Connect with us

News

19A: Key changes necessary but consensus on several provisions – SLPP lawmaker

Published

on

‘We received two mandates to enact a new Constitution’

By Shamindra Ferdinando

SLPP National List member Gevindu Cumaratunga strongly pushed for a new Constitution instead of bringing in the 20th Amendment in place of 19th Amendment enacted at the onset of UNP-SLFP administration in 2015.

Addressing a media briefing at the Sri Sambuddajayanthi Viharaya and meeting organized in Kandy also on Sunday (30), Cumaratunga emphasized that Gotabaya Rajapaksa and the SLPP received overwhelming mandate at the 2019 presidential and 2020 general election, respectively, to enact a new Constitution.

The leader of civil society group Yuthukama dealt with the 13th, 16th and the 19th Amendments as well as the Proportional Representation (PR) system introduced by the then President JR Jayewardene. In addition to one NL slot, Yuthukama Kalutara district candidate Anupa Pasquel entered parliament.

The ideal solution would be to either abolish/do away with inimical provisions in those amendments, Cumaratunga said, underscoring the responsibility on their part to realize the mandates received at the presidential and parliamentary polls.

Cumaratunga said that the 13th Amendment undermined the country’s unitary status whereas the 16th imposed restrictions on the use of Sinhala language in the North and East and the 19th caused anarchy. Therefore, tangible measures should be taken to abolish/amendment/rectify shortcomings without further delay, he said.

Cumaratunga pointed out how the National Joint Committee (NJC), in a statement issued recently explained the need to address all problematic matters without focusing only on the 19th Amendment. Referring to a statement issued by the Buddasasana Karyasadaka Mandalaya on August 25, 2020, Cumaratunga emphasized that the 19th Amendment wasn’t the only cause for continuing political turmoil and instability.

Therefore, the government should seriously look into concerns expressed by those who really believed in a total constitutional overhaul, Cumaratunga said. The civil society activist acknowledged that an influential section of the government pushed for the 20th Amendment in place of 19th Amendment as enactment of a new Constitution would take time. Cumaratunga said that those who preferred the 20th instead of the 19th Amendment were of the view a new Constitution couldn’t be enacted without public consultations.

Lawmaker Cumaratunga questioned the need to engage in fresh public consultations as the previous government conducted quite large scale countrywide operation in that regard. The procedure included a comprehensive report put out by the Public Representations Committee on Constitutional Reforms and the parliamentary process spearheaded by Premier Ranil Wickremesinghe, as the Chairman of the Steering Committee of the Constitutional Assembly.

The first meeting of the Constitutional Assembly took place on April 5, 2016.

 The Yuthukama leader said that the high profile constitutional reforms process that had been undertaken by the previous government was in the public domain. Those who had campaigned for that constitutional reforms process were routed thrice at the 2018 Feb Local Government poll, 2019 Nov presidential and 2020 August general election, Cumuratunga said.

 Now that the SLPP had secured a near two-thirds majority and the required support could be obtained from friendly political parties, the government could go for a referendum. Such a course of action would allow the government to achieve its objective without having to go before the Supreme Court.

Cumaratunga said that consensus could be reached on some provisions in the 19th Amendment. Pointing out that the SLPP government was agreeable to the two term limit on an executive president and the restriction of presidential term to a five-year period, Cumaratunga said that Yuthukama, too, believed those provisions should be retained.

Far reaching change required pertaining to the 19th Amendment was the provision that deprived the elected President to hold ministerial portfolios, MP Cumaratunga said. Emphasizing that Article 4 where the sovereignty of the people was dealt with, specified as follows in Sub Article 4b: “The executive power of the People, including the defence of Sri Lanka, shall be exercised by the President of the Republic elected by the People,” Cumaratunga said all obstacles should cleared for the President to take over the defence portfolio.

Lawmaker Cumaratunga said that it would be better to specify that the President should hold the defence portfolio.

