Are dual citizens a bad lot?

By Gamini Abeywardane

With the passing of the 21^st amendment to the Constitution the issue of dual citizens holding key political positions has come to the public domain again. Unfortunately in our country greed for political power, rivalry and ill-gotten money appear to be playing a key role behind the scene and as a result there is no genuine public discussion on the matter. The majority of those who make public utterances on this issue do so, on those lines and not on what is good for the country at this point of time.

The allegations are that the restrictions imposed target individuals, but it need not be the exact case as many countries have continued to maintain such citizenship restrictions for long due to a variety of reasons.

 A key issue here is the question of loyalty to the country of origin when one has taken an oath of allegiance to another country. This could be sensitive in certain circumstances when such a person is sitting in a high position with much discretionary power.

There have been instances of nationals of one country holding important positions in another country even without dual citizenships when that person is most qualified and there are advantages for the country employing such person. Mark Joseph Carney, a Canadian economist and a former governor of the Bank of Canada was appointed the governor of the Bank of England in 2013 and served till 2020. Another example is John Exter, the American economist who founded the Central Bank of Ceylon and became its first governor. They were appointments selectively made for very valid reasons.

If one wants to argue in favour of dual citizenship holders there are so many examples, but the question is whether a country should allow a dual citizen to hold a vitally important position like a legislator, the prime minister or head of state. Most countries do not allow such things.

India

Our closest neighbour and comparable democracy India does not allow holding Indian citizenship and citizenship of a foreign country simultaneously. In terms of Article 9 of the Constitution of India any person voluntarily acquiring the citizenship of a foreign country will be relinquishing the Indian citizenship.

They have a scheme called Overseas Citizenship of India (OCI) which only allows people of Indian origin and their spouses to live and work in India indefinitely, but does not grant the right to vote in Indian elections or hold public office.

Although India does not allow dual citizenship at all, they have introduced this system to get the best out of overseas Indians who want to come and work in India. As of 2020, there were around six million holders of OCI cards among the Indian Overseas diaspora.

Australia

Australia is also strict in their citizenship laws and native or ‘born and bred’ Australians cannot obtain the citizenship of another country without losing Australian nationality. However since they are a country which has been enjoying the benefit of immigration for decades they allow the immigrants who obtain Australian citizenship to retain dual citizenships in their countries of origin if it is allowed by such countries. But the Australian citizenship laws expressly prohibit foreign nationals and dual citizens from sitting in the parliament. Section 44 of the Australian Constitution bars foreign citizens and dual citizens from sitting in the federal legislature.

However in this issue Australia seems to be alone compared to other major immigration countries like the USA, Canada, and New Zealand, in prohibiting its citizens from taking out another citizenship. The UK, it appears, has long promoted dual citizenship. In these countries having a dual citizenship is not a disqualification to be a legislator or to hold any other position.

Singapore despite its much liberal economic outlook has long maintained restrictions on citizenship. Anyone obtaining Singapore citizenship has to renounce citizenship in his or her home country as they do not recognize dual nationality.

 The major argument in favour of dual citizenship is that it makes sense in a world of economic globalisation, instant communications and vastly increased personal mobility. However with regard to dual citizenship there is no general consensus among countries. Some countries allow dual citizenship; some prohibit it while others recognize dual citizenship in some form.

However it appears that most countries have restrictions arising from government policy and preferences which again depend on their own circumstances. There is no universal rule to say whether dual citizenship should be allowed or even if it is allowed whether that category of persons should be given the right to sit in the legislature or hold high political positions.

National identity and sovereignty

A key factor that has gone into consideration in this matter seems to be the core issue of national identity and sovereignty and security.

Powerful countries like the US and the UK have no such issue because no country can interfere in their internal politics so that they can be quite liberal with citizenship issues. Similarly migrants are unlikely to outnumber the natives in those countries.

The sensitivity of these issues will be paramount where foreign interferences are dominant in internal politics of a country and it can be worst when a country has economically collapsed.

The decision of the Sri Lankan government to ban dual citizens from sitting in the parliament in the latest constitutional amendment has to be viewed against this background.

Read More

Eran proposes vital first step to eliminate corruption in politics

 

By Gamini Abeywardane

Samagi Jana Balawegaya Member of Parliament, Eran Wickramaratne through a private members bill, has presented a very timely and forthright proposal which will address the core issue of corruption in the country.

Wickramaratne in a Twitter post says he presented this bill in furtherance of public interest seeking to amend the Declaration of Assets and Liabilities Law No.01 of 1975 echoing the demands for change and accountability.

According to him first, it seeks to remove the archaic secrecy provisions within the Act to keep it in line with the obligations of disclosure under the Right to Information Act and the principle of maximum disclosure.

Second, he says the bill seeks to ensure that electoral candidates will submit Asset Declaration’s with their nomination papers.

Third, the bill has included the country’s President also in the list of individuals to whom this law applies. Currently there is no requirement for the President to declare assets.  

Fourth, the bill ensures that asset declarations are routinely examined and verified at a central authority – the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption (CIABOC).

Fifth, the bill supports law enforcement to pursue asset recovery in the case of stolen assets. This has been specifically included to address the demands from the Aragalaya to recover stolen assets.

Wickramaratne says that if we are to eliminate or minimise corruption, the example needs to be set by the executive arm of the government. He calls upon all present and past Presidents, Prime Ministers and Cabinet Ministers to join him in voluntarily making a public declaration of assets and liabilities.

