Harim Peiris

By Harim Peiris

(Published in The Island of 11^th November 2017)

The recently concluded three-day debate by the Constitutional Assembly on the Interim Report of its Steering Committee was an excellent exercise in seeking to move forward the State reform process in Sri Lanka. The debate demonstrated that there was a degree of common ground and areas of sufficient consensuses not only between the two major parties in government, the UNP and the SLFP but even with wide sections of the opposition. Old hackneyed terms such as why we need reform or there is no need for devolution etc. was largely absent from the mainstream discourse. With the Parliament focusing its attention on the national budget to be concluded with the December parliamentary recess and January being dedicated to the scheduled local government elections, further progress on the constitutional reform will be after the dust settles from the local government elections. The outcome of the elections, while very local in focus and scope will nonetheless impact the politics of the reform process.

Within this context, it is worthwhile for the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP), which finds itself both heading the government through the presidency but having a divided parliamentary group in both government and opposition to reflect upon its rich tradition of contributions and commitment to state reform including devolution of power.

SWRD Bandaranaike’s advocacy of Federalism

It was SWRD Bandaranaike, the founder of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) who even before the formation of the party, at the time when he was articulating his political vision for the then Ceylon, who advocated the concept of a Federal State. The arguments made at that time by Mr. Bandaranaike was that federalism would be the best method to enable us to reflect the diversity of our society.  He articulated these views on federalism in six letters which he wrote in 1926 to “The Ceylon Morning Leader”. Accordingly, the Bandaranaike-Chelvanyagam pact was a reflection of his own belief that devolution of power was an appropriate, suitable and desirable state structure for Sri Lanka. In more recent times, his daughter and subsequent SLFP leader Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga was to bring the SLFP back to power after a long spell in opposition with a clear political pledge to bring about devolution of power and other constitutional reforms.

President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga (CBK)’s proposed new constitution

This return of the SLFP to power in 1994, under the leadership of CBK was with a clear commitment to constitutional reform and devolution of power. The SLFP proposals of 1994, popularly referred to as a “package”, resulted, after a nationwide dialogue and consultative process, in the proposed new constitution of August 2000. As the SLFP led People’s Alliance Government of 2000 had only a single seat majority in the house, it was a miracle that the proposed constitution of 2000 came as close as it did to securing the required two thirds in parliament, falling only about eight votes short according to the then chief government whips office.

President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s commitment through the All-Party Representatives Committee (APRC)

The Mahinda Chinthanaya “Love Dinnana Maga” or the Mahinda Chinthanaya – Path to Success, the election manifesto of President Mahinda Rajapakse from which he sought re-election in January 2015, has a clear commitment to constitutional reform including the devolution of power. In its section two (2) titled, A Wide Political Reform – A New Political Culture, President Rajapaksa’s manifesto of 2015, states as follows.

“We have been battered for 36 years by the 1978 Constitution which was thrust upon our people and country, without an appropriate debate or discussion. We must also collectively acknowledge that our Constitution is now further distorted due to the various amendments over the years, some of which are not consistent with others. Therefore, instead of amending the Constitution further with piece-meal changes, I will take action to formulate a new Constitution that reflects the peoples’ ideas, aspirations and wishes, within a period of one year.”

It further goes on to state “The entire Parliament will be formed as a Constitutional Council consisting of peoples’ representatives belonging to all political parties, which will identify the peoples’ expectations and aspirations in order to formulate a new Constitution.”

That this publicly stated commitment on which Mahinda Rajapakse secured his unsuccessful support base of forty-seven (47.5%) of the electorate was not a flash in the pan, because President Rajapakse had been making such policy statements before. In his keynote policy speech on 11^th July 2006 as President, to the inaugural session of the All Party Representative Committee (APRC) convened and established by him with the objective of seeking a consensus on reforms to the Sri Lankan State, he stated as follows.

“Our objective must be to develop a just settlement within an undivided Sri Lanka”. He further states “We must explore past attempts from the Bandaranike-Chelvanayakam Pact onwards. We must draw appropriate lessons from the experience of other countries”.

With the stated commitment of President Rajapakse at the 2015 presidential election, that it becomes clear that both candidates at the presidential election in 2015, Mahinda Rajapakse and Maithripala Sirisena, committed themselves and their political program and objectives to constitutional reform.

Accordingly, over ninety seven percent (97%) of the people who voted for these two candidates have given an overwhelming mandate for constitutional reform. Accordingly, the process of constitutional reform through the Constitutional Assembly, is a process which has a popular mandate. The actual reforms themselves or what would be the exact output of this process is left to the apex legislature of our country to devise through a process of dialogue and discourse, including civil society consultation.

As the country moves forward on the constitutional reform process, especially leaders and members of the SLFP should reflect on Sri Lanka’s lost opportunities of the past and not let the country lose out yet again on the window of opportunity presented by the unity government and the consensus around constitutional reforms, to enact the state reforms which Sri Lanka so badly needs.