Connect with us

Editorial

22-A and Catch-22

Published

on

Friday 7th October, 2022

Sanity has prevailed; the parliamentary debate on the 22nd Amendment (22-A) to the Constitution Bill has been postponed. The government seems to have got cold feet due to stiff resistance offered by the Opposition and even a section of the ruling SLPP to the controversial Bill.The process of tinkering with the 1978 Constitution to effect changes to the executive presidency has taken a zigzag course. The first successful attempt to reduce the executive powers of the President was made in 2001, and it paved the way for the 17th Amendment (17-A), which led to the establishment of the Constitutional Council and the Independent Commissions to depoliticise some vital state institutions.

 About nine years later, 17-A was deep-sixed, and the 18th Amendment (18-A) introduced to restore the powers of the executive presidency. In 2015, all those who voted for 18-A in Parliament, save one or two, backed the 19th Amendment (19-A), which reduced the executive powers of the President. Then came the 20th Amendment (20-A), which strengthened the executive presidency again. A fresh attempt is now being made to weaken the presidency through 22-A.

The government has, in its wisdom, chosen to bite off more than it can chew. It does not have a two-thirds majority to secure the passage of the 22-A Bill, and, worse, the SLPP is divided thereon, with the Basil Rajapaksa faction openly opposing it. If the pro-Rajapaksa MPs do not back the 22-A Bill, it will be a dead duck.

Why the government is in a mighty hurry to have the 22-A Bill passed defies comprehension. It has, true to form, got its priorities mixed up. What the country needs at this juncture is not a new Constitution or an amendment to the existing one, but an all-out attempt to sort out the economic crisis, which has the potential to unleash anarchy, which will render all laws useless.

Opposition to the 22-A Bill emanates mostly from its opponents’ fear that the government is planning to introduce some committee-stage amendments thereto without judicial sanction, thereby weakening, if not doing away with, the constitutional safeguards currently in place against moves being made to divide the country. The critics of the 22-A Bill also argue that President Ranil Wickremesinghe is under pressure from the UNHRC, India, and the US-led western powers to enable the full implementation of the 13th Amendment (13-A), and clear the way for federalism. Their fear is not unfounded. There have been instances where governments compassed their sinister ends by stuffing Bills with questionable sections at the committee stage and steamrollering them through Parliament.

Laws become faits accomplis in this country once they are passed owing to the absence of a constitutional provision for the post-enactment judicial review of legislation. There are some precedents. It has now been revealed that in 1988, the J. R. Jayewardene government surreptitiously inserted a section into the Parliamentary Elections Act by having an amendment Bill changed, after its ratification, to allow political parties to engineer National List vacancies and appoint persons of their choice to Parliament. This provision has made a mockery of Article 99 (A) and Article 101 (H) of the Constitution. In 2017, the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe government smuggled a slew of sections into the Provincial Council Elections (Amendment) Bill to postpone the provincial council elections indefinitely. It is argued in some quarters that 20-A prohibits such alterations and additions; Article 78 of the Constitution says ‘any amendment proposed to a Bill in Parliament shall not deviate from the merits and principles of such Bill’. But some constitutional experts are of the view that no legal remedy will be available even if changes are made to the 22-A Bill at the committee stage because laws cannot be challenged in courts after their enactment. There’s the rub.

The SLPP itself has opposed the government’s decision to put the 22-A Bill to the vote. On the one hand, it seems to think that a strong executive presidency is necessary for its survival, which hinges on the Executive President’s ability to rule the country with an iron fist and hold anti-government protesters at bay, and on the other hand, it does not have a two-thirds majority to secure the passage of the Bill, and is very likely to suffer a serious setback in Parliament if a vote is taken thereon. It is also possible that the SLPP has resorted to brinkmanship to have the 22-A Bill amended to prevent the President from dissolving Parliament after the expiration of two and a half years of its term. But how will the SLPP muster 150 votes even if it decides to back the Bill. As it stands, the chances of the 22-A Bill being ratified are extremely remote, but given the sheer number of MPs who are willing to defect, it is difficult to predict the outcomes of votes in Parliament.

President Wickremesinghe will stand to gain if the status quo remains, provided he is not under international pressure to have the 22-A Bill passed with provision for the full implementation of 13-A; he will be able to enjoy unbridled executive powers, and leverage his ability to dissolve Parliament in about six months to tame the SLPP parliamentary group, which needs elections like a hole in the head.

Let the government be urged to delay the debate on the 22-A Bill further and reveal the proposed changes to it thereby allowing an extensive public discussion to take place thereon. It has to show its hand, and give a cast-iron guarantee that it will not stuff the Bill with sections sans judicial sanction at the committee stage, which has become a sort of constitutional wormhole. The need for introducing constitutional provision for the post-enactment judicial review of legislation cannot be overemphasised.



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Editorial

Dons’ frustration and rulers’ nonchalance

Published

on

Monday 5th October, 2026

The Federation of University Teachers’ Associations (FUTA) has held several media briefings during the past several months to highlight a host of unresolved issues affecting the university system, but the government seems to be unconcerned. Addressing the media, over the weekend, the FUTA raised those problems once again, pointing out that all state universities had been left with only about 5,000 teachers because a large number of academics had already left the country, mostly for economic reasons. The situation was taking a turn for the worse, it warned.