This is a vital initiative to bring about the transparency and accountability which is a key demand of the Aragalaya and all other right thinking and honest people who want to see a better Sri Lanka.

These reforms, if ever introduced, will restore some confidence in the system of government we have. However it is doubtful whether the move will garner support from the current set of corrupt politicians

Read More

We need strong diplomacy to stay out of geo-politics of the region

By Gamini Abeywardane

With the latest controversy over a scheduled visit of Chinese research vessel Yuan Wang 5, which India claims to be a spy ship, to Hambantota, Sri Lanka has been dragged into the centre of a tussle between China and India. The matter got even more complicated with Sri Lanka officially asking China to defer this naval visit in the face of severe opposition from India.

The matter however got resolved at least temporarily after several days of negotiations Sri Lanka government had with the relevant stakeholders -- China, India and the US. However all the signs are that Sri Lanka will continue to suffer similar diplomatic headaches unless the country finds a way out of the geo-politics of the region.

There was a similar incident previously in 2014 though it did not escalate to this level when India officially protested to the government of Sri Lanka over two Chinese submarines separately docking in a Chinese built terminal in the Port of Colombo.

In the eighties President J R Jayewardene’s close ties with the United States and poorer relations with India and the growth of LTTE’s terrorism in the northern Sri Lanka resulted in a tense situation with India.

The final outcome was almost forcible entry of Indian forces into the country and eventual signing of the Indo Lanka Peace Accord which also had a clause preventing the Sri Lanka soil being used by any third party in a manner prejudicial to India’s national security interests.

All this is clear evidence that we have mismanaged our regional affairs particularly the relations with our closest neighbour India. The issue has a long history with intermittent invasions from India with Chola Empire once extending its tentacles up to the northern parts of Sri Lanka.

Some of these issues got compounded with tacit support extended by India at one stage to separatist groups in northern Sri Lanka who also received military training in India.  In the face of such developments often there had been suspicion between the people as well as leaders of the two countries.

That’s one side of the story but there are many reasons why Sri Lanka should maintain a very cordial relationship with its closest neighbour.  The historical link from the arrival of Prince Vijaya and subsequent spread of Buddhism into Sri Lanka from India are sufficient reasons for the two countries to have strong relations with each other. In that sense India is our closest relation with whom we share a wealth of historical, religious and cultural legacies.

That way Indo - Sri Lanka relations have to be something of a special nature which goes beyond a normal trade or commercial relationship. On the other hand China is an emerging great power with whom Sri Lanka has had long relations particularly commercial links from the fifties and a great friend that we can never afford to lose. China also has come to our aid during our difficult times such as during the bitter war with the LTTE in the north and east and subsequently helped us in many infrastructure projects.

However managing and balancing our relations with these two countries have become difficult for Sri Lanka in the face of growing tension between India and China. China’s entry into Sri Lanka in the last two decades through investments into ports, airports and the Port City has led to India’s suspicion over possible use of some of these facilities to the detriment of her own security interests.

Given our geographical location and economic involvements we cannot stay clear of this issue and it is important for us to keep our development options as a maritime hub without succumbing to pressures of either India or China. Our future success will depend on how well we can resolve this issue.

The situation becomes further delicate as Sri Lanka is currently in a deep economic mess and we need the assistance and the cooperation of both India and China as partners of economic development.

All this is closely linked to China’s revival of the ancient Silk route in which Hambantota Port is a vital link and its natural for China to assert her rights which she says is all about freedom of navigation in the high seas and call at a port is part of that. It’s a larger regional issue beyond the capacity of Sri Lanka to resolve.

Balancing these two factors requires the best of diplomatic skills. Diplomacy with much professionalism and political maturity on the part of our leaders is a vital necessity for Sri Lanka and it will become more so in time to come. Only a neutral but proactive and clear cut and transparent foreign policy with emphasis on strategic regional and global affairs will help the country to avoid facing unwanted issues in the future.

Strengthening our economic relations beyond India and China is vital in our efforts to become an international maritime hub and Japan is an important first step in that direction. Then the next step has to be involving the British, European and US investors in vital sectors such as shipping and power and it is only by doing so Sri Lanka can extricate itself out of this Indo Chinese power struggle. Sri Lanka needs to emerge as a maritime service centre for all and not just for India and China.  

What we see today is exactly what happens when leaders deal with a country as it is their personal property ignoring the vital diplomatic a strategic implications. First you work with China to the exclusion of India and when there are repercussions you try to work with India to the exclusion of China and there is no diplomacy at all.

Playing one country against the other has its limitations and there is a greater risk of losing both friends at the end. What we need is a regime of professional diplomacy with transparency in all our external relations with full involvement of trained diplomats and lessor involvement of politicians.

Read More

There cannot be a better time to change Sri Lanka’s electoral system

 

By Gamini Abeywardane

The much debated issue of constitutional reforms has surfaced again with the widespread belief that Sri Lanka needs a system change. This is the result of the worst ever economic disaster the country has experienced in its contemporary history. It is a welcome development that the people of our country have finally realized the futility of blaming the colonial past for all the ills of our society.

Now there is unanimity that post-independence populist and opportunistic politics is the root cause of the calamity that has befallen on the country. The frustration of the people is amply displayed by the hatred and displeasure they have heaped on all 225 members of parliament in equal measure. It makes it obvious that the current electoral system has to be overhauled if we are to have the kind of parliament that people want.

