Connect with us

News

President resists independent review by CC of his nominees to high posts – Lawyers’ Collective

Published

on

The Lawyers’ Collective (LC) has strongly condemned what it calls President Ranil Wickremesinghe’s attempt to intimidate the Constitutional Council of Sri Lanka.LC has said in a media statement: “The Lawyers’ Collective strongly condemns the recent attempt by President Wickremesinghe to intimidate the Constitutional Council of Sri Lanka. In an authoritarian move, on 23 November 2023, President Wickremasinghe in an address to Parliament entirely misrepresented the constitutional purpose of the Constitutional Council by stating that the ‘Council falls under the Executive’. The heavy handed and dangerous public comments of the President constitute a serious undermining of constitutionally imposed checks and balances in the governance of the country.

“The Constitutional Council (CC) was originally established by the 17th amendment to the Constitution of Sri Lanka in the year 2000 to vet presidential nominees to high posts prior to appointments being made by the President. The 19th Amendment re-established the Council. The 18th and 20th Amendments brought by Rajapaksa administrations abolished the CC as a means of regaining untrammelled powers of the Executive Presidency. Presently, the Council – now under the 21st amendment to the Constitution, is made up of the Prime Minister, the Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition, one Member of Parliament appointed by the President, five persons appointed by the President as nominated; one Member of Parliament nominated by agreement of the majority of the Members of Parliament representing the Government; one Member of Parliament nominated by agreement of the majority of the Members of Parliament of the political party or independent group to which the Leader of the Opposition belongs; three persons nominated by the Speaker by agreement of the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition and one Member of Parliament nominated by agreement of the Members of Parliament other than those representing the Government and those belonging to the political party or independent group to which the Leader of the Opposition belongs, and appointed by the President. Three persons of those nominated by the speaker by agreement of the PM and Leader of the Opposition are to be persons of integrity, who have distinguished themselves in public life and who are not members of any political party.

“The Council was conceived in response to the largely unchecked powers of the President (a design of the 1978 Constitution) in making appointments to high posts such as Chief Justice, Supreme Court and Court of Appeal Judges, the Attorney General, Auditor General, Inspector General of Police, Secretary General of Parliament and the independent Commissions. The Council is a means of achieving national consensus on appointments that require persons of merit, integrity and acceptance across political divides to temper public perceptions of bias and partiality.

The Council was an integral step in depoliticising high public posts. It was also a leap in constitutional development towards securing public accountability and rebuilding public trust in key institutions. Since the Council was established, the executive has from time to time resisted the check placed on it by various means. There has been non-appointment of members and constitutional amendments that abolished the Council, one which replaced it with a rubber stamp Parliamentary Council. Many Presidents have struggled to abide by the high standards imposed by the Constitution.

“President Wickremesinghe, who heralded the 21st Amendment as a return to accountable governance has, by his recent statements in and outside of parliament, crossed a line. In an outrageous move, the President publicly found fault with the Council for failing to approve his nominee to the Supreme Court and his continuing requests to reappoint the current IGP long after his age of retirement. The Constitutional Council is fulfilling its obligations in refusing this reappointment.

He also makes broad claims that the lack of approval has resulted in the police not functioning and the courts coming to a standstill. The President’s decision to appoint a Parliamentary Select Committee to probe into ‘delays’ by the CC constitutes a threat to the members of the Constitutional Council who are constitutionally mandated to deliberate on and independently decide on whether or not a presidential nominee will be approved. If only one candidate is nominated and CC approval is not given, he must hasten to place one or more better suited candidates for approval. He cannot expect to nominate one person and when the CC cannot endorse such person, resort to public complaints and threats against the Council. In fact, it demonstrates the President to disregard of clear constitutional limitations on his executive powers.

“The Lawyer’s Collective notes the growing authoritarianism of a President who serves without a mandate from the people. People’s sovereignty as articulated by the Constitution cannot be flippantly dismissed. This has been powerfully stated in several Supreme Court decisions including a majority decision delivered last week on the economic crisis.

