Vital week for Sirisena: Will he make

or break the SLFP?

By Our Political Editor-Sunday, April 26, 2015
19A to be debated tomorrow, but suspicions remain whether SLFP
dissidents would delay or derail it -- SLMC and JVP strongly
criticise SLFP's electoral reforms proposals; Rajitha erred in saying
Cabinet approved it -- Concern over moves to present 20A as an
urgent Bill sans public debate; 255-member House proposed

Weeks of political uncertainty

that thrust Sri Lanka on the road
to instability are to end for good
or for the worse next week. The
good is if the 19A is passed in
Parliament after a two-day
debate due to begin tomorrow. It
is to be followed by electoral
reforms through a 20A within
weeks. The bad, firstly, is if
measures to prune down powers
of the Executive Presidency, a
main pledge that thrust
Maithripala Sirisena to the
Presidency, are defeated.
Secondly, a double blow will
come if efforts to introduce a
new electoral system through a
20A are similarly voted out.
The fears of such a possibility
keep mounting. Parliamentarians
supporting former President
Mahinda Rajapaksa are stepping
up the ante. They want to deny a
two-thirds vote though the
Central Committee of the Sri
Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP)
decided unanimously to support
both amendments. It is these
MPs who are now calling the

shots. Their latest position is that they want to move amendments to 19A. One such
instance is to make provision that the proposed Constitutional Council to be set up
should comprise only parliamentarians. The move to include this amendment is being
spearheaded by the pro-Mahinda Rajapaksa faction.
We are still clarifying matters. Once this is done, we will take a final decision,
Opposition Leader Nimal Siripala de Silva (SLFP/UPFA) told the Sunday Times. He
said that for this purpose the SLFP parliamentary group would meet today (Sunday).
For President Sirisena and other leaders of the party, this is no easy task. It is not only
essential for them to convince their MPs to support the 19A, but also the 20A which
has already run into a storm.
Not surprisingly, Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and the Government are
preparing for both eventualities. President Sirisena is doing his best to get the
amendments through. Otherwise, we have to say enough is enough and go for
parliamentary elections. By tomorrow, we will know where things stand, Mr.
Wickremesinghe told the Sunday Times. He said that leaders of the ruling coalition
were now discussing a transitional system when Parliament was dissolved.
Until yesterday, different emissaries were engaged in behind-the-scenes consultations
both with Sirisena and Rajapaksa to discern whether there is common ground for them
to reach an accord. The same emissaries are also working hard to ensure Sirisena
and Rajapaksa are on the same platform for the SLFPs May Day rally. That is clearly
a difficult task after this weeks developments. Our front page news item says that, for
the first time, there will be two SLFP rallies on May Day.
In the event it becomes clear that the 19A could not be passed, an authoritative
Government source said, Parliament would be dissolved immediately after Vesak,
possibly on May 5. In such an event, the source said, elections would be held in the
latter part of June. That event would of course, be sans electoral reforms and on the
old proportional representation system.
The current stalemate including electoral reforms became the subject of lengthy
discussions when the National Executive Council met on Friday afternoon. Unlike in its
previous sessions, taking part this time was also the former President Chandrika
Bandaranaike Kumaratunga.
Both, the Sri Lanka Muslim Congress (SLMC) and the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna
(JVP) strongly criticised the electoral reforms package. It was official Government
spokesperson Minister Rajitha Senaratne who announced at the weekly news briefing
that the Cabinet of Ministers had approved the electoral reforms presented by
President Sirisena. The Cabinet took no such decision. In fact, we wondered why the
President should introduce such a document to Ministers even before all parties
concerned had agreed on it, remarked Rauff Hakeem, the Sri Lanka Muslim

