After presidency, Sirisena says he will remain in politics

President Maithripala Sirisena in an interview with our sister paper Irida Lankadeepa discussed several political issues. Here are edited excerpts:
Q: You will be completing one year in office as President of Sri Lanka on January 8 next year. When you look back at your tenure, are you satisfied?
A: We can be very satisfied if we compare the period before January 8, 2015 and the current year. We have embarked on the changes the country needs. I do not look at my personal satisfaction in addressing this issue. I look at whether the people are happy and content. How far the educated and intelligent people are satisfied. When we compare the situation before I was elected and my tenure so far, there are clear differences.

When we speak of the Executive Presidency, we are aware that in 1978 the late J.R. Jayewardene created a powerful office. The 1978 Constitution conferred on the holder of the office unprecedented powers not wielded by any other leader in the world. It created the character of a monarchy. When one speaks of democracy and independence after the 18th Amendment, I view it as a catastrophe. With technology, people now live in a free society. The common people cannot be bound by fences, chains or walls. If the appointment of members to the Judicial Service Commission and appointment of state officers are exercised by one individual, see the consequences the country faces. Here, the issue is not about the individual. The abuse of personal power in taking arbitrary and incorrect decisions without consulting the intelligentsia, relevant experts and prominent personalities causes serious problems for the country. I cannot discuss the subject in detail now. We obtained the passage of the 19th Amendment with the support of the United National Party, which helped me to come to power, together with other political forces and the Sri Lanka Freedom Party. At that time, there were only 47 UNP MPs. The UPFA including the SLFP had more than 140 MPs.

The support of the UNP as well as other political forces, with the intention of giving effect to national common objectives, we passed 19A by a two thirds vote. That historic honour goes to all 215 MPs who cast their votes. Now look at the establishment of independent commissions. We have talked for more than 40 years about an independent Elections Commission. We spoke in Parliament. There was media discussion. However, no one was able to introduce it. Just a month ago, we were able to set up the Independent Elections Commission. We have been speaking for a long time about a free and fair election process. We can therefore be happy. With the establishment of the Police Commission, the Public Service Commission, the Human Rights Commission and the Judicial Services Commission also, there is great satisfaction in the country.

Look at the judiciary. If we look at different phases of time, how much of pressures they were subjected to? With the 1978 Constitution, the late J.R. Jayewardene’s time, the houses of judges were stoned. There were protests outside their houses. When there was a decision to summon the Chief Justice before Parliament, he resigned. In the recent past, a lady Chief Justice, after a 48 hour inquiry, was removed from office. The JSC (Secretary) was assaulted. We saw how much the executive powers were used to stifle the judiciary.

When one looks at the past one year, how effectively has the judiciary been functioning? When we examine all these aspects, we can see how impartially the judiciary is working.

When we take all these spheres, we can be content. But, in day-to-day issues, including the cost of living, there may be an unsatisfactory situation. I accept that. Yet, more than what hurts the stomach, people’s freedom, democracy, the free environment to live, human rights within the country’s Constitution are all being consolidated as we move on. There are no white vans today. There are no (political) murders. There are no abductions. If such things occur, the law will deal with any person. We can talk at length over these matters. Bearing in mind this situation, I say with responsibility that we are taking measures to uplift the living standards of the people. I am happy with the phase at which things are moving.

Q: On the one hand you are releasing LTTE suspects. On the other, you are jailing military officers. That is one of the allegations against the Government. What is your response?
A: Those who accuse us of releasing LTTE suspects should look at themselves in a mirror. Before January 8 this year, how many LTTE suspects were released by those in power before? From 2009 till 2014, about 12,000 LTTEers were released. Some of them were rehabilitated. There were others undergoing rehabilitation. Take for example Karuna Amman (alias Vinayagamoorthy Muralitharan). Is he just a small person? He is one who murdered 700 Police officers in the East. Similarly he was responsible for the murder of Buddhist monks in Arantalawa. We know he was the military leader of the LTTE in the East. He was allowed to join the ranks of the previous Government. The SLFP Vice Presidency was given to him. He was also given a ministerial portfolio. He was appointed as an MP on the SLFP National List.

Then take the case of Pillayan (Sivanesathurai Chandrakanthan), who was the then Eastern Province Chief Minister. It is all too well known what he was doing earlier. I am not saying they are wrong. See how much of wealth Kumaran Pathmanathan alias KP enjoyed. Supplying weapons, operating ships, procuring explosives were all carried out by him. How did the previous Government treat him? The kind of freedom that was given to him to move around. See his position today. Why Karuna Amman was made a Minister and Pillayan a Chief Minister? They wanted to move towards reconciliation casting aside old grudges. Such dangerous people who were there when the war was under way are now not there.

There are no Karuna Ammans now. If there were any persons against whom there were serious allegations, we will not be in a position to release them. We are releasing only those who need not be detained any longer. Some of them have been released on bail. They have not been given full freedom. Hence, if we take these factors into consideration, what is being envisaged is to remove the bitterness and old grudges. This is to put an end to enmity. Both sides will have to be committed in order to achieve this.

That is the basis for the release of LTTE suspects. Cries are being raised only because a thirty or forty are being released.
On the question of the military personnel. During the conduct of a war, there are rules of engagement which the military is required to follow. Similarly there are also ethics to be followed in a war. There are international conventions and international laws. When there is deviation, those responsible face accusations. Talk to Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka. What does he say? If there was something illegal that has been done against military discipline, punishment would have to be meted out. Those military officers are in custody over an issue that has remained for a long time in the public domain.

