|
|
|
 |
 |
|||
“Today,
the need of the hour is political stability as we prepare for talks with
the LTTE. There has to be stability and predictability with regard to the
Government of Sri Lanka,”
Prof.
G L Pieris added. “There
is no way you can negotiate peace, set the economy right or respond to the
basic challenges confronting the Government if there’s no assurance in
respect of the continuity of the Government,” Prof. Pieris said. He
said that there is “only one stable way” to achieve it - through an
amendment to the Constitution. “We
need to enact an amendment to the effect that Parliament cannot be
dissolved by the President of the country without the consent of the
majority of the members of Parliament,” Professor added. Some
Excerpts from the Cabinet Briefing by Prof G L Pieris August 8, 2002
Q
: Suppose the Government decides to go for an election would you guarantee
to the people of this country that it would be free of violence? Do you
think it is possible to get a 2/3rd majority without violence
considering the present constitution? GL:
No we have no such
intentions of violence and I have no reason to believe we would fail to
obtain a 2/3rd majority. I accept that under the present
constitution, a single party might not be able to achieve a 2/3rd
majority, but because of the peace process many parties can come together
on one platform. So, if we add all the seats of those parties together a
2/3rd is quite possible. Q:
Why are you speaking of a need to take away the power of the President to
dissolve the Parliament? What about the Executive Presidency? The
President herself has agreed to the abolition of the Executive Presidency
so, what is your view on that? GL:
After
the 5th of December there’s no guarantee whatsoever with
regard to the security and the continuity of the Government. One fine
morning you can get up and read the newspapers and find that the
Parliament has been dissolved. I don’t think any Government can function
under those circumstances. But here is a special situation. This
Government is trying to grapple with some of the most difficult problems
that the country has had ever since independence. And that is the
magnitude and the importance of the problems that are being dealt with at
the present time. Then, surely the need for political stability is all the
greater. In
fact, it is absolutely essential. Without it we cannot make any
progress with regard to the resolution of the country’s problems,
there should be a minimum degree of confidence, credibility and stability.
That is the issue! Not the abolition or the redemption of the Executive
Presidency. As usual that is a ‘red-herring’ across the trail. So,
I don’t think we need to focus on that issue right now. We are now
concerned with our own dissolution which is a far narrower issue
than the whole of the Executive Presidency. Q:
Can you say how serious this political crisis is, and whether there is a
danger… a real danger of it derailing the peace process and returning to
a war situation? GL:
No I
don’t think there is any significant danger of returning to a war
situation. This is not something totally unexpected. In the sense, the 5th
of December last year the country was aware of a complex political
situation that has arisen. Because the Executive Presidency was controlled
by the People’s Alliance and the majority of the seats in Parliament
were held by the UNF. So, the tensions and the conflicts that must emanate
from that situation were within the contemplation of the country for the
last ten months. I don’t think that there is a serious issue there. We
have the political authority to deal with that situation and we should be
able to involve certain conventions, certain understandings and means of
dealing with that. After all, this country has had a democratic tradition
since 1931. So, there’s no reason why we should despair. We have to sort
out the problem. The only way to sort it out is by giving power to the
elected Government of the country to peruse its agenda. Then the people
can pronounce on that agenda on a subsequent occasion whether they are
satisfied or not satisfied. But the Government must be given the
opportunity to perform, to implement its mandate. That is one of the
essential elements of the Democratic Process. We are asking, we are
demanding that right. Q:
You didn’t say how serious it is… GL:
Well,
‘how serious’ is
a relative matter. The whole country can see that there is a problem,
which needs to be addressed and resolved. I don’t think it is helpful
for me to try to evaluate it in terms of degrees of seriousness. All I
need to say is that there is an issue and we need to take note of it and
we have to address it in a practical, sensible reasonable manner. Q:
What makes you think that the President is going to use her prerogatives
to dissolve Parliament? What makes you think she would do that? GL:
No,
(that’s
a very good question) what
matters is not whether she would in fact use it on any particular day or
not, but the legal
positivity that she may do so. So
long as you have that element of insecurity and uncertainty, that is a
definite impediment with regard to the Government’s programme of action,
with regard to the peace process in particular. Q:
Has she given indications that she is going to do so? GL:
No,
no, she has not given any such indications. But that is not what matters.
