Editorial
Clash of mandates
Monday 7th October, 2024
The process of submitting nominations for the 14 Nov., general election is currently underway. It is popularly thought that a person who wins the presidency stands a much better chance of steering his or her party to victory at a subsequent general election. But anything is possible in politics, where upset wins are not uncommon. What if a party other than President Dissanayake’s NPP wins the upcoming parliamentary polls?
Dissanayake has been one of the bitterest critics of the executive presidency, which his party, the JVP, has condemned as a wellspring of evil. But he chose to do what his predecessors had done, after being sworn in as the President; he exercised the much-despised executive powers of the President to dissolve Parliament prematurely in a bid to secure control thereof and consolidate his position.
There is a compelling argument that the last Parliament had to be dissolved as the NPP, which had only three members in it, needed to secure legislative power in a general election to carry out President Dissanayake’s policies. But the question is whether a mandate given to a President takes precedence over that of a political party which controls Parliament. There is another argument in favour of the premature dissolution of the last Parliament; the SLPP government, which was full of undesirables, lost legitimacy to remain in power when President Gotabaya Rajapaksa (GR) and Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa resigned due to mass protests. One cannot but agree that the SLPP government was full of misfits, but ironically the majority of the people who, unable to make proper judgements, made the mistake of electing those undesirables in the 2020 general election, voted for Dissanayake overwhelmingly at the recently concluded presidential election!
True, the SLPP government mismanaged the economy and inflicted unbearable suffering on the public, who were left with no alternative but to rise against that regime. But if mass protests can delegitimise popularly elected administrations, future governments, including the one President Dissanayake is planning to form, will also lose legitimacy in case of continuous mass protests against them.
Interestingly, Dissanayake, who successfully harnessed the forces that ousted President GR to realise his presidential dream, said in the run-up the 21 Sept. presidential election that President GR was a victim of what Ranil Wickremesinghe’s reckless borrowing from external sources to the tune of USD 13.5% billion during the Yahapalana government (2015-2019). The biggest beneficiary of the 2022 uprising, which the JVP infiltrated and manipulated, was Wickremesinghe, the ‘reckless borrower’; he became the President! Thus, Dissanayake and the JVP/NPP are doubly at fault.
If the political parties/alliances that form governments after obtaining popular mandates can be dislodged on the basis of the outcomes of presidential elections or according to the whims and fancies of the Executive Presidents, then what are general elections there for? In 2015, following the election of President Maithripala Sirisena, the UPFA ceded control of Parliament to the UNP, allowing President Sirisena to appoint Wickremesinghe as Prime Minister. The UNP did likewise in 2019, after GR secured the presidency. In 2004, the then President Chandrika Kumaratunga sacked the UNP-led UNF government, which had obtained a popular mandate about two years after the 1999 presidential election.
In 2018, President Sirisena made an abortive bid to sack Prime Minister Wickremesinghe and then dissolve Parliament. Last month, the SLPP government stepped down, following the election of President Dissanayake, allowing him to appoint a three-member Cabinet before dissolving Parliament. The Presidents who have either dissolved Parliament or wrested control thereof, immediately after being sworn in, came to power promising to abolish the executive presidency or to curtail the presidential powers that help undermine the legislature. Their actions have facilitated the emergence of an unhealthy political culture devoid of co-operation and coexistence between the Executive and the Legislature, unlike in mature democracies.
There is a constitutional provision preventing the President from dissolving Parliament before the expiration of two and a half years of the term of Parliament. In other words, if the President and the Prime Minister happen to be elected from different parties, they will have to co-operate for at least two and a half years to prevent the country from descending into chaos. If so, why shouldn’t they be made to do likewise after the expiration of the first two and a half years of the term of Parliament? The opponents of the executive presidency maintain that the President should be stripped of the power to dissolve Parliament prematurely. This argument has some merits.
The fact that the President has to have control over Parliament to ensure smooth governance points to a serious flaw in the Constitution. The Prime Minister becomes more powerful than the Executive President to all intents and purposes when they happen to represent two different political parties, and they tend to clash. This constitutional anomaly can lead to political instability mainly due to Sri Lankan political leaders’ insatiable quest of self-aggrandisement and unwillingness to cooperate for the sake of the country.
