Who outfoxed whom?

Dissolution was not openly discussed. Minister Mangala Samaraweera vexed eloquently that parliament would not be dissolved and they would face the no-confidence motion, come Thursday. 

Mr. Samaraweera told UNP whip Tyronne Fernando that the President was of the view that even if the government was defeated, the PA would form a government of national reconciliation.

But early this week, government printing units had received orders for election material, indicating that the government was also toying with that idea.

In any case, the government never expected a mass defection. But when it happened it was caught unawares, exposing its poor intelligence gathering.

In the words of one PA defector, President Chandrika Kumaratunga's arrogant attitude and her desire to arrogate powers to herself brought about this humiliation.

But now the government has acted differently and dissolved parliament when it became clear by Wednesday that a mass defection from the PA was inevitable. Dissolution became the safe option for the PA to save face. But analysts say what the PA feared more was not the defeat at the vote on the no-confidence motion, but a opposition move to impeach the President, probably on Wednesday itself. 

The impeachment resolution could have prevented the President from dissolving parliament. A senior lawyer told this column that if the UNP had handed over the impeachment motion even with half the signatures of half the number of MPs, it would have put the government in a difficult situation. Of course, in that case, the Speaker had the discretion to either accept or reject it, but it was a different issue. But it would have made the situation more confounded, he said. But an impeachment motion was not to be. 

In view of fears of an impeachment motion, the government was forced to act fast. Hence the dissolution — a move that put the PA one step ahead of the UNP-led opposition. Now the government is in an advantageous position as far as the December 5 elections are concerned. It has under its command officials and the government machinery to use or misuse to promote its cause.

The government also knew that if the no-faith motion was passed, the President had only a few options. Since the cabinet stands dissolved in such a scenario, she would be compelled to ask the UNP leader or a member who commands the respect of a majority of MPs to form the next government. Or she could have dissolved parliament. For obvious reasons, she preferred the second option, so that she could have the full power of her own cabinet. 

Soon after the S. B. Dissanayake-led crossover took place, the President consulted her staunch loyalists. While some said they should allow the UNP to form a government, others advised that the dissidents should be crushed at a hurriedly announced election. There were also suggestions to prorogue parliament so that it would give the PA time to convince defectors and potential defectors to remain in the party. 

The President then wanted to convene an emergency cabinet meeting. Instead, she summoned the parliamentary group meeting. Minister Ronnie de Mel, who many believed would also cross over, was also present. Sources said he was there to present a case for a government of national reconciliation. 

President Kumaratunga feared the dissension in her own camp would be aggravated if she allowed UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe to be the Prime Minister. She thought that once a UNP government came into proper shape, more PA parliamentarians would back the UNP to oust her through an impeachment motion. The first step towards this end would have been to appoint a loyal UNP member as the Speaker, replacing Anura Bandaranaike, whose loyalty to the UNP has come under a cloud. Such a move will make things more difficult for President Kumaratunga. So she now believes she has acted properly to avert scenarios that would have prevented her from completing a full second term in office as President, some analysts say.

The PA believes that at the December elections, the UNP will get no more than 100 seats. The JVP, which signed a memorandum of understanding with the PA, is likely to back the government at the elections and tell the country how the UNP dilly-dallied on the 17th Amendment to the Constitution. It is expected to harp on the UNP's lack of interest in strengthening the democratic process, abolishing the executive presidency, setting up of independent commissions and other progressive moves.

One of the JVP's intentions was to bring legislation that would enable a caretaker government headed by the Chief Justice to be in charge during elections, like in Bangladesh. The JVP laments all its good intentions had been squashed by the UNP and its acolytes who crossed over. 

However, some legal experts say a close examination of the 17th Amendment will show that the Commissioner of Elections could exercise all functions of the independent commission until it is constituted.

Section 27(2) of the Amendment states:

"The person holding office as the Commissioner of Elections on the day immediately preceding the date of the commencement of this Act, shall continue to exercise and perform the powers and functions of the office of Commissioner of Elections as well as vested in him immediately prior to the commencement of this Act, and of the Election Commission in constituted terms of Article 104, and shall, from and after the date on which the election commission is so constituted, cease to hold office as the Commissioner of elections."

The dissolution had its impact on the UNP. It put many UNP parliamentarians in an awkward position because electioneering involves a lot of money. They face a herculean task in raising the money for a second election in just over one year. 