The proposed 21^st amendment to the constitution is an essential first step towards the political reforms that the country needs at this juncture. Piece by piece approach is certainly better as it is not practicable to introduce all the necessary reforms in one piece of legislation. The next most important constitutional amendment is electoral reforms and should be done before the next election, either presidential or general.

These reforms should go hand in hand with other essential economic reforms because there is no point in trying to rebuild the economy without removing the root causes for its collapse -- concentration of political power in one individual leading to corruption and electoral system that encourages corruption.

Moreover the current parliament and its political formation with bitter experiences still fresh in the memory, is best suited to introduce such major political changes in the interest of the country. The reform of the electoral system will also pave the way for abolition of the executive presidency if the majority of the people wish for it. Either way electoral reforms are a must because it is an undisputed fact that the current proportional representation (PR) system has largely contributed to bring down the quality of our parliamentarians and consequently the image of the whole country in the eyes of the world community.

The much maligned PR system of voting has discouraged the good and the educated from entering politics both at national and local level. In the earlier first-past-the-post system, a good man with some reputation could always aspire to enter the Parliament with a reasonable amount of campaigning within his electorate which is geographically not a vast area.

The campaigning or canvassing in such an area could be done without much cost and if the candidate is from the same electorate it became even easier because the person is already known in the area. With the introduction of the PR system the electorate has become larger and now it is one whole administrative district.

Campaigning in such an area is not possible without a colossal amount of money and unlike in the early days soon after independence, now it is the corrupt that have more money and inevitably the honest and the educated are not able to compete with such people and win an election.

In such a situation it is not fair to blame the people for electing corrupt men as members of parliament especially in a scenario where political parties continue to include corrupt men in their electoral lists. The faulty system which provides little room for good men and women to enter politics finally gives the people little choice. The parliament we have today may be the worst that this system can ever produce and that is why people have gone to the extent of branding all its 225 members as rogues even ignoring the fact there are a few honest men among them.

The poor quality of the elected representatives has contributed in large measure to the current plight of our nation. Mismanagement and economic chaos is inevitable when parliament does not have enough educated, honest men who can actively participate in debate, discussion and policy making.

Now the elected politicians have brought down the country economically to its lowest possible level since independence turning a once prosperous country to a nation of beggars. We should strike the iron while it is hot and there cannot be a better time to change the electoral system. It should certainly happen before the next election whatsoever.  

Read More

Reforms: A silver lining in dark clouds of politics

 

By Gamini Abeywardane

Despite bad news from pandemic, politics and ship wrecks, a horizon of good news is visible in the area of long-delayed economic reforms. Amidst many issues, the government seems to be determined to go ahead with reforms in several sectors --- petroleum, electricity and gas, for the start which can be expanded.

The burden added to the economy by state owned enterprises (SOEs) has been a major obstacle for the economic progress of the country for a long time. Many efforts to reform them, with the exception of telecom and insurance sectors, have failed in the past amidst stiff resistance from the trade unions and short sighted politicians who backed them for petty electoral gains.

Fiscal Management Report 2020–21 of the Ministry of Finance reveals that 31 out of 52 state owned enterprises have incurred an overall loss of Rs 10.4 billion during the first 8 months of 2020. It is just a tip of the iceberg and it is more than obvious that its necessary to reform the state owned enterprises and even the entire public sector itself, if we are to economically progress.

Ceylon Electricity Board, Ceylon Petroleum Corporation, Sri Lankan Airlines, SLTB, Lanka Sathosa, State Engineering Corporation, HDFC Bank and the state owned TV channels Rupavahini and ITN were among the institutions which incurred heavy losses, according to the Finance Ministry.

It is common knowledge that many of these SOEs have no commercial purpose, are riddled with corruption and mismanagement, political interference and consequent lack of professionalism. So much so several years ago an incumbent finance minister referred to the worst of them as a set of monsters swallowing the country’s economy.

But none of them had the political courage to take on the mighty task of reforming them. They instead looked at the immediate political expediency of keeping them as they are, though they very well knew the long term economic disasters such mismanaged entities could bring about.

Despite many pressures from the interested parties to keep these entities under state control, a change of heart by the incumbent Gotabaya Rajapaksa administration is a welcome signal for all those who wish to see some economic progress in our country.

The government last year formed Selendiva Investments, a company fully owned by the Treasury. Selendiva Investments has already created a subsidiary which will be a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) to raise capital for the development of three hotel properties: Grand Hyatt Colombo, Colombo Hilton and the Grand Oriental Hotel (GOH). Two more SPVs are to be formed later, one for a real estate cluster and another for the creation of a ‘heritage square’.

The new SPV will infuse funds into a subsidiary created last year under Waters Edge called Waters Edge Recreation Ltd which will build and operate mixed development projects on identified Urban Development Authority-owned or acquired lands around Colombo and also the Jaffna International Coordinating Centre.

Once the first cluster raises capital for Selendiva, it will proceed to the next clusters which will include the historic General Post Office, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Cey-Nor land at D R Wijewardene Mawatha and the Gaffoor building in the Fort.

This is supposed to be a part of a grand scheme led by the Urban Development and Housing Ministry to follow Singapore’s famous Temasek Holdings model to get the best returns from the state owned assets.

In 1974, the Singapore government established Temasek Holdings to own and manage state-owned enterprises and initially 36 companies directly managed by the government were placed under its control. Today, Temasek is one of the largest government owned entities which has transformed state owned enterprises into financially strong and viable institutions.