Congress (SLMC) leader. President Sirisena was to intervene to explain that he

presented the SLFP proposals as a Cabinet Memorandum for a discussion. It did not
in any way mean it was a final document. Then, Hakeem went on to urge that the cold
war between the Sri Lanka Freedom Party and the United National Party should end.
He said the National Executive Council (NEC), which now acts almost like a Cabinet
oversight body, should look at the issues before it and take studied decisions on
electoral reforms. He made some veiled criticism against the Jathika Hela Urumaya
(JHU) for using what he called gnanachariwaru (theoreticians) to formulate the
electoral reforms that have come as SLFP proposals. It was clear whom he was
hinting at. Hakeem also faulted Minister Senaratne for officially announcing that the
electoral reforms presented by the President had been accepted by the Cabinet of
Ministers when no such decision had been made. That is not all too surprising. That
Minister Senaratne has outdone his predecessor in political gaffe is now all too well
known.
Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake charged that
the SLFP electoral reform proposals were structured in a way to ensure the elimination
of his party at the polls. He re-iterated his threat to pull out of the NEC if such moves
continue. Quick to endorse Dissanayakes views was Hakeem. If you are bringing this
to shut the door on the JVP, it is wrong, he said. The JVP leader was also critical of
the Jathika Hela Urumaya (JHU) for what he called moves against his party.
Dissanayake complained that decisions made by the NEC were not being carried out.
Moreover changes to the NEC decisions were being made without reference to the
NEC. He said the dilatory tactics adopted over 19A clearly illustrated this position.
Prime Minister Wickremesinghe, the UNPs national leader, was to point out that
efforts to introduce further amendments to 19A, which has already been agreed upon,
were a red herring. One of the participants was to point out that the proposals to have
all members of the proposed Constitutional Council as MPs was the brainchild of
Vasudeva Nanayakkara, a staunch backer of Mahinda Rajapaksa. It was also pointed
out that he was being backed by Mahajana Eksath Peramuna (MEP) leader Dinesh
Gunawardena and former Minister G.L. Peiris.
That all was not hunky dory surfaced when President Sirisena remarked that even in
the case of 19A, one must ensure that the ruling of the Supreme Court should be
strictly followed. He was making it clear that no other provisions should be added. That
was an obvious broadside at the UNP which had allegedly introduced some 19A
changes when the Bill went before the Supreme Court.
Hakeem was to shower praise on President Sirisena for what he called an excellent
address to the nation on Thursday night. He said that the people took his message as
a very sincere approach. Concerned by the heat generated at the NEC meeting,
Sirisena invited party leaders of the coalition for a late night session on Friday. He also

assigned a team of lawyers led by Jayampathy Wickremeratne, PC to formulate two

different draft Bills on electoral reforms.
He wanted them both finalised on Monday so they could be placed before ministers for
discussion next Wednesday. It has been agreed that the proposed 20A will be
introduced in Parliament as an Urgent Bill. That would mean there will be no time for a
public debate or for it to be challenged it in the Supreme Court. Instead, the Bill will go
directly to the SC for determination of its constitutionality. Some political parties in the
coalition were unhappy over the move and say that would only deny an open public
discussion on an important issue.
In an address to the nation on Thursday night, President Sirisena who is quite clearly
beleaguered, made an impassioned plea for MPs to vote for the constitutional
amendments. Pointing out that there were certain obstacles he pleaded it is my
respectful appeal to honourable representatives of the people to consider this as a
historic occasion that has come to you. He said history would respect them for their
support and he hoped every one of you will vote to adopt the 19th Amendment.
In terms of recommendations made to the Cabinet of Ministers by President Sirisena,
the draft electoral reform proposals of the SLFP envisage the creation of 255 seats in
Parliament. This number has been recommended earlier by a four-member SLFP
committee that formulated a reform package. It was headed by Opposition Leader de
Silva and included Mahinda Samarasinghe, Dilan Perera and G.L. Peiris. Elections to
some 170 seats are to be on a first-past-the-post system. Whilst 60 seats would be
picked on a District Proportional Representation system and the remaining 25 would
be on National Proportional Representation system i.e the National List. Todays SLFP
parliamentary group is to be briefed on the 19A and the proposed 20 A.
President Sirisenas plea to his MPs is a national acknowledgement that he is making
a strong bid to come on top of a situation where a section of the party he ostensibly
leads is pitted against him. That it has been a cause for worry is now an open secret.
Sirisena himself was caught off guard when the Commission to Investigate Bribery or
Corruption (CIABOC) summoned former President Rajapaksa this week. It did create
some furore forcing CIABOC to change its mind about asking Rajapaksa to report to
its office. Evidently shaken by the development instead it was decided that CID
detectives attached to the Commission should visit Rajapaksa to record a statement.
The charge against him appointing former UNP General Secretary Tissa
Attanayake as Minister of Health after declaring himself as a presidential candidate
last year amounted to bribery. The charge, to say the least, is on the verge of being
frivolous. One cannot think of any Government in post independent Sri Lanka not
returning favours to those who helped them. If that was bribery, most politicians would
be in jail and most governments would have collapsed.
Similarly, with former Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa. He is being questioned