Some political commentators are of the view that both the presidential election and the parliamentary polls should be held simultaneously. But the possibility of two different parties securing the presidency and control of Parliament cannot be ruled out. The way out is for the political leaders to learn to respect the mandates they receive at presidential and parliamentary elections separately and act in the interest of the country.
It is up to the public to elect, as their MPs, only the individuals who have the national interest at heart, at the upcoming general election. Otherwise, political instability is likely to set in, taking its toll on the economic recovery process in case of a party other than the NPP gaining control of the legislature or the next Parliament becoming hung by any chance.
Editorial
Self-righteous rhetoric and political circuses
Wednesday 13th May, 2026
Former President Mahinda Rajapaksa yesterday visited the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption (CIABOC), made a statement on the Airbus bribery scandal and returned home. A large number of his supporters flocked to Colombo to pledge solidarity with him. Speaking at a District Coordination Committee meeting at the Matale District Secretariat yesterday, President Anura Kumara Dissanayake stated that nobody was above the law, and anyone could be questioned in an investigation. He claimed that his predecessors had violated the Constitution and committed other offences, with impunity. His reference was obviously to President Rajapaksa making a statement to the CIABOC. By making that claim, President Dissanayake left room for allegations that he has a vested interest in the ongoing Airbus scandal investigation and defends the CIABOC action against Rajapaksa.
Yesterday’s show of strength near the CIABOC was organised by the SLPP. It is an affront to the intelligence of the public for anyone to claim that it was the result of a spontaneous outburst of public anger at an alleged move to frame former President Rajapaksa. Such protests are tantamount to attempts to intimidate the CIABOC. It is the organisers of such events who were responsible for Rajapaksa’s defeat in the 2015 presidential election and his ouster as Prime Minister in 2022, when they acted like the proverbial monkey that killed his sleeping royal master by striking a mosquito with the king’s own sword. They attacked the peaceful Aragalaya protesters at Galle Face, triggering widespread retaliatory attacks. The rest is history.
President Dissanayake yesterday said in Matale that his government had ensured that nobody was above the law and urged the public to bring instances of selective law enforcement, if any, to his attention. Is he unaware that the NPP politicians are more equal than others before the law? Kumara Jayakody was not arrested over the coal procurement scam, which is believed to have caused a loss of more than Rs. 10 billion to the state coffers, and led to a situation where a colossal amount of diesel has to be burnt daily to produce power to meet a generation shortfall at Norochcholai due to the use of low-grade coal imported by a company favoured by the government while Jayakody was the Minister of Energy. Power tariffs have been increased to recover the losses caused by the substandard coal imports. It may be recalled that Keheliya Rambukwella was arrested and prosecuted during the previous government for procuring substandard medicines while he was the Health Minister. That administration initially defended Rambukwella but did not stoop so low as to prevent his arrest and make a cover-up attempt by setting up a presidential commission of inquiry to probe all drug procurement issues in the Health Ministry under successive governments. President Dissanayake has appointed a presidential commission to investigate alleged irregularities in coal procurement since 2009! They must be probed, but the allegations against Jayakody are so serious that they should have been investigated separately on a priority basis.
Ironically, while President Dissanayake was waxing eloquent about his government’s commitment to upholding the rule of law, bashing his predecessors for having violated the Constitution, and claiming that his government had ended the culture of impunity, the Joint Opposition levelled a very serious allegation against him. Former Minister of Justice and Constitutional Affairs Prof. G. L. Peiris, addressing the media in Colombo, said that at a recent May Day rally, President Dissanayake had committed a serious offence by asking the public to get ready to hail the judgement to be delivered in a court case on 25 May. Pointing out that only the judge who heard a case was privy to the judgement therein before it was delivered and could not inform a third party of it or have any discussion thereon, Prof. Peiris said interference with the judiciary was a very serious offence, according to the Constitution, and a person who committed it was liable to one-year imprisonment and the suspension of civic disabilities for five years. He said the Joint Opposition had brought the President’s statement at issue to the attention of the Chief Justice and would take it up with international professional associations.
The public may not have a high opinion of the Opposition, which has quite a few tainted politicians among its ranks, but shouldn’t the JVP-NPP government and their leaders turn the searchlight inwards and put their own house in order before preaching to others about the virtues of good governance?
