100 days over but who is in charge?
View(s):The 100-day programme or revolution as promised by the Sri Lanka Government has ended and various theories abound as to the extent to which the Government has fulfilled its promises and what it set out to do.
The business community however is still not convinced that the country is still on the right path, as promised by the new regime, and concerned about current political developments, utter confusion and instability.
Nothing else is happening in business in terms of new investment decisions, new foreign investors. The retail trade however appears to be doing well with supermarkets showing sharp growth in sales and increased consumer buying.
President Maithripala Sirisena in an address to the nation on Thursday, spelling out what has been achieved in this period reflected on a few crucial issues. He believed the Government has delivered on what it promised – dispel global perceptions that Sri Lanka is a nation that violates the rights of people; ending corruption and blockage on free speech and freedom; and presentation of crucial constitutional and electoral reforms that would curb the powers of the president and enable people with better values to be elected to parliament.
Another key inference in his address is that he was elected on the basis of reducing the powers of the president (through the 19th Amendment).
Over the past three months, the Business Times and its opinion polls’ partner, the Colombo-based Research and Consultancy Bureau have conducted polls dubbed ‘BT-RCB opinion polls’ engaging the people through street and email views and comments on the performance of the new regime.
Throughout these opinion polls, the overall view has been to hold parliamentary elections after dissolving parliament as scheduled (April 23) under the 100-day programme.
While the Government tried to keep to that timetable, rumblings in sections of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) didn’t permit that to happen. The new date of dissolution now appears to be in early May though this may change (and parliament dissolved even earlier) if the plan to approve the 19th Amendment fails.
In recent weeks, the question ‘who is in charge in Sri Lanka’ is being asked over and over again. Is it President Sirisena or Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe?
Business Times Columnist Chandrasena Maliyadde brings an interesting dimension to the “who is in charge” issue comparing it to the period of the rule of kings. He writes: “There was a short period when both Subha and Yasa were ruling the country by taking turns. Subha in the morning and Yasa in the latter part of the day. Neither the Ministers nor the people knew who was in command as both of them claimed the throne. Today it is Maithri and Ranil. Both call the Government as my Government. People who are not familiar with the concepts of National Government and co-habitation are watching and waiting.”
Three months after Maithripala Sirisena ousted his former ‘boss’, Mahinda Rajapaksa, the ‘who is in charge’ question is also being constantly asked by the business community.
Two weeks ago the Chamber of Commerce urged the President to call elections as early as possible citing uncertainty and “diverse positions taken on the forthcoming general election by parties currently forming the coalition government”.
It said a period of uncertainty prevails over the current business climate and both local and foreign investors are adopting a cautious approach towards investing in Sri Lanka. However the statement said it was willing to accept the Government position of delaying polls to accommodate crucial constitutional reforms as long as it doesn’t extend to far beyond the scheduled dates. In a subsequent statement, the chamber also urged all political parties to support the 19th Amendment.
Issues continue on the Colombo Port City project with civil society rights group saying the government’s review of the project must be conducted with complete transparency, inclusive of a mechanism for public submissions to this review process; and over the report of a 3-member committee on the Central Bank’s Treasury bond fiasco.
While the verdict on the Port City project is still unclear, the probe committee on the bond issue appears to have exonerated Central Bank Governor Arjuna Mahendran. Quoting from their report that is due to be presented to parliament tomorrow, Deputy Minister of Policy Planning and Economic Affairs Harsha de Silva said the committee has ruled out any direct involvement by the Governor in the transaction. This means there was an ‘indirect’ involvement and what this means (still) remains a secret until the contents of the report are revealed to the public.
Does it mean that in Mr. Mahendran’s role as Governor he has to take responsibility or is there are a different implication in the report? The report has also said that the transaction merits a further investigation which the Committee has no mandate to do except present the facts.
To be fair to the Government (and in this case, meaning the Prime Minister’s faction in the cabinet given the uncertainty of ‘who is in charge’), the bond report was ready to be presented to parliament on Monday but was delayed by the chaos over the presentation of the 19th Amendment.
On Thursday, Mr. Mahendran returned to his desk at the Central Bank but was that a wise decision with the contents of the report yet to be discussed in parliament? The decision to return was based on a high-level government decision and may have been prompted by the already-delayed release of the Central Bank’s annual report for 2014. The annual report, in the past five years, is normally issued in the first week of April.
Issues have also been raised about gaps in the SriLankan Airlines probe committee report pertaining to the role of the board of directors. While the committee has made serious strictures against the chairman and CEO, there is little or no reference to th role of the directors who are equally culpable in the decisions taken. On the other hand, the continuation in office of some heads of department against whom many issues of mismanagement and politicisation have been made also raises questions of good governance and accountability.
Most business leaders are of the view that the 19th Amendment and along with it the creation of independent commissions on elections, police and the judiciary should be approved before an election is held.
They also agree with the widely-held public view that the country is without any clear leadership and any clear idea of who is in charge which is not good for business and the economy. “The President must be assertive, must be strong … which is not the case now as the country appears leaderless,” said one business leader.
Elections being held under the ambit of the new commissions covering elections and police would be the best thing to happen as the country heads towards another rumbustious poll with a hung parliament as the likely result.