups will act in such a way
to retain the political power among themselves.
Time constraint
However, the
question remains that with presidential elections being due in November whether
the limited time available will be sufficient to effect such a major political
change. It will not be possible to scrap the executive presidency without
modifying the electoral system as the PR system and executive presidency are
closely interconnected. The other issue is another set of constitutional
proposals which may also aim at abolishing the executive presidency while also
addressing all other relevant issues including devolution of power has been
already developed through the Constitutional Assembly and is now before the Parliament.
In such a
scenario it is difficult for the major political parties to look at the issue
of abolishing the executive presidency in isolation while ignoring the issues
of devolution of power and electoral system. If such an amendment is to
successfully go through the passage of Parliament it should receive the
blessings of the minority communities and the small political parties as well.
In this
context it is difficult to imagine that the proposal, however attractive it may
be to major political players, will gather the necessary momentum to become a
reality within the available short period before the presidential election. In
such a situation, it can be a priority for the next government and the set of
constitutional proposals that have been developed through the Constitutional
Assembly can be the basis for such a change. (The writer can be contacted on gamini4@gmail.com)
A very good analysis. Time is certainly opportune. But will the leaders of the major political p[arties rise to the occasion? If they want to, they can kill two birds with one stone: abolish the accursed Executive presidency and resolve the festering national issue one and for all. But will they rise to the stature of statesmen?
ReplyDelete