The UNP's sole aim was to form a government of national reconciliation if it won the no-confidence motion. It did not want to form a UNP-led government because such a government would be unstable due to presidential intervention and manoeuvring. For instance, by sacking PA rebels, she could create more upheavals in their ranks. Conscious of this scenario, the UNP was anxious to strike a deal with the PA to form a government of national reconciliation.

As a last ditch effort for consensus, SLMC leader Rauf Hakeem and UNP constitutional expert K. N. Choksy met Minister Lakshman Kadirgamar, who was one of the ministers appointed to talk to the UNP. They discussed two contentious issues — the setting up of a cabinet from both parties and creating a post of executive vice president. The creation of an executive vice presidency became a sticky point, and it had been rejected by both the UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe and his deputy Karu Jayasuriya. The other point of no return was the demand put forward by President Kumaratunga that both PA rebels S. B. Dissanayake and G. L. Peiris should not be included in the Cabinet.

The government of national reconciliation is also the aim of SLMC leader Mr. Hakeem. He told this column earlier that he would not let his decision known until the last moment since he was keen on the setting up of a more productive government with both parties sitting in the same cabinet. It could be done only if the PA realised that there could not be a government without the SLMC and the UNP realised that the no-confidence motion could not materialise without the help of the SLMC. So Mr. Hakeem had an opportunity to test his ability, but failed to bring both parties together. 

By Wednesday afternoon, there were reports that many more PA parliamentarians were ready to cross over. The names Lakshman Kiriella and Deputy Speaker Sarath Munasinghe were among those mentioned. Maj. Gen. Munasinghe quit the PA on Friday. Mr. Kiriella was apparently unhappy over the elevation of Sarath Amunugama to cabinet status. He feels he had been overlooked in favour of Mr. Amunugama in spite of his unstinted service to the party. Sources close to him said Mr. Kiriella would not have minded his demotion to the post of deputy minister if Mr. Amunugama who was a late comer from the UNP had not been made a minister. Ironically Thilanga Sumathipala, former Cricket Board Chief reportedly had a hand to play in Mr. Kiriella crossing over to the opposition led coalition. 

Mr. Sumathipala played a major role in getting Mr. Dissanayake to the opposition camp. He facilitated discussions between Mr. Wickremesinghe and Mr. Dissanayake in the grand scheme against the Kumaratunga administration.

Mr. Sumathipala, a one-time SLFP loyalist and one time close associate of Vijaya Kumaratunga, fell out after President Kumaratunga directed Sports Minister Kiriella to dissolve the Cricket Board — a move that cost Mr. Sumathipala his job. Undeterred, Mr. Sumathipala took up the challenge and pooled all his resources to ensure the downfall of the PA government. In apparent recognition of Mr. Sumathipala's role, Mr. Wickremesinghe asked Mr. Sumathipala to contest on the UNP ticket, but he declined.

The government was in total darkness as to what was going on. Even if it had some inkling about the UNP moves, it underestimated the capabilities of Mr. Sumathipala. In other words, the dissolution of the Cricket Board was the beginning of the end of the road for the PA administration.

But this does not take away the credit from Mr. Wickremesinghe who made the downfall of the government possible through meticulous planning. He displayed the resourcefulness and skill of his father Esmond Wickremesinghe to achieve this objective. It was his father who masterminded the downfall of Sirima Bandaranaike government in December 1964. But Wickremesinghe (Snr) had the backing of a wily J. R. Jayewardene. The duo had been described as the most 'deadly' combination in politics of yore.

After nearly 37 years, Wickremesinghe Jr. enacted a similar drama. The PA called it an outright conspiracy by some traitors within their own camp. The PA's claim could be justified, because those who betrayed her were at one time at the helm of the PA administration close to President Kumaratunga and were enjoying all the perks as she claimed in a post-dissolution statement. 

Others who worked hard behind the scenes are Assistant Leader Gamini Atukorale, deputy leader Karu Jayasuriya and those who were involved in a party rebellion early this year. These UNPers who called themselves reformers claim that if not for the revolt they staged, this could not have been possible. These reformists predict a landslide victory for the UNP at the December 5 polls.

But the most pertinent question that is being asked is will the election be free and fair. We have a half-baked constitutional council and the 17th Amendment has given more powers to the Elections Commission. Are these measures enough to ensure a fair poll? 