By several previous statements we have raised concerns that the damage to public trust is long lasting. In the wake of an economic and political crisis, and people having expressed their strong desire for change, the conduct of the President signals a failure to break away from undemocratic governance practices of the past, breaching his own pledge of support for the 21st Amendment.

“It is vital that the corporate sector as well as the international community including the International Monetary Fund take grave notice of the growing authoritarianism of the President and the impact it has on good governance and the rule of law in Sri Lanka. If this authoritarian trajectory of the President continues unchecked, it will only lead to political upheaval and further economic uncertainty.”

Signatories to the LC statement are: Upul Jayasuriya, President’s Counsel, Dr. Jayampathy Wickramaratne, President’s Counsel, Professor Savitri Goonesekere, Attorney-at-Law, Geoffrey Alagaratnam, President’s Counsel, M.A. Sumanthiran, President’s Counsel, Dulindra Weerasooriya, President’s Counsel, Dinal Phillips, President’s Counsel, Saliya Pieris, President’s Counsel, S.T. Jayanaga, President’s Counsel, Nalin Dissanayake, President’s Counsel, Lal Wijenayake, Attorney-at-Law, Professor Deepika Udagama, Professor Camena Gunaratne, Upul Kumarapperuma, Attorney-at-Law, K.W. Janaranjana, Attorney-at-Law, Srinath Perera, Attorney-at-Law, Akalanka Ukwatta, Attorney-at-Law, Ermiza Tegal, Attorney-at-Law and Manoj Nanayakkara, Attorney-at-Law



News

Prez seeks Harsha’s help to address CC’s concerns over appointment of AG

Published

on

Chairman of the Committee on Public Finance (CoPF), MP Dr. Harsha de Silva, told Parliament yesterday that President Anura Kumara Dissanayake had personally telephoned him in response to a letter highlighting the prolonged delay in appointing an Auditor General, a vacancy that has remained unfilled since 07 December.

Addressing the House, Dr. de Silva said the President had contacted him following the letter he sent, in his capacity as CoPF Chairman, regarding the urgent need to appoint the constitutionally mandated head of the National Audit Office. During the conversation, the President had sought his intervention to inform the Constitutional Council (CC) about approving the names already forwarded by the President for consideration.

Dr. de Silva said the President had inquired whether he could convey the matter to the Constitutional Council after their discussion. He stressed that both the President and the CC must act in cooperation and in strict accordance with the Constitution, warning that institutional deadlock should not undermine constitutional governance.

He also raised concerns over the Speaker’s decision to prevent the letter he sent to the President from being shared with members of the Constitutional Council, stating that this had been done without any valid basis. Dr. de Silva subsequently tabled the letter in Parliament.

Last week, Dr. de Silva formally urged President Dissanayake to immediately fill the Auditor General’s post, warning that the continued vacancy was disrupting key constitutional functions. In his letter, dated 22 December, he pointed out that the absence of an Auditor General undermines Articles 148 and 154 of the Constitution, which vest Parliament with control over public finance.

He said that the vacancy has severely hampered the work of oversight bodies such as the Committee on Public Accounts (COPA) and the Committee on Public Enterprises (COPE), particularly at a time when the country is grappling with a major flood disaster.

As Chair of the Committee responsible for overseeing the National Audit Office, Dr. de Silva stressed that a swift appointment was essential to safeguard transparency, accountability and financial oversight.

In a separate public statement, he warned that Sri Lanka was operating without its constitutionally mandated Chief Auditor at a critical juncture. In a six-point appeal to the President, Dr. de Silva emphasised that an Auditor General must be appointed urgently in the context of ongoing disaster response and reconstruction efforts.

“Given the large number of transactions taking place now with Cyclone Ditwah reconstruction and the yet-to-be-legally-established Rebuilding Sri Lanka Fund, an Auditor General must be appointed urgently,” he said in a post on X.