University teachers are among the professionals who played a pivotal role in enabling the JVP-led NPP’s meteoric rise to power, but today they are shouting themselves hoarse in a bid to draw the government’s attention to the problems besetting the university system, but in vain. The same holds true for the state-sector doctors, who have got short shrift from the government, which rides roughshod over the GMOA (Government Medical Officers’ Association) as well as the BASL (Bar Association of Sri Lanka), whose members also campaigned hard for the NPP.

The incumbent government, just like its predecessors, has apparently prioritised a plan to increase the number of universities in keeping with what looks like a politically determined agenda over resourcing and staffing the existing universities adequately. President Anura Kumara Dissanayake, in his wisdom, has promised to establish 50 new universities across the country while almost all state universities are experiencing severe resource constraints, with many academics voting with their feet.

A quality university system cannot be created simply by increasing the number of universities or admitting more students. The need is for a combination of capable academics, adequate resources, institutional autonomy, rigorous standards and a system of accountability. There are certain other conditions that need to be fulfilled for a country to create a vibrant university system that conforms to international standards. First of all, there should be a clear national higher education strategy to establish a diversified, future-oriented tertiary education system that is adequately resourced and staffed.

Universities cannot function properly, much less achieve academic excellence, without enough qualified teachers and appropriate student-to-staff ratios. Adequate and sustained funding, strong research capacity, academic freedom, institutional freedom and rigorous, independent quality assurance, industrial and international links are among the other factors that help ensure the robustness of a university system.

The World Bank’s recent assessment of Sri Lanka’s higher education sector has identified scarcity of qualified academic staff, inadequate research and innovation output and passive student learning among the challenges facing the sector.

FUTA members have told the media that foreign research grants have to be approved by the Cabinet of Ministers; the approval process is frustratingly slow, and therefore universities are without enough funds for research. There are arguments for and against government oversight on research grants, but the real issue is why the government cannot expedite the approval process. Teaching and research are traditionally regarded as inseparable functions of a university. Besides, universities need sufficient freedom to determine curricula, conduct research, appoint staff and make academic decisions without inappropriate political or bureaucratic interference. UNESCO regards academic freedom and institutional autonomy as important conditions for universities to fulfil their teaching and research functions.

It is doubtful whether Sri Lankan governments have learnt from history how other countries achieved their development goals. The OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) has revealed that universities played a central role in the development of the Global North by producing the educated workforce, scientists, engineers, doctors, teachers, administrators and other professionals needed to build modern economies and strong public institutions. They also became major centres of basic and applied research, generating knowledge that helped drive industrialisation, technological innovation and productivity. The OECD notes that universities in most developed economies remain major providers of research and important contributors to the development of new technologies. The rise of strong university systems was not merely a result of development in the Global North; universities themselves helped usher in progress. It is hoped that Sri Lankan policymakers, particularly politicians, will take cognisance of this simple fact.

The incumbent government has raised the retirement ages of judges. It even went to the extent of amending the Constitution amidst protests from national and international organisations, claiming that it had to do so to clear a backlog of cases. It has also launched a substantial programme to recruit and train thousands of police personnel. Why can’t it take similar action urgently to resolve the shortage of university teachers? It should heed the university teachers’ warning; students who qualify for university admission may have to wait for several years before the commencement of their academic programmes, and universities might end up being empty shells.

Continue Reading

Editorial

Kaduwela land grab and statist spectres

Published

on

A private company has complained to the police, alleging that Kaduwela Mayor Ranjan Jayalal and NPP MP Asitha Niroshana forcibly took over a block of land belonging to it in Athurugiriya for a Metro bus stand. Lawyers representing the company have told the media that the police have not acted on their complaint due to political pressure. The NPP politicians remain defiant, insisting that the new bus stand will not be shifted under any circumstances.

Sri Lanka politicians take leave of their senses when power goes to their heads. During previous governments, there were widespread allegations that some politicians got their supporters to encroach on privately owned estates in the Colombo suburbs and then demanded money from hapless owners to remove the squatters, while others openly grabbed houses and land with impunity. These allegations have gone uninvestigated. The 2024 regime change was expected to bring such illegal practices to an end. But in 2025, a group of JVP activists, led by a deputy minister, stormed a party office belonging to their rival faction, the Frontline Socialist Party (FSP), in Yakkala, and forcibly occupied it after assaulting and driving away a group of FSP members. They even showed the police a document, claiming that it was a court order vesting the ownership of the building in the JVP, and the police promptly cordoned off the area and set up a checkpoint to ensure the safety of the JVPers. But in April 2026, the Gampaha District Court ordered the JVP to return the office to the FSP.