Then there is the proposal to amalgamate Litro Gas and LAUGFS Gas supposedly to resolve the debt issues of both companies while transferring the management of the LPG sector to the private sector. Currently both companies are having high debts to the banks as a result of operating with prices controls by the government which is not a sustainable situation any more.

The government has also decided to amend the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation Act ending the state monopoly of import, refining and   marketing, supplying, producing, mixing and distributing of petroleum products. This is another important development as it is high time the government gradually moves out of the petroleum business which has become a highly political issue.  

A proposal by the United States-based energy company M/s New Fortress Energy (NFE) to acquire 27% of the shares in West Coast Power (Pvt) Ltd (WCPL), owner of the Kerawalapitiya Yugadhanavi power station is another noteworthy development as such investments are much needed in the power sector.

The matter is currently on hold due to objections from the CEB Engineers’ Union, but these are important developments that have to take place sooner or later because a complete restructuring of the power sector is necessary to resolve the country’s future power issues while it will rid the treasury of the burden of financing CEB’s losses.

The developments of this nature are naturally opposed by the trade unionists, workers and politicians with populist tendencies who hardly care about the economics involved in these developments. For many decades we have been perpetuating inefficiencies, corruption and cronyism in the name of popular votes and survival of politicians and now it’s time some hard decisions are taken for the future well-being of the economy however unpopular they may be.

Read More

Aflatoxin issue: An ideal platform to set up an effective food administration

By Gamini Abeywardane

The recent brouhaha about contaminated palm oil and the harmful effects of aflatoxin became the subject matter of political debate overshadowing its actual relevance to the health of the people. It also became a platform for a kind of trade war between local coconut oil manufacturers and palm oil importers.

Many were talking about the need to punish the culprits and politics behind it while there was hardly any discussion on finding a permanent solution to perennial issue of toxic and other harmful content in food and food ingredients.

It is necessary to punish those who have knowingly imported or distributed edible oils which are contaminated and harmful to the health of the people. Yet far more important is to have a stronger legal and institutional mechanism akin to the Food and Drug Administration in the US to deal with this issue.

Over the years there has been a lackadaisical attitude towards the quality of foodstuff sold in this country and the general perception has been that with right influence one can bypass all the institutions that are responsible for maintaining the quality standards in this regard.

Food security is obviously a part of the national security and this probably may be the best opportunity for the authorities to look at the issue seriously and to come up with a proper solution.

The issue surfaced through palm oil received country much attention because of the wide media coverage, but it encompasses a range of things which includes locally made coconut oil, imported and locally grown fruits and vegetables, confectionaries, bakery products and many other food items available in the local market.

Some of these food items are not subjected quality control while even those requiring Sri Lanka Standards (SLS) may not be always safe for consumption because of the weaknesses and loopholes in the quality control certification process.

Therefore it is clear that while more stringent legislation is necessary; the existing system also has to be strengthened leaving no room for unscrupulous traders and producers to misuse it through corrupt means.

According to Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations (FAO) food security exists when all people, at all times, have physical, social and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food which meets their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life.

In other words not only should the people have economic access to sufficient food they should also be safe and nutritious and therefore if the available food is not safe for consumption there is no food security.

Food safety refers to routines in the preparation, handling and storage of food. Safe food handling practices and procedures should be implemented at every stage of the food production life cycle if we are to curb health risks and prevent harm to consumers.

It is a well-known fact that the rules and regulations with regard to food security are very stringent and effectively administered in the US, UK, the European Union and other developed countries like Japan while they are poorly administered in the third world countries.

Now the issue has come to the public domain in a prominent manner the government should seize the opportunity to lay the foundation for an effective quality administration system covering all types of food and food ingredients that are available for sale in the market. Like national security it’s a subject that cannot be compromised in the face of popular politics.

Read More

Referendum, an ideal way to formulate national policies

Provision for referenda is a major democratic step in the 1978 Constitution. It can be used very effectively to find out the opinion of the people on vital national issues. The irony is that ever since its introduction it has not been used for the intended purpose. Instead the very man who introduced it, President J R Jayewardene used the referendum in 1982 to extend the life of the Parliament without holding a general election.

By Gamini Abeywardane 

The idea of using the constitutional option of holding a referendum on a nationally important matter came from none other than President Gotabaya Rajapaksa this week. It was when he said he was ready to hold even a national referendum to change the higher education policy to make it suitable for the country’s modern needs.

The occasion was when he met Vice Chancellors of the national universities along with members of the University Grants Commission to discuss the issues relating to reforms in higher education. One of the major current issues is the non employability of particularly arts graduates passing out of the universities due to lack of vital skills needed in the job market.

The issue is a long standing one probably coming down from late sixties, but none of the ruling politicians ever made a genuine effort to sort out the problem. They all have been talking about the abstract idea of higher education reforms and appointing committees to make recommendations while practically doing nothing to sort it out.

With change of medium of instruction and expansion of university education following political and social changes that began in 1956 a new problem arose when the country started producing arts graduates beyond its requirements.

Most of them were qualified in subjects that had practically no relevance for available jobs while they lacked the minimum skills in vital subjects like the English language and information technology. The net result was although the private sector had opportunities they were not ready to employ these graduates.

We cannot afford to go on producing large numbers of non-employable graduates at public expenses. Obviously the system needs major reforms if we are to progress as a country. President Gotabaya Rajapaksa fortunately seems to have correctly understood the issue and also identified the possible solutions without much loss of time.

