The Political Column

Emerging new alignments

The political situation has once again assumed a sense of uncertainty. In the words of SLMC leader Rauf Hakeem, the two main parties, the PA and the UNP, are looking at each other, not knowing what the other side is up to.

He was obviously referring to the no-confidence motion against the government. "The storm is gathering and members are put into a predicament. But what concerns the SLMC more than anything is lasting peace," the SLMC leader said adding that his party was ready to play the historic role of being the catalyst in bringing about consensus politics between the two main parties.

As Mr. Hakeem puts it, when both the PA and the UNP realise that the fate of the no-faith motion hinges on the support of the SLMC, the situation will warrant the SLMC to play the role of a catalyst. The SLMC, Mr. Hakeem said would push for consensus between the two main parties to form a government of national reconciliation.

"If both these parties are jockeying for power and positions then it would be a different scenario altogether. If these two parties come together to resolve the burning North-East question, then there comes a situation where we can forget everything and join hands to achieve a primary objective of bringing about peace in a troubled land. That is why we do not want our position known earlier," the SLMC leader told this column.

The SLMC's position is a typical stand any minority party or small party would adopt given the present configuration in parliament. Small parties thrive in situations in which main parties are bogged down in political uncertainty. 

But there appears to be some kind of uncertainty within the SLMC itself after the death of Rizwi Sinnalebbe who was included in the PA national list of MPs on the recommendation of the SLMC/NUA. Now the question is which party will have the moral and legal right to appoint a replacement. 

Mr. Hakeem said the PA had three options _ to keep the SLMC out of it, to keep the vacancy open or it can invite the SLMC to appoint a member.

If the government invites Mr. Hakeem to appoint a replacement, it could open the door for a new relationship between the PA and the SLMC. It may also help heal the wound inflicted on the SLMC when the President unceremoniously sacked Mr. Hakeem from the cabinet. Given this scenario, the SLMC appears not keen on bringing down the PA administration. It has set its eyes on a broader political objective _ bringing about national reconciliation _ with which it hopes to rebuild its tarnished image, especially among the majority community.

But SLMC insiders said they believed that Mr. Hakeem was inclined towards the UNP. They likened the SLMC's link with the UNP to a fly in a jam pot, unable to get out of it. 

They asked how could the SLMC take such a stance when the UNP had gone all out to safeguard the interest of the SLMC in every sphere, including its many legal battles. There was no way that the SLMC could get out of this scenario and think of a different approach now, they said.

But they conceded that if the opposition could be armed with a no-confidence motion that could threaten the government, the SLMC would be in a position to coerce the government to think in terms of forming a government of national reconciliation.

It is true that the UNP lawyers, including K.N. Choksy, Romesh de Silva and Ikram Mohamed, were heavily involved in SLMC cases. Even on the issue of nominating a successor to Mr. Sinnalebbe, SLMC lawyers have consulted Romesh de Silva.

Meanwhile, political observers say that it was unlikely the PA would ask the SLMC to fill the vacancy. They also feel that the PA stands to gain if it asks the SLMC to nominate the new MP, while pointing out that the SLMC is unlikely to demand any positions as its sole aim now is to strengthen its base in Muslim-dominated areas.

Mr. Hakeem was in for a fresh problem on Wednesday when he realised that Speaker Anura Bandaranaike had not invited him for a discussion where small parties were to decide on their nominee to the Constitutional Council. The Secretary General of Parliament invited leaders of the TULF, TELO, ACTC, JVP, SU, EPDP and other independent groups to this meeting. The Secretary General had invited Ferial Ashraff instead of Mr. Hakeem to represent the NUA. This created a controversy in political circles.

Mr. Hakeem told this column that the Supreme Court had held that NUA and the PA were alliances with constituent parties. There were no individual members representing the PA and the NUA. The leadership battle of the NUA was pending before the District Court. Therefore the decision of the Parliament Secretary General to omit the SLMC is a preposterous decision.

Opposition political parties including the JVP who met at the Mayor's Centre on Wednesday backed the SLMC. Though Mr. Hakeem was not invited, all other political parties stood by him and told the Speaker that they would walk out if Mr. Hakeem was not invited.

But later Speaker Anura Bandaranaike invited the SLMC to the meeting.

Mr. Hakeem also penned out a letter to the Speaker, stating his position on the matter and questioning the validity of inviting Ms. Ashraff to the meeting. The letter says: 

"My attention is drawn to a letter dated 1st October 2001, sent under the hand of the Secretary General of Parliament Dhammika Kitulgoda, to the party leaders in Parliament of the TULF, TELO, ACTC, JVP, SU, EPDP and the Independent Group 2, to discuss the appointment of a person to the Constitutional Council as required by Article 41a (1) (f) of the Constitution.

"I am surprised to note that the said letter of invitation had also been extended to Ferial Ashraff MP in the purported capacity as the Parliamentary Group Leader of the NUA.

"I wish to bring to your kind notice that the name of Ms. Ashraff was substituted for the late M.H.M. Ashraff after his death in the nomination list of the PA in the Digamadulla District. Ms. Ashraff was thereafter elected as a Member of Parliament. Therefore, it is respectfully submitted that Ms. Ashraff does not fall within the category of a leader of a party as contemplated by Article 41a (1) (f) of the Constitution.

"At the last Parliamentary Elections, three candidates of the NUA were returned to Parliament, to represent the Districts of Kandy, Wanni and Batticaloa and one member was elected in terms of Article 99 A of the Constitution. I have been elected as the Group Leader of the said four Members of Parliament and seven other MPs who were recommended by the Sri Lanka Muslim Congress and returned to Parliament under the PA. I continue to function as the group leader of the said eleven MPs in Parliament to date.

