Columns

One of the areas in which there is broad consensus across the political spectrum in Sri Lanka is the need for Constitutional reform. Despite this widespread agreement, the paradox remains that while there is consensus on many aspects of Constitutional reform, this consensus has not always translated into concrete national policy or implementation.

For at least three decades, the contours of Constitutional reform have been the subject of extensive discussion and debate. Much work has been done and a significant body of literature has emerged on the constitutional changes required to address the political, social, and governance challenges facing the country. While certain contentious issues remain—such as the precise nature of the State—there is near unanimity among experts, political parties, and public opinion leaders on several key areas requiring urgent attention. These include the abolition of the Executive Presidency, the reform of the electoral system, and addressing the grievances and aspirations of the different communities constituting the Sri Lankan Nation.  

The call for systemic change that gained momentum following the Aragalaya of 2022 further underscores the need for Constitutional reform as a means of improving governance. The widespread disillusionment with the political establishment, governance failures, and economic mismanagement have amplified demands for a more accountable, transparent, and representative system of government. In this context, Constitutional reform is increasingly viewed as a necessary step toward meaningful change.

Given the broad consensus on the need for reform, the next logical step is to establish a clear and effective roadmap for implementing these changes. The experience of Constitutional reform processes all over the world has demonstrated that public participation is crucial in ensuring the success and legitimacy of any such process. However, such processes must be structured and time-bound to prevent indefinite delays and a loss of momentum.

Sri Lanka’s history provides valuable lessons in this regard. The two instances when a Constitutional reform process was successfully completed (whatever may have been the shortcomings in the content included in the final document) occurred within two years of a government assuming office. The Republican Constitution of 1972 was enacted within two years of the United Front Government coming to power, and similarly, the 1978 Constitution was enacted within two years of the UNP Government’s election victory in 1977.

By contrast, the Constitutional reform efforts under the Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga administration illustrate the challenges of prolonged deliberation without timely implementation. The government initially introduced a package of reforms in 1995 that was extensively debated and discussed across the country. Based on these public consultations, a more refined package of reforms was proposed in 1997 which was subject to further discussion among the public and political stakeholders culminating in the Draft Constitution of 2000.

While this draft was widely praised by constitutional experts, it ultimately failed to secure the necessary parliamentary support. By the time it was tabled in Parliament in 2000, the political dynamics had shifted, and the government was facing declining popularity. The Opposition of the day smelling blood and the prospect of coming to power in the upcoming Presidential election torpedoed the effort and burnt copies of the Draft Constitution during Parliamentary proceedings.

This experience highlights the risks of allowing political calculations to overshadow substantive reform efforts.

Another effort that helped to arrive at agreement on several contentious issues related to Constitutional Reform was the attempts made by the Yahapalana Government. However this effort too failed to reach the desired end as discussions meandered on without an eye on the time and as a result all the efforts to reach national consensus was lost with the change of administration in 2019.

Approaches to Constitutional reform

There are multiple possible approaches to initiating and completing the Constitutional reform process. One viable method is to follow the precedent set in 1972, whereby a set of Basic resolutions embodying the key principles of the new Constitution is first adopted by Parliament. A multi-party committee could work on these resolutions, ensuring broad political consensus before presenting them to the legislature for formal adoption. Once these foundational principles are agreed upon, the detailed provisions of the Constitution can be fleshed out accordingly.

Another approach is for the government to introduce a White Paper outlining its proposed Constitutional reforms for public discussion. This would allow for extensive debate and feedback before drafting a new Constitution for parliamentary approval. A White Paper approach ensures that the government’s perspective and policies are clearly spelt out and transparent and provides a basis for public engagement.

Political thinkers could think of other innovative approaches as well. Whatever approach is adopted time is of the essence.

Another factor that may delay and thereby cause the country to eventually lose out on the opportunity for Constitutional reform will be the Government’s stand on the timing of such efforts. Given the NPP Government’s commitment to pursue Constitutional reform and abolish the Executive Presidency, if the Government desires to use the provisions in the current Constitution to implement the mandate it received from the people and not embark on the reform process immediately, it can still do so.

In such a situation the Government could initiate and complete the Constitutional reform process early but defer the implementation of certain key provisions—such as the abolition of the Executive Presidency—until a later date, possibly closer to the end of its term.

The importance of civil society participation in the Constitutional reform process cannot be overstated. Public discourse, legal expertise, and stakeholder engagement all play a critical role in shaping a Constitution that reflects the aspirations and needs of the people.

The National Movement for Social Justice (NMSJ), led by former Speaker Karu Jayasuriya, which has been at the forefront of advocating for Constitutional reform, last week brought together a distinguished panel of experts, such as Professor Savitri Goonesekera, Dr. Nihal Jayewickreme, Dr. Jayampathi Wickremeratne, and Velupillai Kuhanendran to discuss the subject. The keynote address at the seminar was delivered by Rajeev Amarasuriya, the President-elect of the Bar Association of Sri Lanka.

These discussions underscored the urgency of Constitutional reform and reinforced the need for a structured, inclusive, and time-bound approach. The forum emphasised the importance of ensuring that the process is not hijacked by partisan interests but remains focused on national priorities.

Conclusion

The broad consensus on Constitutional reform presents a rare opportunity for Sri Lanka to undertake meaningful changes that can strengthen democracy, enhance governance, and address long-standing socio-political issues. However, the success of this endeavor depends on a well-structured, inclusive, and time-bound process that prioritizes national interest over short-term political calculations.

As outlined above lessons from past Constitutional reform efforts highlight the importance of achieving consensus early, ensuring public participation, and maintaining momentum to prevent political shifts from derailing the process. Whether through parliamentary resolutions, White Papers, or deferred implementation strategies, the goal must be to create a Constitution that is not only legally robust but also socially and politically sustainable.

The discussions spearheaded by organisations like the National Movement for Social Justice provide an important platform for deliberation and consensus-building. As Sri Lanka navigates its political and economic challenges, Constitutional reform remains a critical component of the broader effort to establish a more stable, just, and democratic society. Now, more than ever, there is a need for decisive action to translate broad consensus into tangible outcomes that will shape the nation’s future for generations to come. Otherwise it will be another lost opportunity in the country’s journey to build a just society and a strong nation. (javidyusuf@gmail.com)