on his role in the floating armoury case where a private security firm was authorised
to handle weapons with the connivance of the state security services. In both
instances, the Government did shoot itself on the foot. Neither before summons to
appear before CIABOC or thereafter, did the Government tell the public on what the
duo faced. True that strict secrecy laws govern investigations by CIABOC. That does
not in any way prevent the Government from saying why the Rajapaksas were being
summoned and what the subject matter of the investigation is. If indeed the
Government was blissfully unaware, then it would have to take the blame for not
knowing what is going on. The result of all this has been a wave of public sympathy.
Bauddhaloka Mawatha in Colombo was virtually blocked by crowds as Gotabaya
Rajapaksa was driven to the CIABOC to make a statement but later won time. It
happened again on Friday when he turned up. On the other hand, it lays bare another
uncomfortable reality. It is proof that since being voted to office, the SirisenaWickremesinghe Government has been running on an engine and wheels put in place
by the previous Rajapaksa administration. Are they short of officials who believed in
the policies and principles of the new Government? Was this why some officials even
allegedly colluded to allow principal witnesses in multibillion dollar cases under
investigation to flee the country ostensibly on family leave or drag their feet in offering
opinions on the outcome of investigations?
The question was whether the new Government did the right thing by merely replacing
Rajapaksa appointees with others from the public service. The principle behind the
new Governments move was to put Yahapalanaya (good governance) on the right
track. It was to de-politicse the public service and give public servants a backbone, but
practically, some of these persons who were put in key posts belonged to the
Rajapaksa era. Their loyalties remained with those in the ousted Rajapaksa
Government.
Learning from this mistake, probably, the new Government replaced Rajapaksa
nominees in private banks with its own officials. This drew criticism that the new
Government was doing the same wrong things the Rajapaksa Government was
accused of doing appointing henchmen. The Governments explanation was that
these new appointees were only engaged in a holding operation until the private banks
found men and women who would be independent nominees for these banks (holding
Government shares). This was therefore, the dilemma the new Government faced, but
it was a case of you were damned if you did, and damned if you didnt.
The Governments action even in the case of the former Economic Development
Minister Basil Rajapaksa left much to be desired. He returned to Sri Lanka and
claimed that he had gone to the United States after the presidential elections for
medical treatment a rare privilege which few Sri Lankans enjoy. Having a home in
California and being a powerful member of the Cabinet of Ministers in Sri Lanka was
even a higher privilege. Probably buoyed by the rising tide of support for his ex-

President brother within Parliament and outside, he turned up this week, the day after
his return to Sri Lanka, against the advice of his ex-President brother, at the Financial
Crimes Investigation Division (FCID) to make a statement and was later remanded. He
entered the Prison Hospital and has since been transferred to the Merchants Ward of
the National Hospital. Talk of privileges. When FCID detectives questioned him, Basil
Rajapaksa made an appeal to give him two days time to return to them. We never
arrested you when you returned to Sri Lanka. We gave you the opportunity to come
here. We cannot grant you more time since you were wanted for questioning for
several weeks, a detective who recorded a 16-page statement told the younger
Rajapaksa. A Police source claimed they feared giving time would have led to crowds
converging at the Kaduwela Magistrates Court to stage a protest. Basil Rajapaksa
also said that if he was not arrested, he was prepared to remain in the FCID office
overnight. His appeals were turned down.
There is an interesting aspect to these developments. If such a situation were to arise
when the previous Government was in power, the resultant state media blitz would
have branded those involved as traitors or anti national elements who were
responsible for heinous crimes. But under the coalition Governments Yahapalanaya,
in keeping with the pledge at presidential election, they had ensured a relatively free
media. That, no doubt is a welcome move. In that climate, it is not only the ruling
coalition that got its share of media exposure but those in the Opposition too. Whilst
this should be the case, the Governments message particularly on the current
investigations into cases of bribery, corruption and malpractices is not reaching the
public. The previous Government ensured its MPs took part in television talk shows to
keep such issues alive. They did so at public meetings and news conferences too.
Even those dealing with the probes were asked to face the media. Surprisingly though,
the ruling coalition appears to be more focused on news releases and that too on
speeches and actions of their own leaders. This is whilst the Opposition receives its
share of positive exposure. Despite the presence of known communication experts in
their midst, that the UNP dominated Government faces a serious shortcoming in this
field is an indictment on the leadership. They are either oblivious to realities or are too
busy otherwise.
It is known that the troika running the country President Sirisena, Premier
Wickremesinghe and former President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga have
been discussing matters relating to investigations into bribery, corruption and other
malpractices by the previous regime. They did focus on some serious cases but
veered around to ensure that cases of bribery and corruption related to the previous
Government be taken early. Whether this was part of their pre-election strategy is
unclear. This is whilst some of the most serious cases have been left hanging and
investigators kept guessing what to do next. Different leaders have adduced different
reasons. In keeping with this move, a onetime high ranking official of the previous
administration, the onetime head of a regulatory body and a member of the clergy are
to be arrested in the coming week with regard to the alleged misappropriation of state