Editorial
Enriched uranium and poverty of scruples
Tuesday 12th May, 2026
US President Donald Trump yesterday rejected Iran’s response to his peace proposal. He wants the conflict ended on his own terms, but Iran is not amenable to that idea. Oil prices have gone up again.
The economic cost of the US-Israeli war on Iran is incalculable, as is obvious. There has been a welcome pause in the conflict, thanks to a fragile ceasefire, but economies across the world are still reeling due to a global energy crisis. CEO of Saudi Aramco Amin Nasser is of the view that the world has lost about one billion barrels of oil over the past two months, and it will take energy markets a considerable time to stabilise even if the oil supplies resume via the Hormuz Strait, the closure of which has curtailed shipping and sent energy prices through the roof. It is not only energy supplies that have suffered due to the US-Israel military campaign; many countries are experiencing crippling fertiliser shortages as well, so much so that the Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN has warned of a possible decline in global agricultural output. Most of all, the human cost of the war has been enormous for Iran.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who considers the war on Iran a dream come true for him, and is trying to turn his country’s military might into political gain, has reportedly said that there is still “work to be done” in Iran. He says Iran has retained many of the capabilities it had at the start of the war. Iran has not given up its enriched uranium or dismantled its nuclear sites, he has said. This claim is at variance with President Trump’s statement that the US military has “beaten and completely decimated” Iran. Netanyahu himself has also bragged that Iran has been militarily weakened as never before.
Netanyahu wants enriched uranium in Iran removed urgently. He says that can be done as part of an agreement to be reached. He has stopped short of mentioning any timeline for the proposed task. Trump has expressed a similar view. An Iranian news outlet linked to the country’s armed forces has denied reports that Tehran agreed to allow its enriched uranium stocks to be removed as part of talks with the United States. Thus, the uranium issue is sure to stand in the way of finding a lasting solution to the West Asia conflict, saving lives and properties and facilitating uninterrupted energy and fertiliser supplies via the Hormuz chokepint.
The US-Israeli military campaign has apparently strengthened Iran’s resolve to acquire nuclear capability. In a world where nuclear weapons are the currency of power, Tehran is not likely to give up its nuclear programme. Any country with nukes is a danger to the world, but only the US has so far carried out nuclear attacks. Not even North Korea has done so. Those who got a head start in the nuclear race decades ago have built huge nuke stockpiles, which are believed to be sufficient to blow up this planet several times over. The new world order based on the law of the jungle has left many countries struggling to safeguard their independence, and some of them are pursuing their nuclear ambitions in keeping with what can be described as the de Gaulle doctrine.
Charles de Gaulle rightly argued that no country without the atomic bomb could properly consider itself independent. He maintained that national sovereignty required an autonomous nuclear force, which he called the force de frappe, which alone, in his opinion, was the ultimate guarantee of political independence and great-power status. So, it is only natural that countries that feel threatened and have the wherewithal are trying either to shore up their nuclear stockpiles or to arm themselves with nukes.
While Trump is devising ways and means of grabbing Iran’s enriched uranium, in a dramatic turn of events, the FBI and other federal agencies have launched investigations into the deaths or disappearances of about 10 top US nuclear and space scientists, according to international media reports. US House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer has suggested, in an interview with Fox News, that there has been a foreign involvement in these deaths and disappearances. Republican Congressman Eric Burlison has claimed they have “all the hallmarks of a foreign operation” and cited China, Russia and Iran as potential lines of inquiry.
Self-righteous powerful nations’ calls for nuclear non-proliferation to make the world safe ring hollow. If the much-peddled argument that no more countries should acquire nuclear capability to ensure global safety is to gain credibility and wider acceptance, the proponents of it must accelerate nuclear disarmament, decommission their arsenals and lead by example. Most of all, they ought to take cognisance of what US President Dwight D. Eisenhower said in his famous “Cross of Iron speech” on war in 1953, highlighting the opportunity cost of military spending and stressing that resources used on weapons are stolen from the people struggling to meet their basic needs: “Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed.” How true!