MP Cumaratunga said that the provision that denied the President the right to dissolve parliament one year after the general election, too, should be amended. In terms of the 19th Amendment, the President received the right to dissolve parliament only after the House completed four and half years.

The former government amended the provision that dealt with the President’s power to dissolve parliament in spite of the Supreme Court previously ruling that such a change should be subjected to a referendum, Cumaratunga said. The civil society activist pointed out how President Sirisena struggled to cope up with treasury bond scams allegedly perpetrated by the UNP as he lacked the constitutional power to intervene.

Commenting on the provision that deprived anyone below the age of 35 contesting the presidency, Cumaratunga said that the particular stipulation should be retained. The MP said that he didn’t see any reason why a person at such a young age should contest the presidency.

Cumaratunga also discussed the continuing controversy over amending the constitutional provision that prevented dual citizens from seeking public office. The National List MP said that he would like to discuss the matter taking into consideration Basil Rajapaksa’s dual citizenship (US and Sri Lanka), former Central Bank Governor and now fugitive Singaporean Arjuna Mahendran and President Gotabaya Rajapaksa giving up his US citizenship to be eligible to contest 2019 presidential election.

 Lawmaker Cumaratunga said that having left the country soon after the 2015 change of government Basil Rajapaksa could have stayed in the US. Instead, the former SLFP National Organizer returned in April 2015 after the then government initiated investigations, Cumaratunga said. The police arrested and remanded him and he underwent hardship but remained committed for a political role, the MP said. If all dual citizens were prepared to face investigations the way Basil Rajapaksa did, there was no need for the provision to prevent dual citizens from holding public office, Cumaratunga said.

However, Arjuna Mahendran fleeing the country was evidence that dual citizens/foreign citizens shouldn’t be accommodated unless they accepted sole Sri Lankan citizenship, he said.

Cumaratunga said that President Gotabaya Rajapaksa had set an example by giving up his US citizenship to serve the country. The lawmaker said that Gotabaya Rajapaksa, in his capacity as the wartime Defence Secretary played a significant role while being a US citizen.

The MP said that the stipulation that the President and members of parliament should only be Sri Lankans could be extended to other higher level categories.

Lawmaker Cumaratunga declared his firm support to the Independent Commissions while calling for proper procedures to be followed in making appointments to Independent Commissions. Pointing out that the previous government blundered by accommodating TNA leader R. Sampanthan as the Opposition Leader to enable him to sit in the Constitutional Council, Cumaratunga alleged that was done to manipulate the process.

Of the 10 member Constitutional Council, five are appointed in agreement between the Prime Minister and the Opposition Leader.

 If the Joint Opposition was given the Opposition Leader’s Post, the whole process wouldn’t have gone awry, Cumaratunga said.

He said that Premier Mahinda Rajapaksa and Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa could choose five persons to ensure the proper functioning of the Constitutional Council. The MP said that the need was to rectify the Constitutional Council and the Commissions not to abolish them. Cumaratunga proposed that the President could choose from persons recommended by the Constitutional Council. The President should also receive the constitutional authority to remove those appointed, the MP said.

Cumaratunga said that the SLPP should be sensitive to the sentiments of those who brought the party to power. The lawmaker warned that political parties and the government could no longer continue as if public sentiments didn’t matter. “Look at what happened to the UNP. The UNP was reduced from 107 to 55 (SJB 54 + UNP 1), TNA 16 to 10 and the JVP 6 to 3,” Cumaratunga said, adding that those treacherous civil society elements were taught an unforgettable lesson.

Quoting statements issued by the Buddasasana Karyasadaka Mandalaya as well as the NJC, MP Cumaratunga strongly suggested that much delayed Provincial Council elections shouldn’t be held as the very basis of the system undermined the country’s unitary status or in other words was contrary to President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s ‘One Country, One Law’ concept.