funds amounting to Rs. 600 million. FCID investigators say the evidence in this case is
overwhelming.
This is another reason why Sirisena, during his address to the nation made repeated
references to fighting bribery and corruption. He wanted to make the point that neither
he nor the Government had given up the fight. He declared, I will take every step
possible, especially to protect and strengthen the peoples freedom and democracy
and through these means eliminate corruption and fraud, thereby protect the genuine
rights of the people. He said, Every action will be taken to reduce and eliminate
corruption and fraud, theft or waste. He likened those people who preferred a corrupt
system to those who wanted to remain as slaves when slavery was being abolished in
America. They (meaning the previous leadership) misled the public when action is
taken to eliminate corruption and fraud. Interesting enough, Sirisena is underscoring a
point, though not consciously, that contributing to such a misleading situation is the
lack of information disseminated by his Government. He could easily have overcome
such a situation if he did harness the wider media support he has. Of course that is a
responsibility for his coalition leaders too.
Other than his public plea to detractors in the SLFP, President Sirisena did explain
himself on a variety of issues. Responding to his critics who said he lacked strength
and was weak, he said my behaviour in the last 100 days was not to use the unlimited
powers that are available to his office. Why? Because you elected me to distribute
this power. I came for that purpose. I came to remove the unlimited powers held by the
Executive President. However, what is at issue is not the use or abuse of the
executive powers of the Presidency. It is rather a question of how assertive he has
been in guiding the state machinery against bribery, corruption and other acts. This is
particularly in the light of various pressures being brought to bear on constituent
leaders of the coalition and a public perception that the Government had relented on
more serious cases.
He also devoted a substantial part of his speech to foreign policy issues to make the
point that Sri Lanka was now not internationally isolated. They were divided over us.
They now place their trust in this Government, and me, just as you did, and believe
that as Head of State I would protect the freedom of this country and its Democracy,
Human Rights and Fundamental Rights. To back up his assertions he referred to his
visits to India, Britain, China and Pakistan. What seemed a moot point was his
remarks to questions on what has been done in the 100-Day Programme of Work. He
replied Some of these valuable actions are neither physical in nature nor visible to the
eye.
Sirisena also sounded a note of caution to the media. He noted, I recall how prior to
January 8 those who yielded political power spoke to the heads of media institutions,
news directors and news editors. Are we to transform the freedoms we have obtained
to that of the wild ass? I see how some of the media institutions behave today. I am

surprised how they use these freedoms in a wrong manner. It must be noted that we
have firmly established the democratic rights of the people and the freedom of the
media.
Sirisenas comments on the issue cannot be questioned. He is obviously unhappy
about some media. However, it is pertinent to recall the sayings of at least two of his
predecessors Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga and Mahinda Rajapaksa. In
the weeks and months after they assumed office, they vowed at different fora to
protect media freedom but later became highly critical and went after it.
Kumaratungas tenure saw the killing of a tabloid journalist, serial criminal defamation
cases being filed against editors and publishers and periodic clamp down of
censorship where even the use of a map of Sri Lanka, available with tour operators
the world over, was prohibited. In marked contrast, Rajapaksa publicly claimed that
there was no censorship during his tenure. Privately, it was another story where
different forms of pressure were used forcing media practitioners to practice selfcensorship. Physical attacks, including murders of journalists were chronic. Sirisenas
remarks nevertheless raise some concern.
If indeed there are errant media as he perceives, his advisors should have asked him
to deal with them under the law. Sweeping remarks whether media freedom is the
freedom of the wild ass tend to reflect more on his image. It could be misconstrued to
mean he was reacting to criticism against him as medias experience with his
predecessors has shown. On the other hand, if indeed there has been abuse it is
incumbent on his office to explain what they are.
More than the media, the internecine issues within the SLFP are the main cause for
concern for Sirisena right now. In the event his MPs do not facilitate the passage of the
19A and thereafter the 20A, his choice is now clear. He would have to dissolve
Parliament. His own credibility as a leader is at stake. Will he become a lame duck
President? This raises more questions for him. MPs who did not support him face the
risk of not receiving nominations for parliamentary elections. Will the SLFP dissenters
who back Rajapaksa then rally round him to form a new party and contest both the
SLFP and the UNP? That would be to the advantage of the UNP. Yet, with public
sympathy veering the Rajapaksa way, the result of Governments own shortcomings,
both Sirisena and his Government would have kicked into their own goal.