He had suggested teaching these undergraduates information technology and a foreign language to make them suitable for the employment market. Probably a subject like management also can be included in addition to a main art subject that a student can select.

This is probably the most simple and practical way of resolving the issue although there is likely to be opposition from the traditional academic types.We as a country will not be able to progress unless we introduce some revolutionary changes in our system of education.

As suggested by the President referenda can be used as a way of finding out the opinion of the people on such issues so that whatever the policy changes introduced can be permanent and long lasting, unaffected by political changes.

Provision for referenda is a major democratic step in the 1978 Constitution. It can be used very effectively to find out the opinion of the people on vital national issues. The irony is that ever since its introduction it has not been used for the intended purpose. Instead the very man who introduced it, President J R Jayewardene used the referendum in 1982 to extend the life of the Parliament without holding a general election.

Nearly four decades later it is a salutary development that a leader has thought of using it for nationally important issues. It’s a useful method developed in the Scandinavian countries in order to find the people’s opinion on important matters.

Going one step further, it can be much beneficial if the mode of conducting a referendum can be made easier and less costly with modern technology. Since a referendum is a non-binding one it could be conducted even through the internet. That way the concept of referenda can be used effectively to develop permanent policies on all our national issues.

Often the ideas promoted by political groups are not necessarily the opinion of the people, but eventually they are implemented by fooling the politically active sections of the people causing damage to the country in the long run while the majority of the people observe in silence. So-called revolutionary changes in our university system in the sixties are a classic example and that is where the root of the today’s problem is.

Read More

19th amendment needs modification

By Gamini Abeywardane

Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa when he met a well-known Buddhist monk recently made it clear that the 19^th amendment to the Constitution needs modification. He indicated that it fetters the executive presidency and the newly elected President is able to function because he is in the Premier’s seat.

It is obvious from the experience of the previous government that split of powers of government between the President and the Prime Minister under the current status is so irrational that the country cannot be governed smoothly if there is any disagreement between the Prime Minister and the President.

This is the very malady which technically made the Ranil Wickremesinghe administration wholly ineffective to the extent people felt as if there was no government in the country. Most of the lapses which threatened the national security causing great damage to the economy and finally bringing down the very administration could be attributed to the imbroglio created by the 19^th amendment.

Then what is the solution? It is not certainly going back to the 18^th amendment to the Constitution which gave excessive powers to the President. Some of the good things like the independent commissions created under the 19^th amendment should be retained while removing some of the obstacles created for the executive president directly elected by the people to carry out his normal functions.

For example the nineteenth amendment prohibits the President from holding ministries; nevertheless the appointment of ministry secretaries is entirely within the President’s powers. Cabinet ministers are appointed by the President in consultation with the Prime Minister while the President remains as the head of the cabinet and therefore should preside over the cabinet meetings.

By virtue of the Constitution President is the Head of the state and also of the Government. He is also the commander on chief of all armed forces and he alone has the power to declare peace or war. Such powers are generally inherent in a head of state, but here the point is our head of state is directly elected by the people and the system of government we still have is executive presidency.

In such a situation it can be argued that the executive president who is also the head of the state and head of government should technically have the power to hold the defence ministry although the position under the nineteenth amendment is not quite clear.

These are anomalies that need to be rectified and they cannot be done without the two thirds majority in the Parliament. The next general election that is supposed to be held in the mid-year is quite crucial in that sense and it may not be impossible if the President continues to go on the correct track which we believe he is already on.

In case he is unable to muster that kind of majority on his own he should be supported by the other political parties in the Parliament to correct this anomaly in order to ensure smooth functioning of the Constitution and the system of government it has bestowed on the country.

Read More

Of executive presidency and abolition dreams

The emergency cabinet meeting aimed at abolishing the executive presidency failed to produce any results.  However it speaks volumes about the sudden desire to abolish the executive presidency developing in all quarters of the political spectrum. There is lack of clarity on who called for the cabinet meeting, but it is clear that such a sudden meeting wouldn’t have been possible unless there was some agreement between both President and the Prime Minister.

The abolition of the executive presidency has been in the political debate since the death of President Ranasinghe  Premadasa. Chandrika Kumaratunga, Mahinda Rajapaksa and Maithripala Sirisena, all had the abolition of the executive presidency as a main item in their election manifestos. Some argue that the executive presidency is good for the country, but if that is so its abolition would not have been an attractive theme for election manifestos.

All Presidents have promised good things for the country at the time of elections, but done what is good for them after getting elected. And that has been the fate of this abolition idea so far. Now it has been at least half abolished through the nineteenth amendment. In practice what we have now is more like a quasi-executive presidency as most of its powers have been transferred to the Parliament.  As a result its abolition has become easier than before.

The original nineteenth amendment draft envisaged creating almost a non-executive presidency. However due to the Supreme Court determination and resistance from the then Joint Opposition in the Parliament it was a much different version which was finally passed and it has created a number of new issues. Accordingly even a future government will find it difficult to rule the country because of the possible friction between the Parliament and the President.

By now it is well accepted that the nineteenth amendment to the Constitution in its present form is troublesome and needs modifications. However any modification will involve either transferring powers from the President to the Parliament or vice versa and will not be practically easy even if the next President and the Prime Minister are from the same political party.