 



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

Justice Minister hits back at CLA

Published

on

Harshana Nanayakkara

By Saman Indrajith

Justice Minister Harshana Nanayakkara yesterday told Parliament that the Commonwealth Lawyers’ Association (CLA) was not an organisation officially recognised or registered under the Commonwealth Secretariat, but a fee-levying private association.

Responding to a question by Opposition and SJB Leader Sajith Premadasa on why he had failed to meet CLA representatives, who recently visited Sri Lanka, Nanayakkara said he had offered them a date and time for a meeting, but they had been unable to attend.

The Commonwealth Lawyers Association (CLA) has questioned procedural fairness and other matters of concern in a report that deals with the Supreme Court hearing petitions against the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution. Among the issues raised by CLA President Steven Thiru, is the composition of the five-member bench.

The Minister said the CLA representatives subsequently requested another date, but he had already scheduled official engagements for the proposed day.

Nanayakkara said it was, therefore, incorrect to claim that he had refused to meet the CLA delegation.

“The CLA is not an official body accepted or admitted into the Commonwealth of countries. It is a private club whose members pay fees for membership,” he said.

However, the Minister said he was not suggesting that the organisation was “a bad organisation”, adding that the accuracy of several statements made by CLA members during their visit to Sri Lanka had yet to be established.

Nanayakkara identified lawyer Upul Jayasuriya as the CLA’s local representative and said Jayasuriya had sought a meeting with him.

“I gave him the opportunity, but he came up with the excuse that he could not make it as he was not in Colombo. Therefore, it is wrong to state that I did not give them time,” the Minister said.

Continue Reading

News

First visit by an Indian Defence Minister since IPKF deployment

Published

on

Deputy Minister Maj. Gen. Aruna Jayasekera receiving Indian Defence Minister Rajnath Singh on his arrival at the Bandaranaike International Airport (BIA) yesterday.

By Shamindra Ferdinando

Indian Defence Minister Rajnath Singh is in Colombo on a three-day official visit, the first by an Indian Defence Minister since the 1988 visit by K.C. Pant, during Rajiv Gandhi’s tenure as the Prime Minister.

The Indian Defence Ministry declared that the visit would further strengthen the traditionally strong and friendly bilateral relations in mutually beneficial areas, including a strong maritime and defence partnership.

The visit takes place in the wake of Sri Lanka and India signing seven MoUs, including one on defence, in April 2025. Communist Party General Secretary Dr. G. Weerasinghe told The Island that the government should set the record straight regarding the rapidly developing military relations with the US and India. The acquisition of Colombo Dockyard Ltd., by Indian Defence Ministry-run Mazagon Dock Shipbuilders Limited, soon after the finalisation of MoUs, underscored New Delhi’s strategy, Dr. Weerasinghe said. Responding to another query, Dr. Weerasinghe said that the government should take this opportunity to discuss the Tamil Nadu fishing fleet poaching on Sri Lankan waters.

Pant visited during the Indian Army operations against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in the Northern and Eastern Provinces here, while Pranab Mukherjee visited Colombo, in August 2005, to pay last respects to assassinated Foreign Minister Lakshman Kadirgamar.

Indian and Sri Lanka governments said that the visit was meant to strengthen cooperation between the two neighbouring countries in the fields of defence, economic engagement, maritime affairs and regional security.

An Indian warship arrived at the Colombo harbour ahead of the Defence Minister’s visit, reminiscent of old gunboat diplomacy. INS Udayagiri’s visit coincided with the Defence Minister’s visit. The Defence Minister’s delegation included senior officials from Ministry of External Affairs.

During the visit, the Indian Defence Minister is scheduled to hold high-level discussions with President Anura Kumara Dissanayake who also holds the Defence portfolio, Prime Minister Dr. Harini Amarasuriya and Defence Secretary Sampath Thuyacontha. He is also expected to meet members of the Indian community, residing in Colombo.

