21 A: Consensus on non-inclusion of provisions that required approval at referendum sought

JVP to submit written proposals to Justice Ministry

By Shamindra Ferdinando

Some political parties, represented in Parliament, have stressed the need to ensure that the 21st Amendment to the Constitution does not include provisions that require public approval at a referendum.SJB’s Patali Champika Ranawaka, PHU leader Udaya Gammanpila and the leader of civil society group Yuthukama Gevindu Cumaratunga have taken that stand at recent meetings, chaired by Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe.UNP leader Wickremesinghe chaired meetings, on 27 May and 03 June at the Prime Minister’s Secretariat. Justice Minister Dr. Wijeyadasa Rajapakse, PC, was present at both meetings which also attended by senior representatives of political parties.Of the 15 political parties, represented in Parliament, only the JVP led- Jathika Jana Balavegaya (JJB) declined to join the process spearheaded by Premier Wickremesinghe. The JJB parliamentary group comprises three MPs, including a National List member.

JVP leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake told The Island that they wouldn’t attend meetings chaired by the UNP leader. Having questioned the circumstances Wickremesinghe received the premiership, lawmaker Dissanayake said their submissions would be made to the Justice Ministry.SLPP National List MP Cumaratunga told The Island that the 21st Amendment should be prepared following consultations with all stakeholders to ensure the effort received the backing of political parties represented in Parliament. SLPP National List MP Kumaratunga said so speaking on behalf of eight political parties. Of them, seven contested the last general election on the SLPP ticket or received SLPP National List slots.The SLFP, the largest party in the rebel group with 14 seats in Parliament is not among the eight-party grouping.

Lawmaker Cumaratunga emphasized that the success of the project largely depends on preparing the proposed 21st amendment on the basis of consensus reached through the ongoing consultation process.In spite of the main Opposition party, the SJB submitting far reaching constitutional proposals by way of a private member’s motion that required both 2/3 and approval at a referendum, the party has been represented at both meetings. SJB General Secretary Ranjith Mandumma Bandara, MP, and Attorney-at-Law Suren Fernando, who had been a SJB National List nominee, represented the party.

Yuthukama leader Cumaratunga said that the Justice Minister explained the main issues at the discussions, including who would exercise power to make cabinet appointments and whether the President could remove the Prime Minister. The civil society activist said that reaching agreement on the 21st Amendment was a prerequisite for a wider discussion on a new Constitution.  MP Cumaratunga stressed that the SLPP received mandates at the last presidential and parliamentary elections in Nov 2019 and Aug 2020 for the introduction of a new Constitution. That mandate couldn’t be ignored but the immediate requirement was to get the 21st Amendment enacted, MP Cumaratunga said, urging all political parties to compromise on their respective demands.

SLPP Chairman and Foreign Minister Prof. G.L. Peiris and Chief Government Whip Dinesh Gunawardena who represented the ruling SLPP at the June 03 meeting have stated that the President should retain the power to appoint and remove the Cabinet-of-Ministers. The SLPP has declared that the President should have the power to remove the Prime Minister, too. Having made the request in writing, Ministers Peiris and Gunawardena left the meeting.Political sources said that the TNA that hadn’t attended the May 27 meet chaired by Premier Wickremesinghe was present at the June 03 all party discussion. The TNA has strongly suggested the abolition of the executive presidency. The TNA’s stand has received the SLMC’s backing though several other political parties asserted that provisions that would require a referendum shouldn’t be included in the proposed 21st Amendment.

SLPP lawmaker Rear Admiral (retd) Sarath Weerasekera declared at a recent meeting jointly chaired by President Gotabaya Rajapaksa and Premier Wickremeisnghe at the President’s House, he wouldn’t support the 21 amendment under any circumstances. Lawmaker Weerasekera has told the gathering that the proposed amendment was contrary to the two mandates received by the SLPP at the presidential and parliamentary polls.Responding to The Island queries, the former Public Security Minister challenged the President’s right to pursue strategies at the expense of political stability.

Meanwhile, the dissident SLPP group, in response to the Justice Minister’s request, has submitted its proposals in writing pertaining to the proposed 21 amendment. The rebels have asked for the inclusion of what they called essential proposals: (1) The people should receive the right to challenge in Supreme Court amendments to a Bill at the committee stage within a month after the Speaker endorses that Bill (2) All bilateral and multilateral agreements should receive the parliamentary approval (3) Structural changes in state enterprise should be subjected to parliamentary approval (4) Procurement Commission should be expanded to inquire into investments into strategic fields such as  ports and airports. Agreements on such assets once cleared by the Procurement Commission should be subjected to parliamentary approval (5) The Prime Minister should be a member of the National Security Council (6) The President can hold only the defence portfolio and (7) Ministers should receive the right to inquire from the Police Commission and the Public Service Commission the basis on which a particular decision was taken. They have the privilege of receiving response from both commissions within two weeks.

The rebels have also suggested some critical changes pertaining to the 21st draft in its present form. In respect of (1) 41 A (1) e, the three persons (not members of Parliament) appointed to the Constitutional Council should consists of a businessman or a company director named by Ceylon Chamber of Commerce, nominee of professionals groups and a Professor appointed by the University Grants Commission on the recommendation of Vice Chancellors of Universities. (2) 41 B (3) Formulation of a procedure for the Constitutional Council to receive names of those to be recommended to the President for positions in various commissions. Members of Parliament should receive the right to nominate members to the commissions (3) 41 (B) (3) formulation of criterion for the nomination of members to various commissions (4) 44 (1) amended as with Prime Minister’s written agreement instead of Prime Minister’s advice (5) 44 (2) amended as with Prime Minister’s written agreement instead of Prime Minister’s advice (6) 45 (1) amended as with Prime Minister’s written agreement instead of Prime Minister’s advice (7) 45(2) amended as with Prime Minister’s written agreement instead of Prime Minister’s advice (8) 46 (1) amended as with Prime Minister’s written agreement instead of Prime Minister’s advice (9) 50 (1) amended as with Prime Minister’s written agreement instead of Prime Minister’s advice (10) 153 C (a) specific time for the Constitutional Council to fulfill its obligations that hadn’t been addressed previously (11) 155 G provision for Police Commission to investigate complaints received against police officers in case senior officers failed to do so (12) 155 H (3) Police Commission to fulfill its obligations that had been disregarded previously (13) 155 K (4) Police Commission to fulfill its obligations that had been disregarded previously (14) 156 (C)1criterion for the promotion of domestic production/services should be included in the overall procurement process (14) 156 (C)1 Procurement Commission to fulfill its obligations pertaining to the declaration of relevant regulations within a specific period (15) 35 (1) remove provisions relating to interim arrangements pertaining to the life of Parliament as well as the presidency as the proposed amendment didn’t deal with both issues and (16) 36 (b) abolition of parliamentary seat of dual citizens immediately after the enactment of the 21st Amendment.

The rebel group has pointed out that the 21st amendment in its present form would allow a dual citizen to retain both the seat and ministerial portfolios for a period of three months by not attending parliament.