"In these circumstances I urge you to defer the said meeting or in the alternative afford an opportunity to the said members of Parliament elected to Parliament to represent matters to you on this issue." 

At Thursday's meeting with the Speaker, Mr. Hakeem protested against the presence of Ms. Ashraff who had also been invited by the Secretary General of Parliament to the meeting. When Mr. Bandaranaike assured him that it would not create a precedence Mr. Hakeem cooled down.

Then came the time to appoint the member representing small parties in the Constitutional Council. The Sihala Urumaya protested over the JVP nominee Gamini Epa, the former Auditor-General on the basis that he was in the national list of Sirisena Cooray's Purawesi Peramuna at the October 2000 elections. The SU in fact wrote a letter to the Speaker to this effect and the Speaker upheld its protest. However, the SU did not succeed in getting its nominee Prof. Buddhadasa Hewavitharana as the JVP came up with a fresh name, which was acceptable to many. The JVP nominee was eminent lawyer and UNHCR's legal expert S. S. Wijeratne.

Five other members were to be appointed jointly by the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition and the two leaders were scheduled to meet on Friday to finalise the list. The council will also have a presidential nominee in addition to the three ex-officio members _ the Prime Minister, the Speaker and the Opposition Leader.

Beside these, the SLMC-UNP alliance has caused some resentment in the UNP circles in the east. The UNP's Muslim politicians from the east are of the view that their party enjoys more support than the SLMC and the PA in the east.

They point out that at last year's general elections, former SLMC leader M.H.M. Ashraff had to contest under the PA banner in a bid to defeat his arch rival Myown Mustapha. 

The SLMC normally polls about 70,000 votes in the Digamadulla district and the PA polls roundabout 42,000. The UNPers say the UNP' strength in the Digamadulla is much more than the PA-SLMC combine. They say that in the event of a three-party battle in the east, the UNP would emerge as the winner with most number of seats. Thus they insist that if there is a UNP-SLMC electoral pact, SLMC candidates in the east should contest under the UNP banner.

These UNP politicians, especially those in the Digamadulla district, are bringing pressure on the UNP leadership, saying that the UNP should not lose out in a deal with the SLMC. But some SLMCers are of the view that the UNP is amenable to their proposals _ to accommodate the SLMC in the East because the SLMC has made certain sacrifices for the UNP.

"In this game, it is a give-and-take policy and the UNP should be able to make some sacrifices for the SLMC," one SLMCer told this column. But it appears that UNP politicians in the East are adamant and they insist the party can sweep the board on its own.

But now, the immediate problem faced by the UNP is as to whether it could defeat the government at the vote on the no-confidence motion. There is speculation that the government is also trying to take the motion for debate on October 9 as it is confident that the UNP does not have the required numbers in parliament. 

The UNP is also pressing for an earlier date. A decision in this regard will be taken at the party leaders' meeting on Monday.

However, some UNP MPs are doubtful whether they could really make it because most of them think the SLMC might not support the motion. The SLMC is keeping its decisions close to its leader's chest. The UNP is wondering as to what the government's strategy would be and many analysts believe that both the PA and the UNP are groping in the dark as far as the no-confidence motion is concerned.

The more radical wings of the UNP believe that the no-confidence motion is gathering momentum with former ministers S. B. Dissanayake and G. L. Peiris trying to form a separate political entity such as the UNP Breakaway Group. In such a situation there is precedence in the Supreme Court rulings that a breakaway group could exist without any problem in Parliament. So far, it is said that nearly 14 members from the PA had pledged support to the S. B. Dissanayake-G.L. Peiris group, and they are in the process of forming the new party which will go into a broader alliance with the UNP. It may be that at the next election, the breakaway group of the PA would contest on its own in the Nuwara Eliya and Matara districts and in other districts it will contest under the UNP.

The PA and the JVP are also planning a similar arrangement. The JVP will contest some southern districts on its own while the PA will accommodate JVP members in its list in other districts under this arrangement.

The JVP is all upbeat with the prospects of a fresh election as it could claim credit for a series of people-friendly measures that are being implemented under the PA-JVP deal. Slashing of the cabinet to 20, the write off of farmer debts and the setting up of the Constitutional Council and the independent commissions have turned out to be political investments for the JVP.

The JVPers are great communicators and they know how to market election campaign with what they have achieved with only 10 MPs.

But it is not the elections that keep the PA guessing these days, but it is the no-confidence motion. The PA feels it is not the right time for elections, because it feels the odds are against it with PA dissidents ganging up with the UNP. So, the PA is likely to try out various methods to avoid such a scenario. 

The PA also seems to be preparing itself for the worst scenario _ the defeat at the vote on the no-confidence motion. It may allow the UNP to form the government but the President will keep the important portfolios of defence and finance. She may also not agree to the appointment of PA dissidents to the cabinet, which is headed by her. 

The President could even sack these dissidents from the party, thus disqualifying them from holding cabinet posts. But the dissidents could go to courts. If the Supreme Court upholds the sacking of dissidents for voting against the government, then the President will once again gain the upper hand. But this could happen only three months after the sacking of dissidents. She may then even push for a no-confidence motion against the UNP-led government.

Another scenario may unfold if the UNP tries to defeat the budget in order to get an election? This can be a possibility, but the question is as to which government will be in power during the budget.

The Parliament is unable to dissolve by itself after it completes one year and both the PA and the UNP are heading for a tricky situation if they are to debate the no-confidence motion at this juncture.

The best option in the circumstances for both parties is to think nationally and act nationally and set up a government of national reconciliation in the interest of people. 

Situation Report

Editorial/ Opinion Contents