PA dissident Dissanayake with disarming frankness said at a news conference on Wednesday that he knew how the PA won the last general election. In fact, the UNP agitated at the beginning of the second parliament under the PA, accusing Mr. Dissanayake of being responsible for mass-scale rigging. 

Now Mr. Dissanayake being in the UNP-led coalition, can his rivals expect fairplay at the polls, especially in Nuwara Eliya district? Earlier, he was to come on the national list, but now Mr. Dissanayake has decided to contest on the UNP list under the Elephant symbol, though his group would function as a separate entity in a large coalition. 

The Dissanayake group and the UNP would soon sign an MoU because they had hardly any time to register their coalition for recognition before nominations on October 20.

The UNP has welcomed Mr. Dissanayake with open arms, though it had accused him of alleged election malpractices. One of his supporters was also accused of slashing the mouth of a UNP supporter with a razor during the last year's elections. So the UNPers in Nuwara Eliya will have no option but to work along with their one-time foes who put them on the razor's edge in the fight against the PA. But it is said that in politics there are no permanent friends or foes, only permanent interests. This is the underlying principle in any political alliance, including a one that is taking shape between the PA and the JVP.

The unfolding political scene was so interesting last week that by Wednesday evening, CWC leader Arumugam Thondaman resigned his portfolio, stirring speculation. He apparently had an understanding with the UNP that if the UNP could produce the required numbers, he would support the UNP to defeat the government. The CWC has always been supportive of the party in power. But when the PA controls the much powerful Executive Presidency, it is baffling as to why Mr. Thondaman chose to quit the government. There could be a hidden agenda. In his letter of resignation, too, he made it a point not to antagonise the President. 

So Mr. Thondaman apparently thought that his partnership with the PA had come to an end. He refused to join the UNP during the budget debate early this year but has now thought it fit to join the UNP. 

Nobody can blame Mr. Thondaman. Such changes are in the nature of politics in Sri Lanka. For instance, take Ronnie de Mel who is shuttling between the UNP and the PA. Has he lost credibility? Some will say 'no' because they believe the UNP may receive him once again with open arms. Isn't Mr. de Mel an opportunist, Mr. Thondaman will ask us. Similarly, take the case of Wijeyapala Mendis. There is no other UNPer who could be called more UNP than Mr. Mendis. He has a history of over 50 years with the UNP, but he crossed over to the PA and is back again in the UNP. He definitely had a problem with Mr. Wickremesinghe. 

So most of the politicians rather than following principles and policies which they preach when they are in power have stooped towards achieving personal gains or selfish motives. Mr. Mendis' re-entry was not welcomed by UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe at the beginning. But finally he gave Mr. Mendis a respectable welcome. 

The SLMC also had problems in its own quarters. The recent dispute was over reports that some of the SLMC MPs had been approached by government leaders to discuss the appointment of a new national list MP to fill the vacancy created by the death of Rizvi Sinnalebbe. 

But everybody had to fall in line with Mr. Hakeem in the wake of the crossovers. Mr. Hakeem, too, asked the UNP to show its numbers if the SLMC was to back the no-confidence motion. This was also one of the reasons that prompted the crossover on Wednesday instead of Thursday, which was thought to be an auspicious day. When the crossover took place, Mr. Hakeem consulted lawyer Faiz Musthapha and took a decision to stand by the UNP. Mr. Hakeem is now busy preparing an electoral pact with UNP.

Meanwhile, Anura Bandaranaike's re-entry to the SLFP has caused further dissension in the SLFP. SLFP seniors such as Mahinda Rajapakse are said to be upset over the re-entry. It probably dashes the chances of a peson other than a Bandaranaike taking over the party leadership for the first time in 50 years. A few days ago, Mr. Rajapakse was made to wait nearly two hours in the Presidential Secretariat lounge when he was summoned for a meeting with the President. This incident has hurt him so deeply that he is not taking a special interest in propping up the government. 

Mr. Bandaranaike's re-entry to the SLFP was meticulously engineered by a group of UNP parliamentarians who along with a weekly newspaper launched a scathing attack on him. These UNPers appear to rejoicing over the return of Anura to the SLFP for two reasons — getting rid of Anura and causing dissension in the SLFP.