The alleged land grab in Athurugiriya is different from the previous ones in that it is not intended to benefit any political party or any private individual as such, but it cannot be countenanced on any grounds. There should certainly be a place for the Metro buses to be parked in Kaduwela, but the government must not bulldoze its way through to acquire private property. It should negotiate with the company concerned and explore the possibility of purchasing the land at the prevailing commercial rate or taking it on lease. If the owner is unwilling to sell or lease the property, the government will have to look for an alternative location. There is no other way out. That is the way such disputes should be settled in the civilised world. The police must be made to explain why they have not instituted legal action against the Kaduwela Mayor and the NPP MP.

The government’s efforts to develop the Metro service deserve praise, encouragement and public support. The state-owned bus service has to be revitalised. However, the development of the Metro bus service cannot be cited in extenuation of high-handed actions, such as the alleged land grab.

It is high time the JVP/NPP politicians and their supporters realised that a popular mandate is not tantamount to a carte blanche and they cannot act according to their whims and fancies. The alleged land grab is bound to have an unsettling effect on investors, particularly foreign investors, given the JVP’s original ideological programme, which bore the imprimatur of its founder-leader Rohana Wijeweera, and the continuing influence of the party’s old guard over the present government. The JVP’s early programme called for far-reaching socialist economic measures, including the abolition of private ownership in several sectors and revolutionary land reform. The forcible land takeover in Athurugiriya not only smacks of statism but also conjures up the failed communist spectres of the past.

The government should take cognisance of what the US says, in its 2026 Investment Climate Statements: Sri Lanka, about land tenure here. Noting that Sri Lanka has made important progress since the 2022 economic crisis, the report says the investment environment remains difficult and unpredictable. It is not simply a negative report: it acknowledges political stability under the NPP government, commitment to the IMF programme. However, it makes specific mention of “tenure insecurity” in the context of weaknesses in Sri Lanka’s land sector. The report lists it alongside land scarcity, fragmented land administration, land degradation, encroachment and land disputes. Tenure insecurity generally means that a person or business does not have sufficiently certain, legally enforceable and transferable rights over the land they occupy or use. But it also means vulnerability to illegal occupation, land grabbing, encroachment or other involuntary loss of land. The World Bank’s definition of ‘tenure insecurity’ is noteworthy. It says tenure security involves protection against the involuntary loss of land, and notes that insecurity can arise from disputes within families or communities, or from the actions of governments or private claimants.

The US investment report provides an important reference to the foreign investors assessing Sri Lanka’s investment climate. The JVP-NPP government therefore should not send the wrong message to investors. In this day and age, news travels almost at subatomic speed, reaching millions of people across the globe within seconds. The government would do well to be mindful of the repercussions of its actions.

Continue Reading

Editorial

Fuelling discontent and protest

Published

on

Saturday 3rd October, 2026

Private fuel bowser owners were up in arms, yesterday, claiming that they were incurring huge losses because the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation (CPC) had not increased commissions for fuel distribution. Unless the CPC responded favourably to their demand for a substantial increase in commissions, they would be left with no alternative but to stop fuel distribution completely with immediate effect, they warned, noting that the CPC had promised to announce its final decision yesterday.

The Ceylon Petroleum Private Tanker Owners’ Association (CPPTOA), which is leading the fuel bowser owners’ struggle, said yesterday that it expected their commission to be raised at least to 20%, as the cost of fuel distribution had increased sharply. A meeting between the CPPTOA representatives and the CPC officials was going on at the time of writing.

It defies comprehension why the CPC lets the grass grow under its feet without addressing issues that have the potential to cripple fuel distribution. The CPPTOA had been protesting for weeks, but the CPC ignored fuel distributors’ demand. It may have expected the problem to go away with the passage of time. Everything possible must be done to prevent pumps from running dry at filling stations, causing hardships to the public and adversely impacting the economy.

The CPC should have taken immediate action at the first sign of trouble and invited the CPPTOA to talks instead of waiting until the eleventh hour. Prudence demands that a game of chicken be averted in a crucial sector like petroleum distribution.

Issues that could cripple the petroleum sector are best sorted out at the negotiating table, which is the ideal place for bargaining. We are not in a position to say whether it is fair for the CPPTOA to demand a 20% commission, but the fuel distributors’ grievances should be addressed and the CPC ought to hold talks with them and negotiate solutions as and when issues crop up. Flexibility is a prerequisite for resolving trade union problems. Intransigence and brinkmanship only aggravate such issues, much to the detriment of the country’s interests. If bowser operators stopped distributing fuel for a couple of days, perish the thought, it would take a considerable time to replenish supplies thereafter, and fuel queues would reappear. Disruptions to fuel distribution could have a domino effect on virtually every other sector of the economy.

The fragile economy, which is recovering from an unprecedented crisis, cannot take any more shocks, and the patience of the public is manifestly wearing thin. Petroleum sector trade unions have claimed that the CPC is selling fuel from older stocks at higher prices, while fuel distributors have called upon the government to scrap the loss-recovery levy immediately, arguing that the CPC’s legacy debt has now been fully repaid. These are the issues the Opposition should take up in Parliament instead of making loud noises that signify nothing.

One can only hope that the CPC and the CPPTOA will resolve the commission issue through negotiations, and the CPC will act more responsibly in the future without trying to wish away trade union issues that could cripple the petroleum sector.

Continue Reading

Trending