Whatever prompted the recent emergency cabinet meeting meant for initiating abolition of the executive presidency was once again not in the interest of the country, but to safeguard the self-interests of those who initiated it. Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe is now pushed to the wall in the face of mounting pressure from a sizable faction of his party to nominate Sajith Premadasa as the presidential candidate. Incumbent President is not in a position to contest for another term. The move is likely to have even the blessings of former President Mahinda Rajapaksa because he is constitutionally prevented from running for presidency again.

The JVP’s recent move to abolish the executive presidency through the proposed twentieth amendment would have been an excellent opportunity to resolve the issue. The move did not find the support of the Prime Minister Wickremesinghe probably because of two reasons. Firstly because he had the ambition of getting into the high post himself and secondly because he thought such a move would facilitate Mahinda Rajapaksa to capture the governmental power through the Parliament.

However now it seems too late to introduce any constitutional amendment before the presidential election. It is unlikely that whoever is elected as the next Executive President will soon work towards abolishing his own position. The only option will be to modify the nineteenth amendment to remove unwanted friction between a future President and the Prime Minister which is again will not be an easy task.

  

Read More

Loss making SOEs need urgent reforms

But no govt. touches the issue because of political sensitivities

By Gamini Abeywardane

In the developed world the elections are often fought based on economic and social policies relevant to the time. For example the solutions to main problems facing the country should be in the manifestos of the contenders at elections and they should be part of the political debate.

Unfortunately in our country the situation seems to be quite different with various unexpected and emotive issues coming into the political debate around the election times. This has been the pattern ever since we gained independence.

Politics of the sixties and seventies was dominated by petty cultural, linguistic and racial issues to the exclusion of vital economic and national priorities. Who will give more free rice and impractical ideas like nationalization or providing government jobs took the centre stage of political debate sidelining the important issues.

Then with emergence of separatist ideas and onset of terrorism in the north the need for countering those tendencies came to the forefront becoming a dominant factor in all subsequent elections. These tendencies resulted in some of the critical issues not finding their due place in the ongoing national debate.

One such area that has escaped due attention is the loss making state enterprises whose burden on the treasury has been escalating at a rapid speed. According to the Ministry of Finance, during the first quarter of 2019 alone, fifty-five state-owned enterprises made Rs 59 billion in losses.

It has been reported that of the state-owned enterprises that make losses the Ceylon Electricity Board continues to lead the pack with a Rs 23 billion loss while the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation  has made losses of Rs. 21 billion and Lanka Sathosa Ltd made losses of Rs. 788 million during the first quarter of 2019.

This trend, if not arrested in time, can have catastrophic effects on the country’s economy and it’s time that political parties open this subject for public discussion without keeping mum over such issues for petty electoral advantage.

Many politicians in our country have opposed the idea of privatization or even part privatization for mere political expediency and have instead advocated reforming loss making entities while they are in state control. The idea is fine, but our experience is such ideas have not worked despite much talk about converting such entities into profitable institutions.

On the contrary, we could see how SriLankan which was a profitable airline under Emirates management became a monumental loss under state control.  At the other end is Sri Lanka Telecom which had poor performance as a state entity which now has not only become a top performer, but has also revolutionized the entire telecom sector in the country after its partial privatization.

Many years ago one had to be a Member of Parliament or a top government official, if one were to obtain a home phone line. Others had to be in a waiting list for several years.  But now it is a matter of one or two hours and just a phone call away – there are enough and more telecom players competing with one another to come home and fix it.

Then take the case of garbage disposal and cleaning of the city of Colombo. Anyone would remember how untidy the city was with dumps of garbage strewn here and there, stray dogs often feeding on them while the municipality had a large number of excess employees among those dedicated to keep the city clean. It’s no secret that most of them were supporters of various politicians and many of them were drawing their salaries even without being physically present at work while attendance were marked through proxies.

Now as a result of outsourcing such work to well organized private sector companies we see a clean city with garbage being removed on daily basis at the correct time. These companies are no doubt making a good profit. It’s because they manage their workers well and do the work with the minimum number of people ensuring maximum utilization of the resources.

A state entity in our country can never achieve that kind of efficiency because of some inherent issues such as political interference, mismanagement, corruption, wastage, inefficiency, indiscipline and lack of incentives. With whatever plans and restructuring efforts we have failed to produce any positive results in these state enterprises and all know they have the potential of becoming profit making institutions under right management.

What we have witnessed in our country is that governments at popular demand keep stuffing all institutions under them with their supporters irrespective of whether there are vacancies or not, especially when elections are around. Politicians generally do not work like businessmen. They have no idea about efficiency or return on investment. They only think of how to remain in power. Therefore the general tendency is to do whatever is within their powers to remain in power and that is how most of the state controlled enterprises became white elephants.

Always there is a vast gap between what is economically right and what is politically feasible. Politicians themselves often do not have the necessary discipline to make these institutions work as they themselves are corrupt. As far as we see making state enterprises profitable under government control is a near impossible task with our political culture.

Divestiture of assets belonging to the state to private sector is a method adopted in many countries as a means of converting lossmaking enterprises into viable entities. Any structural changes in these entities are generally resisted by the workers and their trade unions as they feel insecure with reforms while they are happy to continue with the existing state of affairs. However, these institutions are a burden on the economy and the people in the long run as ultimately they are sustained with taxes from the people.

The situation is made worse when politicians, especially when out of power start backing the wrong side for political gain and try to undermine any efforts at reforming these institutions. Even any form of restructuring is viewed by the workers as a first step towards privatization and therefore generally opposed.

