News
President going to SC over term: UNP largely silent, JHU says nothing wrong, JVP hits out
Consequent on President Maithripala Sirisena seeking the opinion of the Supreme Court (SC) on whether he can stay in office for six years till 2021–political parties and other organisations that chose not to intervene in the matter expressed differing views.
The United National Party (UNP), the main coalition partner in the Government of President Sirisena’s Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP), largely chose to remain silent on the whole issue. UNP Deputy General Secretary and Education Minister Akila Viraj Kariyawasam told the Sunday Times that the party had “not discussed” the matter.
“Our party’s Working Committee is also yet to meet, so there has been no opportunity for us to discuss it,” he stressed, adding that the UNP had no further comment.
The Jathika Hela Urumaya (JHU) which is also part of the Government, did not see anything wrong in President Sirisena’s seeking the Supreme Court’s opinion over his term of office, Nishantha Sri Warnasinghe, the JHU’s National Organiser said.
Mr. Warnasinghe acknowledged that the President’s move to seek the court’s opinion “had set off ripples in political circles” but he said it was the President’s right to seek the opinion of the highest court of the land on whether his term of office was five years or six.
“The key point is whether the 19th Amendment applied to his term too as he was sworn in before it came into effect. We see nothing wrong in him clarifying the matter. It is his Constitutional right and ,frankly, there is no reason to be alarmed by it,” the JHU member added.
Mr. Warnasinghe, though, said the President’s move might have upset the plans of some people “who have ambitions of being a future Prime Minister or President” and they were the ones who were raising their voices the most.
The President’s move to seek the court’s opinion came amidst the campaign for local government elections, pointed out Nizam Kariyapper, the Sri Lanka Muslim Congress (SLMC) Secretary. He claimed the SLMC had been too busy with their campaign to discuss the matter. “It is anyway over now. The SC will convey its opinion to the President. We don’t wish to comment,” he stressed.
While the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) too did not intervene when the matter was heard in court this week, JVP Propaganda Secretary Vijitha Herath said that in seeking the SC’s opinion, President Sirisena had clearly demonstrated that he had no intention of abolishing the Executive Presidency, as he had earlier promised to do.
“During the last Presidential Election, President Sirisena campaigned as the common candidate on a platform to abolish the Executive Presidency. He received a mandate from the people to do just that. Yet, he chose to introduce the 19th Amendment, which only curtailed some powers of the President while reducing the term of office from six years to five. The promise to abolish the Executive Presidency remains unfulfilled,” he pointed out.
“President Sirisena had also publicly stated that he had wanted to reduce the President’s term of office to four years under 19A but that he had been advised by legal experts to make it five years. As such, the President himself has publicly stated that he would prefer a further reduction,” he said.
Mr Herath also noted that the President’s latest move indicates that not only does he hope to keep the Executive Presidency, but that he is also interested in standing for a second term.
“In the end, the matter is up to the SC. However, we believe the President’s move raises serious ethical questions on his part.”
Meanwhile, the Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) also chose not to intervene during the SC hearing. BASL Secretary Amal Randeniya said the association had made the decision not to intervene or comment on the matter which was before the SC. “However, we sent a notice to our members informing them that if individual members wished to intervene, they could do so.”
This week, a five judge bench of the Supreme Court comprising Chief Justice Priyasath Dep, Justice Eva Wanasundara, Justice Buwaneka Aluvihare, Justice Sisira de Abrew and Justice K.T. Chitrasiri heard arguments regarding the President’s term of office.