Another political pie crust?

Saturday 22nd August, 2020

Leon Trotsky, one of the finest political writers the world has ever seen, once identified clarity and brevity as the hallmarks of good political writing. The same is true of political speeches. Professional trainers of writers and speakers insist that when one says something one has to make sure one has said it. President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s policy statement in Parliament, on Thursday, conformed to the aforesaid yardsticks of effective communication. He came, he delivered his short speech without bellowing sententious rhetoric and went away. The occasion was devoid of customary pomp and circumstance. A great deal of taxpayers’ money must have been saved.

The President’s policy statement was not much different from what is stated in his presidential election manifesto, Vistas of Property and Splendour, on which there has been a substantive public discussion. What we found more noteworthy than anything else in the presidential address was the SLPP’s undertaking to frame a new Constitution after abolishing the 19th Amendment (19A), which has been a thorn in the side of the government. How serious is the new dispensation about introducing a brand new Constitution?

The SLPP leaders have no problem with the existing Constitution except 19A, which was tailored to the needs of the UNP leaders who wanted to prevent former President Mahinda Rajapaksa from running for President again and ruining the chances of other Rajapaksas of doing so while enabling the then Prime Minister to arrogate to himself some of the presidential powers. However, 19A has strengthened the Independent Commissions and such salutary features must be retained. President Rajapaksa had a two-thirds majority in Parliament, from 2010 to 2015, but was not keen to have a new Constitution written. Instead, he introduced the 18th Amendment to vest more powers in the executive presidency.

The framing of a constitution is a problematic process owing to devolution, which has led to the failure of several attempts to introduce constitutional reforms under previous governments. The Kumaratunga adminstration’s draft Constitution was stillborn; the LTTE had rejected it out of hand and the UNP and the JVP shot it down in Parliament subsequently. It offered to devolve more powers to the periphery in the form of regional councils. All-party talks under the Mahinda Rajapaksa government failed mainly due to issues related to devolution. The yahapalana government undertook to formulate a new Constitution but chose to fight shy of addressing the issue of devolution, and its constitution-making project was put on hold and then forgotten. It obviously did not want to take a political risk.

The present government has within its ranks opponents of the 13th Amendment, which they want scrapped because the country has done without Provincial Councils for years. It will come under international pressure to devolve more powers in case it undertakes to formulate a new Constitution. A previous Rajapaksa government offered 13 Plus, and the TNA, which is struggling to shore up its shrinking vote bank following the recent electoral setback, will have a rallying point in such an eventuality. This is something the government needs like a hole in the head.

The yahapalana government introduced 19A to further its interests, while promising a new Constitution, which became pie in the sky. The SLPP government is trying to abolish 19A for political expediency while promising to frame a new Constitution. Once this amendment is replaced with a new one tailored to the needs of the SLPP leadership, there will be no need for the government to introduce a new Constitution.

Why has the government promised to make a new Constitution? A promise is said to be like the pie crust which is made to be broken. One can only hope that the government will adopt a consensual approach to amending the Constitution, and something similar to the 18th Amendment will not be thrust upon the country.