Columns

The country’s struggle to stay afloat in the middle of the economic crisis that it faces is further compounded by the inability of the political parties in Parliament to reach agreement expeditiously with regard to the initial steps that have to be taken to ensure political stability.

Justice Minister Dr.Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe has presented the 21st Amendment as the first step in the process of correcting the historic mistake made by the enactment of the 20th Amendment. While there seems to be general consensus with regard to the need to revive the provisions of the 19th Amendment, there is also considerable foot dragging on the part of some Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) members, with regard to its support for the 21st Amendment.

These members have come up with the ludicrous argument that the economic crisis should be resolved before any political reforms should be undertaken.

There are no takers for this position with the general consensus being that the economic crisis is inextricably tied up with the political crisis and that addressing the latter will facilitate the resolution of the economic crisis. In fact it will ensure the necessary political stability that will inspire the international community to reach out toSri Lanka in its time of need.

The real objective of the detractors from the SLPP seems to be to prevent the passage of the provisions that prevent dual citizens holding any important positions in the structure of governance. Their unstated interest in ensuring that this provision does not get into the statute books is to enable Basil Rajapaksa to remain in office rather than the national interest.

The dual citizenship issue is more a matter of principle than one relating to the political fortunes of anyone individual. A dual citizen who holds high political office is constantly facing a conflict of interest as a result of dual loyalties which may arise when taking critical decisions that involve the second country of the dual citizen.

Thus the dual citizenship issue is not about one individual but rather relates to a larger principle. In fact it will not result in any injustice to any individual. If Basil Rajapaksa is strongly desirous of serving the people of Sri Lanka all he has to do is to give up his US citizenship and retain his Sri Lankan citizenship.

In fact the issue of the Constitution permitting dual citizens holding public office was raised by Wimal Weerawansa and Udaya Gammanpila among several others with President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, at the time the 20th Amendment was being discussed. On that occasion the President won the support of the dissenters for the 20th Amendment with the assurance that he would ensure that such a provision will be excluded when a new Constitution was drafted.

It is therefore imperative that he takes the lead in pushing through the provisions in the 21st Amendment including the removal of the provision permitting a dual citizen to hold high political office. Failure to do so will be tantamount to giving the interest of an individual priority over that of the national interest.

The need to enact the 21A without further delay is underscored by the fact that the proposals contained in the draft before the Cabinet contains provisions relating to depoliticisation of the administration which are critical in the current context.

The 21 Amendment also contains welcome provisions relating to the restoration of the Constitutional council although the composition of the council in the draft is problematic. Having seven politicians and only three members from civil society may defeat the very purpose for which the Constitutional council is being set up.

The ideal composition would be seven civil society members and three politicians if the Constitutional council is to achieve its objectives.

The 21 Amendment seeks to set up several independent commissions including the Audit Commission and the Procurement Commission which will pave the way for minimising corruption and also result in a qualitative change in governance.

The recent spate of violence on May 9 this year, and the failure to curb or prevent such violence can be attributed to the Police being hamstrung by the process of politicisation set in motion by the removal of the independent commissions including the Police Commission.

The extent of politicisation of the Police after the passage of the 20th Amendment is evident from the statement of Police Inspector General C. D. Wickramaratne.

The IGP is reported to have made an important revelation. He had pointed out that 126 out of 184 officers appointed to head Police stations in the first 11 months of last year did not face even preliminary interviews and were given appointments due to political influence. Three inspectors were also appointed due to political pressure despite being disqualified to become OICs.

According to the report, there were 360 disciplinary cases against Police officers, but despite adverse reports, many were even promoted due to political pressure from government MPs.

Clearly corruption and politicisation are not burdens that the country can carry at this time when it is gasping for breath. It is imperative that the 21st Amendment is quickly passed and the Government turns its attention to the larger political reforms and economic reforms that are imperative in the medium and long term. (javidyusuf@gmail.com)