24 January 2018 12:00 am
Unlimited power is apt to corrupt the minds of those who possess it.”
-William Pitt, the elder
Now that the Supreme Court has made a determination on the referral by President Maithripala Sirisena as to whether his term of office is five years or six years, any ‘confusion’ that may have arisen in his mind must have been removed. The President was eager to reassure the people that it was merely to avoid any ‘confusion’ regarding the issue that the referral was made. Usually the President is not easily confused, going by his track record; rather an individual with both feet firmly on the ground, practical and obviously shrewd. It is therefore, all the more difficult to fathom what caused the ‘confusion’ about his term of office in the light of the 19th Amendment, introduced with his aegis by the good governance government.
It sounds odd, for a person whose first promise, to the Sri Lankan citizenry, in his historic speech after breaking ranks with the Rajapaksa regime, was that he would not contest for the presidency a second time. Queer indeed, for one who has no desire, or as we sinhalese put it, craving for the seat of the Executive Presidency to allow himself to be troubled by such ‘confusions’, culminating in a referral to the Supreme Court.
Yet it was Socrates who said that weak minds were preoccupied with individuals and average ones with events while the truly brilliant minds pondered on concepts. So rather than being overtly concerned with the personality, words or actions of the President, let us see what makes those who hold the high office of Executive Presidency say and do things, which are queer, and totally contradictory to what they say before they are perched on that hot seat.
The people of this beautiful isle do know by now that the enticement of absolute and unfettered power the seat of Executive Presidency holds for it’s occupier is simply boundless. To the extent that they would even shamelessly turn back on their promises to the whole nation, i.e. that they would do away with this constitutional leviathan. Chandrika Kumaratunge, Mahinda Rajapaksa and now Maithripala Sirisena have promised in no uncertain terms to do away with this system as their main election promise. Well, what happened with the two former Presidents is common knowledge. What makes these otherwise respected and honoured personalities shamelessly and unethically break the promises? What makes them not only shun the mandate given in this regard but also try and perpetuate their hold on this all-powerful position, as the 18th amendment testifies?
As Basil Fernando, the renowned human rights activist and lawyer puts it, the Presidency is akin to the mythical Gyge’s ring which makes the wearer invisible and consequently, invincible; anyone wearing it would grab it for dear life for they know and savour the limitless power it yields. The 1978 Constituiton created a constitutional monster that devoured the entire Constitution in one gulp, making short work of all accepted norms of constitutionalism, separation of powers and checks and balances. Article 32 in its original form made the President simply an entity above the law, militating against Article 12, which states that all are equal before the law, by creating an individual above and unreachable by the law.
Many thought that the 19th Amendment has watered down the unbridled and naked power of the one who holds this office; yet the enticement it has for the occupiers remains quite tempting after all, from what can be seen is taking shape in the current political scenario.
When Prof. A.J. Wilson called our Executive Presidency, “the Gaullist system in Asia”, he was obviously referring to the De Gaullean model embraced by France at the expense of a parliamentary system. Prof. Wilson certainly, though not deliberately, downplayed the human factor that would take a queer shape in the Sri Lankan context. In a country without structural tenacity and practical experience in the mode of governance introduced to us by the Europeans, we were sure to go astray with a repository of such massive powers on one individual. In a nation where power has always been conveyed vertically, i.e. from above and no strong examples of civil society standing as a buffer against unbridled power, the system was sure to create a dictatorship.
With the 19th Amendment, some of the sharpest teeth of the executive monster have been removed or blunted, admittedly. Yet it still possesses claws and fangs so potent and fatal to the democratic mode of governance. In any event, that it has a magical and enchanting effect on the person warming the seat is manifest from the sudden ‘confusion’ that crossed the President’s mind. Whether it arose from a desire to clear any constitutional crisis that might have ensued at the last minute or it was the same old syndrome that has plagued former office bearers is too early to predict; a clue will be in the modus operandi of the President in the remaining two years in office.
As I stated earlier human beings, when saturated with power do funny things with the lure of continued power. They lose their common sense, common touch, self respect, core ethical values that have fashioned their personal and political careers.
Yet it was Socrates who said that weak minds were preoccupied with individuals and average ones with events while the truly brilliant minds pondered on concepts
The President being relatively an acceptable person as a politician, (I stress the word ‘relative’) showed a remarkable degree of incomprehension, at best, in being confused about the tenure of his presidency. As he very recently said, we wish to believe that he does not fall under the 50% of politicians who are there for the plunder at their disposal. We hope his only motive in referring the matter to the Supreme Court was to avoid ambiguity and to ensure that the sovereignty of the people was not undermined. Yet given the history of the lure of the seat that turned people-oriented leaders into despots, intoxicating them with power, apprehensions are only natural.
Many leaders and parties have expressed the dire need to abolish this authoritarian system that has acted as an antidote to good governance; yet once in power, they have tried by whatever means to lengthen their stay on the seat. The current President had as his core policy at the January 2015 election, the abolishing of the executive presidency. We hope he is a person who values his reputation and a person who does not fall under the category of politicians who were intoxicated by the power of his office.
All the comments on social media and blogs decrying the referral, imply that it was an immoral and greedy attempt at prolonging the stay in power; yet I hope against hope that it was a genuine effort for avoiding a constitutional crisis.
If it was so, the President has nothing to complain and could rest at ease, knowing that he will be letting go of the reins in another two years. In doing so, he will be making history as the first and possibly the only politician not to have fallen prey to the enticement and intoxication of the office of Executive Presidency.
Yet, again, it is too early to decide whether he is immune from a syndrome that afflicts all who sit on that coveted seat.