The question is not whether she would dissolve it in three months time or
six months time or nine months time. The problem is the uncertainty… the
total, complete, absolute uncertainty and unpredictability that would be a
feature of that situation. It is that that is unacceptable. Q:
Have you given her a particular time frame within which she has to respond
to your ‘proposal’? GL:
No
we haven’t but we would like her to respond as quickly as possible. Q:
As you yourself have said, this uncertainty built last December and
the first ingredients of the proposed amendment, you told us about three
months ago was that the power of dissolution was going to be removed and
was going to be replaced by an advisory… a resolution of the Cabinet of
Parliament. But,
what really brings a question is… she has a whole range of powers
(dissolution is just one possibility which you want to address now). She
has the power to dismiss the Government. And that is not part of the
ultimatum… you are not asking her to shed ‘that’ power now? When
you were asked a question on Executive Presidency you said it’s a ‘red
herring’. The real ‘red
herring’ is the present situation when you address only one point as
if dissolution is the only threat and an election is the only solution for
the present. We
don’t see the composition of Parliament changing after an election. This
looks like something related to the progress or lack of it in the peace
process. It amounts to what we can see as a virtual moratorium of the
peace process. Why
should the LTTE even take your calls today when you’ve not resolved your
problems? You yourself have said that there is a problem of governance in
this country and that you’ll not be able to address the peace initiative
until this problem is solved. And we know the extent of the President’s
powers and we know the composition of the Parliament and the possible
outcome an election would have. In the light of this, why should you
resort to some brinkmanship at this hour? The timing itself is very very
suspicious. This situation was there three months ago or six months ago. GL:
No,
no, I don’t agree with your point of view at all. I don’t think it is
a policy of brinkmanship on our part. We are identifying the critical
problem here. The critical problem is the arbitrary, unlimited power to
dissolve Parliament in a situation where the Government continues to enjoy
the confidence of the majority in Parliament. That is the major issue. I
don’t see why we need to raise a whole host of other marginally relevant
problems without dealing with that central issue. There is a problem and
there is a way of dealing with that problem. And eventually it is the will
of the people that must be well - the will of the people as expressed in
three elections, which had been held within the last eight months. I
don’t think any reasonable person can say that there is a doubt about
what the people want or who should rule this country. The people have
indicated their feelings on that matter beyond any doubt what so ever. The
government that got that mandate, the Government of PM Ranil
Wickremasinghe must have the freedom to pursue its agenda. There must be
no obstructions. And if the Government is not given that capability and if
there was a threat of dissolution at anytime the Government is perfectly
entitled to secure for itself conditions which would enable the elected
Government to rule the country. Q:
What is the situation that gave rise to the present ultimatum? Because we
have not seen anything obstructing the peace process. Has she ever said
that she would not shed these powers? GL:
No
that is not our view. In our view, after the 5th of December
the situation is such that dissolution can take place at anytime for no
reason whatsoever. And we as an elected Government feel that is
unacceptable. And we will have no difficulty in convincing the majority of
the people of our country that that is a very reasonable claim. How can a
government solve the problems of the country? How can a government set
about executing its mandate when the sword of Damocles is perpetually
hanging over its head? Q:
it sounds reasonable but… GL:
No
I don’t think we need to carry on arguing about this.
You have one point of view and I have another point of view. Q:
May I ask why you now keep saying
that this problem has been evident since last December when you were
elected… and if that’s the case why is it becoming imperative this
week to put this matter before the President? A:
What
I said was, since the December 5th the PA and the UNP were
partners in this governance process. This is the first time it has
happened in our country since the Executive Presidential System came into
force in 1978. We have had four Executive Presidents. But in all those
situations the Presidents had controlled the Parliament. This is the first
situation where the Executive President does not have control over
Parliament. And it is Parliament that controls public finance. No one else
has authority with regard to public finance and that is the power that
belongs to Parliament and Parliament alone. President Kumaratunga is the
first and only President who does not have control over Parliament. So you
have there the ingredients for a potential conflict. Q:
I’d like to know if the Government and the President has come into a
compromise regarding the vehicle issue because the cabinet has become
silent about it A: No, we have not come into any compromise regarding that issue. We have decided to discuss that issue when the Cabinet meets next week.
|
Today's Stories
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
“I
don’t think there is any significant danger of returning to a war
situation. This is not something totally unexpected. In the sense, the 5th
of December last year the country was aware of a complex political
situation that has arisen. Because the Executive Presidency was controlled
by the People’s Alliance and the majority of the seats in Parliament
were held by the UNF. So, the tensions and the conflicts that must emanate
from that situation were within the contemplation of the country for the
last ten months. I don’t think that there is a serious issue there,”
Cabinet Spokesman Professor G.L. Peiris was responding to a question
raised by a journalist at Thursday’s Cabinet Press Briefing in Colombo.
Contact Information: Send mail to 