Columns

By Sandun Jayawardana  

The passage of the 22nd Amendment (22A) to the Constitution, widely considered as a key component in the political reform process, was delayed in Parliament this week amid sharp divisions between the government and opposition over the draft amendment.

Differences of opinion regarding the content of the draft amendment were far more apparent within the ruling Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP), despite the rather clumsy attempt by government leaders to hide it and pin the blame for the delay on the opposition.  

A two-day debate on the second reading on 22A had earlier been scheduled for Thursday (6) and Friday (7). On Thursday morning however, President Ranil Wickremesinghe took to the floor to make a special statement regarding the current economic situation where he briefed MPs regarding measures taken by the government to take the country out of the crisis.

At the conclusion of the President’s speech, Leader of the House Susil Premajayantha announced that the government was prepared to grant a debate on President Wickremesinghe’s speech with the agreement of the House. The announcement prompted Chief Opposition Whip Lakshman Kiriella to query whether Mr Premajayantha was asking to hold the debate on that day itself. “We are ready, but does that mean the 22nd Amendment will not be moved today?” he queried.

It then became apparent that the government was not ready to proceed with the debate on 22A, with Prime Minister Dinesh Gunawardena blaming the opposition for blocking the passage of 22A. He claimed that the Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) led by Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa and several other opposition parties had indicated to him the previous evening of their inability to support the draft amendment. “We deeply regret this,” said the PM. Mr Gunawardena however, conveniently omitted to mention that the SLPP too was clearly divided over 22A, given that party General Secretary Sagara Kariyawasam had told a press conference the previous day that a constitutional amendment was not what the people were demanding at this stage.

Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa disputed the PM’s claims, saying that while some MPs in the opposition had met the PM the previous day to discuss several issues in relation to 22A, they had never stated they would not be able to support it. “We wanted to know if more amendments were being introduced to the draft. For example, will an attempt be made at the Committee Stage to remove the clause prohibiting dual citizens from entering Parliament? Will the powers given to the president to dissolve Parliament after 2 ½ years be increased to 4 ½ years? We did not receive any assurances from the PM at the time.”

The SJB had not reached a final decision on whether or not to support 22A, Mr Premadasa said, and thanked Justice Minister Wijeyadasa Rajapakashe for responding positively to concerns raised by the opposition. “We can’t allow 22A to become another 20A. It cannot serve as an exercise to deceive the people,” he insisted.

Mr Kiriella meanwhile, called for the appointment of a Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) to further discuss the constitutional amendments.

Everything that is in 22A was discussed and agreed upon after four days of deliberations between 43 MPs representing the leadership of parties in Parliament. The Supreme Court has also recommended five amendments to 22A that would enable it to be passed without a referendum. The government intends to introduce those amendments, Justice Minister Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe stated.

“This amendment was brought in for the sake of the country; not for a party, group or MPs,” he claimed. The minister called on MPs to come together and pass the amendment in order to safeguard democracy and the parliamentary system.

A clearly frustrated Minister Rajapakshe recalled that there was a time not too long ago when MPs could not step out in public owing to fears over their safety. “It is up to you to go back to that Dark Age if that is your wish, but I appeal to you not to make that mistake again.”

The debate on 22A was listed on the order paper of Parliament and it should not be put off, argued SLPP MP Weerasumana Weerasinghe, who is sitting with the opposition. He called on the Justice Minister to make his appeal for unity not to the opposition, but to those within his own government. “We shouldn’t let the 225 MPs of this House be used to advance the agendas of one or two people,” he further stressed.

Pivithuru Hela Urumaya (PHU) Leader Udaya Gammanpila meanwhile, appealed to the Speaker not to allow the process of introducing a constitutional amendment to be crippled due to the intentions of one or two MPs. “If someone is trying to sabotage this process, let us expose them.”

National Freedom Front (NFF) Leader Wimal Weerawansa accused the government of arbitrarily postponing the debate. “As far as we understand, this is due to the prohibition on dual citizens from holding public office,” he noted. Mr Weerawansa claimed that the debate is being held up due to the opposition of 10-15 government MPs whose strings were being pulled by “Mola Hathano” (The one with seven brains), a term he frequently uses to refer to former Finance Minister and SLPP National Organiser Basil Rajapaksa.

With the matter deadlocked, Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena convened a meeting of the Committee on Parliamentary Business, where it was decided on Friday to hold the debate on 22A on October 20 and 21. Only time will tell whether this is enough for the parties to iron out their differences for the passage of a bill that requires a 2/3 majority in Parliament to pass.

Parliament will reconvene
at 9.30am on October 18