Editorial
A potential problem to be managed
Monday 11th May, 2026
Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) leader Chandrasekar Joseph Vijay has achieved his chief ministerial dream in Tamil Nadu, with the help of some other parties, including the Congress. His meteoric rise to power was possible mostly due to his popularity as a film star, his unrealistic promises and a massive protest vote fuelled by anti-politics. Winning elections is one thing, but living up to people’s expectations by fulfilling campaign promises is quite another. In politics, a beginner’s luck rarely lasts long. If implemented, the freebies promised by Vijay to garner favour with voters, are estimated to account for more than 50% of Tamil Nadu’s tax revenue. Thus, Vijay has his work cut out to prevent his first chief ministerial term from facing the same fate as his first film, which reportedly became a box office bomb.
The paradigm shift in Tamil Nadu politics has sent the Colombo commentariat into overdrive, with divergent assessments of its implications for Sri Lanka and Indo-Lanka relations. Some commentators are of the view that Vijay’s anti-Sri Lanka utterances were mere campaign rhetoric; Vijay himself will forget them with the passage of time, and even if he wants to pursue his pledges, especially the one to retrieve Katchatheevu, there will be nothing he cannot do, as New Delhi considers the issue long settled. The proponents of this argument have apparently ignored the fact that the Indian Centre is swayed by Tamil Nadu, and New Delhi has even resorted to extreme measures to appease the Tamil Nadu politicians and further its own interests at the expense of Sri Lanka. India trained, armed and funded pro-Eelam terror groups, and rammed the Indo-Lanka Accord down President J. R. Jayewardene’s throat in 1987, paving the way of devolution. India was hoist with its own petard, with the LTTE turning against it, a few years later, and the situation changed.
The current world order is anything but “rules based”. International pacts, accords, covenants, treaties, charters, etc., become worthless when the powerful signatories thereto feel like violating them. The US has violated the UN Charter, perhaps for the umpteenth time, by abducting President of Venezuela Nicolás Maduro and his wife. It has also carried out unprovoked air strikes on Iran, killing its Spiritual Leader and thousands of civilians besides destroying assets worth billions, if not trillions, of dollars.
It has been alleged that at the height of the 2022 uprising here, following the forced resignation of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, Indian High Commissioner Gopal Baglay pressured Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardene to take over the presidency in violation of the Constitution. Abeywardene told Parliament subsequently that the goal of those who tried to force him to appoint himself the Acting President was to plunge this country into anarchy. Baglay allegedly acted in violation of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, which requires diplomats to refrain from interfering with the internal affairs or politics of the host countries. Curiously, this very serious allegation remains unprobed though the grandees of the JVP-NPP government and the SJB-led Opposition wrap themselves in the flag and often declare their commitment to protecting the national interest.
The possibility of the new Tamil Nadu administration escalating the issue of illegal fishing in Sri Lankan waters to such an extent that New Delhi may feel compelled to intervene more assertively, if not aggressively, cannot be ruled out. In 2013, the then Minister of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Development Dr. Rajitha Senaratne disclosed that certain Tamil Nadu politicians owned trawlers and rented them out on the strict condition that they be used for poaching in Sri Lankan waters. These troublemakers are likely to step up their illegal fishing operations to belittle Sri Lanka’s sovereignty and bring New Delhi and Colombo on a collision course.
Responses to vital bilateral issues should not be grounded solely in suspicions and perceptions if they are to be workable. Tamil Nadu politicians’ hostility towards Sri Lanka is a problem to be managed diplomatically. Foreign relations are layered and dynamic, and diplomacy requires calibrated responses to contentious issues. It is, however, prudent to be cautious.
-
News7 days agoMIT expert warns of catastrophic consequences of USD 2.5 mn Treasury heist
-
News4 days agoLanka Port City officials to meet investors in Dubai
-
News23 hours agoEx-SriLankan CEO’s death: Controversy surrounds execution of bail bond
-
Editorial7 days agoClean Sri Lanka and dirty politics
-
News5 days agoSLPP expresses concern over death of former SriLankan CEO
-
Editorial6 days agoThe Vijay factor
-
News5 days agoPolice inform Fort Magistrate’s Court of finding ex-CEO of SriLankan dead under suspicious circumstances
-
Features2 days agoHigh Stakes in Pursuing corruption cases