Dr. Weerasinghe said that the NPP government conveniently extended the moratorium on foreign research vessels imposed during Ranil Wickremesinghe’s tenure in 2024. The CP official said that the media alleged that that decision was taken at the behest of the US and India but nearly two years after the last presidential election the ban remains.

Continue Reading

News

“I’m not a war criminal, I fought for my country”: Shavendra Silva

Published

on

Shavendra Silva

Former Army Commander and Chief of Defence Staff General Shavendra Silva has rejected allegations of wrongdoing during the final stages of war against the LTTE, declaring his readiness to answer specific accusations against him and questioning the basis on which he has been sanctioned internationally.

In an interview with India-based “Impact Stories,” retired General Silva said the Sri Lankan military had fought the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) professionally and had sought to minimise civilian casualties during the final military offensive.

Silva, who commanded the Army’s 58 Division during the final phase of the war in 2009, said he had repeatedly sought an explanation for sanctions imposed on him.

“I have been sanctioned by the United States of America, and I was sanctioned recently by the United Kingdom. For what? I have been asking, tell me what I have done wrong,” Silva queried.

“I’m not a war criminal. I fought for my country,” he added, arguing that if he had violated military law, he should have been investigated and punished under the appropriate mechanisms.

The United States imposed travel restrictions on Silva and his immediate family in 2020, citing what it described as credible information of his involvement, through command responsibility, in alleged gross violations of human rights during the final phase of the war. The United Kingdom later imposed sanctions on Silva in 2025 over alleged human rights violations during the conflict.

Silva rejected allegations that the military deliberately targeted civilians, while acknowledging that civilian deaths could have occurred during the fighting.

“There would have been deaths of civilians, but those are not intentional,” he said, adding that military planning sought to minimise civilian casualties and that targets were avoided when civilians were observed nearby.

Recalling the final stages of the offensive, Silva said his division rescued more than 123,000 civilians and that more than 75% of, approximately 12,000 LTTE members, who surrendered at the end of the conflict, had surrendered to his division.

He said surrendered LTTE members were subsequently rehabilitated and reintegrated into society, arguing that this demonstrated the military’s approach toward those who laid down their weapons.

Silva also recalled an “encirclement operation” in which he said a large number of LTTE bodies were recovered. He said a senior LTTE northern commander was among those found dead and was dressed in civilian clothes while carrying a weapon.

“One could say a civilian was killed. No, he was the LTTE northern commander,” Silva said, arguing that combatants wearing civilian clothing could subsequently be counted as civilian casualties.

Silva also accused the LTTE of using civilians as human shields, preventing people from leaving areas under its control and positioning military assets near civilian locations during the final stages of the conflict.

He criticised successive Sri Lankan governments for what he described as a failure to effectively present the military’s account of the war internationally, saying this had allowed allegations against Sri Lankan troops to gain traction overseas.

Silva called on governments and international organisations making allegations against Sri Lankan forces to engage directly with those accused and present specific incidents for explanation.

“Come to a dialogue,” he said. “Tell us, ‘You all had done this on this particular day, at this particular time,’ so that we can clarify.”

“If we have done something, we will accept,” he added.

Silva also rejected claims that the LTTE represented the wider Tamil community, saying grievances should be addressed politically rather than through armed violence. He cited the LTTE’s assassinations, suicide attacks and forced recruitment while arguing that entire ethnic or religious communities should not be blamed for the actions of the organisation or its supporters.

The former Army Commander said the military’s objective had been to defeat the LTTE and free civilians from its control, while maintaining that Sri Lankan troops did not intentionally commit abuses against civilians.

Sri Lanka’s final military offensive remains the subject of longstanding international scrutiny. United Nations investigations and international human rights organisations have alleged serious violations of international humanitarian and human rights law by both government forces and the LTTE during the final stages of the conflict. Sri Lankan military leaders, including Silva, have repeatedly rejected allegations that government forces deliberately targeted civilians.

Continue Reading

Trending