In countries where there is no such political culture like China, Singapore and UAE state enterprises have often produced good results under proper management. Even in neighbouring India there are well-run state enterprises. Some popular examples of such entities are Emirates Airline, Singapore Airline, Indian Oil Corporation and Sinopec in China. It’s worth finding out why such achievements are not possible in Sri Lanka. Merely opposing privatization is not going to solve this problem and if privatization is not acceptable then we should go for Public Private Partnerships.

As suggested by the current government a few years ago this can be achieved by setting up a government owned holding company on the model of Temasek Holdings in Singapore or Investment Corporation of Dubai (ICD) with a mandate to consolidate and manage all government portfolios in state enterprises brought under them. It could provide strategic oversight by developing and implementing strategy and corporate governance policies for the long term benefit of the country. However, for whatever reason no visible progress has been made in this regard.

It is vital to get the private sector into these entities, if we are to reform them in any meaningful manner. Without introducing good corporate governance and discipline they can never be reformed. How much of the shareholding should be divested can be decided depending on the strategic importance of each enterprise. It is understood that the state should have a greater say in certain vital areas, nevertheless it is futile to have that say if these enterprises are only adding burden to the economy.

It is important to have a dialog on this issue and explain to the public the gravity of the situation and the urgent need for reforming these entities, so that all political parties can contribute by suggesting ways and means of depoliticizing the management of these entities and improving profitability without merely opposing reforms for petty political gain.

Read More

Why aren’t good people in the Parliament?

Can educational qualifications be prescribed for parliamentarians?

Every nation is supposed to have the government it deserves. Does it mean the type of Parliament we currently have is what we Sri Lankans deserve? Technically it cannot be so with a highly literate population and a history of a high level of education even from the colonial times.  Then what went wrong?

By Gamini Abeywardane

The diminishing standards of our parliamentarians have been a matter of grave concern to many in the recent times. The apathy of many MPs towards vital economic and national issues, the poor contribution they make through their parliamentary speeches and worst of all rowdy and unruly behaviour of some of them have triggered the question whether it is possible to lay down some minimum educational qualifications for parliamentarians.

Many ask, if you need a paper qualification even for the lowest rank job in the public sector how can one become a member of the highest law making body without any such qualification. Their question sounds logical and reasonable.

However the issue is, in a democracy where universal franchise and equality are highly regarded it is not possible to deprive any person of the opportunity to become a representative of his or her people purely on the ground of educational qualifications. Probably that is why most democracies in the world do not have such limitations.

This position has been recognized by Section 90 of our Constitution which states that every person who is qualified to be an elector shall be qualified to be elected as a Member of Parliament unless he is disqualified under the provisions of Article 91. That literally means if you have the right to vote you also have the right to stand for election as a Member of the Parliament.

Therefore under our law it is not possible to stipulate educational qualifications for parliamentarians. In our neighbouring India the situation is quite different although they do not legally stipulate such qualifications. About 75 per cent of MPs in the current Lok Sabha have at least a graduate degree, while 10 per cent are only matriculates, according to a report by PRS Legislative Research (https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/topic/PRS)

The Union Cabinet always consists of highly educated academics and professionals mostly with multiple qualifications. The current Cabinet of Narendra Modi who himself holds a Master’s Degree has 25 members out of which two have doctorates, six have postgraduate qualifications,  12 are graduates while only five have not received university level education.

Every nation is supposed to have the government it deserves. Does it mean the type of Parliament we currently have is what we Sri Lankans deserve? Technically it cannot be so with a highly literate population and a history of a high level of education even from the colonial times.  Then what went wrong?

Terrorism factor

There are several possible reasons and prime among them is the terrorism factor, specifically that of the LTTE which posed a threat to the ruling class. In short they eliminated the best of our potential leaders --  men like Lalith Athulathmudali, Gamini Dissanayake, C V Gooneratne, Denzil Kobbekaduwa, Janaka Perera, Lukshman Kadirgamar who could have changed the destinies of our country.

When a country has educated leaders at the top level they in turn tend to attract like-minded people for the important positions and the chain reaction goes on encouraging more and more educated and decent professionals into the system. The best way to weaken a country or its government is to destroy its best leaders both the current and the potential.

The LTTE tried to achieve it by eliminating the clever, educated and pragmatic potential leaders from the south and with that threat no good men entered politics for several decades. So the vacuum was filled with those closely connected to existing politicians and their cohorts often promoted from the local and provincial government levels.

On the other hand the LTTE was very careful about whom they wanted to eliminate. They targeted the broadminded and liberal politicians with a vision for sorting out the main issues confronting the country while leaving out the mediocre ones. They never touched the peripheral, communal and chauvinistic ones whom they thought would ultimately help their plans in the north.

PR system of voting

The much maligned Proportional Representation system of voting is another major reason which has discouraged good and educated men from entering politics both at national and local level. In the earlier first- past-the-post system, a good man with some reputation could always aspire to enter the Parliament with a reasonable amount of campaigning within his electorate which is geographically not a vast area.

The campaigning or canvassing in such an area could be done without much cost and moreover if the candidate is from the same electorate it became quite easy because the person is already known in the area. With the introduction of the PR system the electorate has become larger and now it’s one whole administrative district.

Campaigning in such an area is not possible without a colossal amount of money and unlike in the early days soon after independence, now it’s the corrupt that have more money and inevitably the good and the educated are not able to compete with such people and win an election.