There was outcry for a probe. Even before we came to power, during the elections campaigns requests were made from us that investigations into these matters were necessary. We were told that cooperation for the formation of a new Government would be extended if only such investigations were carried out. Now, the Ekneligoda issue. Then the murder of Lasantha Wickremetunga, the murder of MP Nadarajah Raviraj. Many of these issues were subjects of public debate both locally and internationally.

Our country will have to be devoid of such things. The only way is to ascertain the truth. If someone has not done any wrong, whoever is involved will be freed at the end. However, if someone had committed an offence, he has to face punishment and that happens all over. We have to think of these issues impartially. Communal passions cannot be roused or ‘patriotic’ feelings roused to resolve these issues. That may be the easy thing to do.

Q: There are accusations against the Financial Crimes Investigations Division (FCID). Some in the opposition are saying that political vendetta is being carried out by them. Some officials in the FCID, it is alleged, are also settling personal scores.
A: We gave a promise during elections to probe serious cases of fraud and corruption. We pledged to probe the serious cases under the previous Government. It is to fulfil these pledges that we set up independent commissions under 19A. That is number one. We appointed a Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry to probe issues that arose. This can be done by the President under the Constitution. The Commission is now conducting inquiries. If we take the FCID, there is reasonable criticism. I accept that. When MPs made complaints to me, I told MPs to give me facts which can be proved. If the FCID is being guided by political considerations, it is a serious mistake. The FCID is duty bound to conduct investigations impartially. They have been set up following a decision by the Cabinet of Ministers. I see the FCID, on the one hand, carrying out its task responsibly. On the other hand, there are complaints against it.

On the allegations against FCID, I propose to conduct an inquiry. I will discuss with the Inspector General of Police and other different stakeholders the issues and take appropriate action.

Q: The Government is preparing to abolish the Executive Presidency and introduce a new Constitution. Parliament is to convert itself into a Constitutional Assembly on January 9 for this purpose. How soon would a new Constitution be in place?
A: We have acknowledged that there is a need for a new Constitution. When one considers such a change, it has to be borne in mind that ours was the worst Parliament before the 19A was introduced. The foremost office was the Executive Presidency. It conferred unlimited powers on the Presidency. I felt it should be abolished. It is the responsibility of Parliament to abolish or even reduce the powers of the Executive Presidency. I will extend my fullest cooperation. My support is there even to completely abolish the Executive Presidency. If not, I will also support to prune down powers. This office is not fit for Sri Lanka.

The problem lies in the personality who becomes President. There have been six presidents since the late J.R. Jayewardene until I assumed office. Anyone can discern how these six have run the presidency. Such an office need not be on the personality of a person. Therefore I am saying that the position should be abolished and the role of Parliament strengthened.
People accept that proportional representation (preferential voting) is a corrupt process. Politicians are earning large sums of money to gain votes through this system. Some even rob. A new electoral system is required and the people accept this without debate. We therefore hope to work out a new electoral system. We will do this first. Within one year after the Constitutional Assembly is set up, we hope to approve a new Constitution. We will seek the help of local experts and will not require any foreign expert.

Q: You are saying that before a new Constitution, you will introduce a new electoral system.
A: Yes, we will bring that first. The new electoral system will have to be incorporated in the new Constitution.

Q: After the abolition of the Executive Presidency, will you be contesting the elections?
A: I have made it clear that I will not be contesting for a presidency again. That does not mean I will ideologically give up politics. Politicians cannot leave that realm and survive. That is the truth. Therefore I will continue with my political philosophy and political view.
Q: With the abolition of the Executive Presidency, it would be the Prime Minister who will be the Head of Government. Do you have plans for that office?

A: Even when I was to be named common candidate for the Presidency, I was unaware until 24 hours before. That decision was made then. Therefore, I cannot foretell what I would be doing by then. In my 49 years in politics, I do what I have to do today. Only when it comes to tomorrow, I will decide what has to be done.

Q: Some budget proposals came in for severe criticism. The opposition has said that no previous budget had so many amendments in Sri Lanka’s history. What have you to say?

A: Some believe we had to move those amendments because we had to kneel before trade unions. A good side of the budget is the fact that there are many good proposals. A section that was enjoying privileges were hurt. For example, the duty free vehicle permits of state sector officials. There were protests. The permits for MPs were cancelled. They protested. A third of national income is being spent on payment of pensions. This is a huge problem. When we said there would be no pensions (only contributory pensions) for those who will join next year there were protests. When we offered to pay cash instead of the fertilizer subsidy, the farmers objected. When we introduce a voucher system for school uniforms to curb corruption, there were protests.

On another side, there were certain sections on whom there were pressures. Hence, there is a good side too. There was also the issue of a pay rise. It is not an easy thing to withdraw benefits that are already granted. Our Finance Minister tried to take them all at once. We have made a small mistake there. That is where we have gone wrong. That is what we had to rectify. There is nothing to hide. That is what happened.

Q: You also had to intervene?
A: Yes, I had to intervene. Before leaving for the Vatican, I personally spoke to the Prime Minister. I said the protests are not good. We should not create non-existent problems as a Government. Continue to do the good work. We do not need to create problems because of the budget. We will amend some proposals taking into consideration the protests of the people and the ministers. Even from the Vatican, I spoke with the Prime Minister. I also spoke to senior ministers of the SLFP and the UNP. I also told them not to create unnecessary issues.