By Saman Indrajith

Continue Reading

News

Govt. exploring possibility of converting EPF benefits into private sector pensions

Published

on

The NPP government was exploring the feasibility of introducing a regular pension, or annuity scheme, for Employees’ Provident Fund (EPF) contributors, Deputy Minister of Labour Mahinda Jayasinghe told Parliament yesterday.

Responding to a question raised by NPP Kalutara District MP Oshani Umanga in the House, Jayasinghe said the government was examining whether EPF benefits, which are currently paid as a lump sum at retirement, could instead be converted into a system that provides regular payments throughout a retiree’s lifetime.

“We are looking at whether it is possible to provide a pension,” Jayasinghe said, stressing that there was no immediate plan to abolish the existing lump-sum payment. “But we are paying greater attention to whether a regular payment can be provided throughout their retired life.”

Jayasinghe noted that the EPF was established as a social security mechanism for private sector employees after retirement and warned that receiving the entire fund in a single installment could place retirees at financial risk, particularly as life expectancy increases.

He also cautioned that interim withdrawals from the EPF undermined its long-term sustainability. “Even the interim payments that are given from time to time undermine the ability to give security at the time of retirement,” he said, distinguishing the EPF from the Employees’ Trust Fund, which provides more frequent interim benefits.

Addressing concerns over early withdrawals, the Deputy Minister explained that contributors have been allowed to withdraw up to 30 percent of their EPF balance since 2015, with a further 20 percent permitted after 10 years, subject to specific conditions and documentary proof.

Of 744 applications received for such withdrawals, 702 had been approved, he said.

The proposed shift towards an annuity-based system comes amid broader concerns over Sri Lanka’s ageing population and pressures on retirement financing. While state sector employees receive pensions funded by taxpayers, including EPF contributors, the EPF itself has been facing growing strain as it is also used to finance budget deficits.

Jayasinghe said the government’s focus was to formulate a mechanism that would ensure long-term income security for private sector employees, placing them on a footing closer to a pension scheme rather than a one-time retirement payout.

Continue Reading

News

Sajith accuses govt. of exacerbating people’s suffering to please IMF

Published

on

Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa yesterday strongly criticised proposals to increase electricity tariffs, warning that the move would deepen the hardships faced by the public already reeling from disasters and rising fuel costs.

Premadasa, who is also the leader of the SJB, told Parliament that the government was considering an electricity price hike at a time when people were struggling to recover from recent crises, while coping with higher fuel prices. He accused the administration of acting contrary to its own election pledges and the expectations of suffering people.

Making a special statement, the Opposition Leader recalled that the government had come to power promising to reduce electricity bills by 30 percent, within three years, by shifting from fuel-based power generation to cheaper renewable sources, such as solar, wind and hydropower. Instead, he said, those commitments had been abandoned.

Premadasa pointed out that the CEB has sought approval from the Public Utilities Commission of Sri Lanka (PUCSL) for an 11.57 per cent tariff increase for the first quarter of 2026 to cover its losses. He questioned whether the government had assessed the impact of such an increase on low- and middle-income households, as well as state institutions.

He also asked why the government had failed to honour its promise to cut electricity tariffs by one-third through a transparent pricing mechanism.

The Opposition Leader further criticised the limited time allocated for public consultations on the proposed new energy policy, saying it was unfair and should be extended, particularly given the prevailing national crises.

Premadasa warned that the removal of competitive tariff structures for industries would be unjust to large-scale consumers using more than five million units of electricity, and called for comparative reports before any subsidies are withdrawn.

He added that despite earlier assurances to reduce electricity bills by 33 percent, the government has once again increased fuel prices, even as global fuel prices decline, continuing, what he described as, a pattern of broken election promises.

Accusing the government of being constrained by International Monetary Fund (IMF) conditions, Premadasa said the simultaneous increases in fuel and electricity prices were exacerbating the economic burden on the public.

By Saman Indrajith

Continue Reading

Trending