Then there is the National List which is expected to be a platform to accommodate some educated members who are able to make useful contribution to national life although the Constitution does not lay down any specific criterion for these appointments. Unfortunately this list is also is being misused as a means of appointing candidates rejected by the people at national elections as Members of Parliament.

In such a situation it is not fair to blame the people for electing wrong members to Parliament. The kind of Parliament we have now is not what the people deserve, it is an electoral outcome distorted by the LTTE’s terrorism through its systematic elimination and made worse by the PR system of voting. Now the LTTE menace is over and we should at least modify the existing PR system if we want to have a set of better parliamentarians and consequently a better government.

Read More

Nineteenth amendment: Gridlock or progressive step?

Westminster or prime ministerial system of government, with whatever its weaknesses, has worked well for centuries and well-developed traditions and conventions are available to meet with any situation. We are probably paying for our sins after haphazardly changing a system of governance which had worked quite well in our country for a long time.

By Gamini Abeywardane

The leaders of the United National party which introduced the 1978 constitution described it as the panacea for all political ills of the country since independence. The political opponents of the UNP saw it as the road to dictatorship and end of all freedoms.

All Presidents that came into power after J R Jayewardene and Ranasinghe Premadasa climbed on to the pinnacle of power on the promise of abolishing the ‘tyrannical’ executive presidency though none of them stuck to their promises beyond the election date. Instead, they enjoyed the powers and perquisites of the high office to the maximum and also examined the possibility of sticking to it beyond the two terms.

The only exception was Maithripala Sirisena who upon his election tried to deliver his promise quite honestly. Fresh from the victory backed by all forces who wanted to re-establish democracy and give the Parliament and the judiciary their due place, Maithripala had no qualms about giving up the massive powers attached to his post.

Probably the reason was, he never contested on his own accord or as a candidate of his own political party, but was handpicked and persuaded to be the common candidate by a combine of all those political parties and the civil society groups that rallied round Venerable Maduluwawe Sobitha Thera to topple the Rajapaksa regime.

Amidst massive opposition, pandemonium in the Parliament and constitutional snags, Maithripala could only go half way in terms of delivering his promise of abolishing the executive presidency. The balance part in terms of the Supreme Court determination was not possible without holding a national referendum.

The nineteenth amendment as such, was the maximum he could have gone, however honest he would have been in his attempt to deliver his promise. Ironically enough even he seems to be now regretting over going that far. He now tells the country that nineteenth amendment is the reason for the mess we are in today ---the scuffle between the Premier Wickremesinghe and him as well as other political woes.

At the same time he stated that the eighteenth amendment almost created an absolute monarchy and there was great need for a change. It is an admission that the nineteenth amendment, despite its faults, was a progressive step. However, at last he seems to find fault with both eighteenth and nineteenth amendments.

Indirectly, the suggestion is that it is better to change the nineteenth amendment before the next presidential election in order to prevent a recurrence of a similar situation in the future. That seems to have some point.

What if the next two elections also produce a President and a Prime Minister who will pull in two different directions? By nature of the nineteenth amendment the holders of the two posts will enjoy some sort of equal power and the worst is if the presidency and the premiership go to two different political parties.

Such a scenario is not impossible particularly in the current context of confusion and chaos with no party or individual in politics considered exceptionally popular. Then, the only option will be to go on for another four and half years as the President under the nineteenth amendment will have no authority to dissolve Parliament before such time.

Consensus

It is only the consensus among political parties that can resolve such an issue in a democracy. However, our experience is that consensus on such a major issue is never possible in our system where the greed for power and perks overtakes national interest.

That way the country has no other option than tolerating all the ills of the Constitution and the system until some party obtains two thirds majority in the Parliament which is again a near impossibility under the prevailing proportional representation system.

Thus the possibility is for the nineteenth amendment in the present form to remain a part of the Constitution whether one likes it or not. All this would have been avoided if the process to draft a new Constitution that began in the Parliament several years ago had seen its fruition.

A major part of the work in that regard has been already done, but it is not possible to go ahead with it in the prevailing political climate. It is also unlikely that a future government will be able to revive that process and continue with it from where it has been stopped.

However, with date for Presidential elections fast approaching there is no time for debate over any such things and inevitably the matter will be left to the next President and the Parliament to resolve.

So the likelihood is that there will not be any possibility for a totally new Constitution, but piecemeal changes may be introduced from time to time depending on the outcome of each election. We will have to live with each amendment for some time to see how workable they are.

Future politics will be complicated with unexpected issues coming up because of the friction between Parliament and the President. The reason is there are no conventions or precedents in our system because we are still experimenting with our presidential form of government.

Judicial interpretation

The only hope in this regard can be the judicial process which will be able to play a decisive role in interpreting the provisions of the Constitution as happened in the recent judgments of the superior courts in the unsuccessful attempt to dissolve the Parliament.

The matter can also get resolved to some extent if the next government gets a clear majority in the Parliament. Still there is a greater possibility that many of the matters of friction among the various agencies of the government will end up in courts and that can be one way of resolving some of these issues once and for all.   

A Constitution like any other system has to evolve and maybe we are going through this evolution. Further amendments or judicial interpretations will become necessary to overcome every obstacle that we may confront on the path of our constitutional development. The country’s courts will have a definite role to play in it.

Westminster or prime ministerial system of government, with whatever its weaknesses, has worked well for centuries and well-developed traditions and conventions are available to meet with any situation. We are probably paying for our sins after haphazardly changing a system of governance which had worked quite well in our country for a long time.

Read More