LG elections and silence of the Commissioner of Elections

Regional political parties in the north accused the president of violating election laws by threatening to withhold central government funding from local bodies which do not elect his party into power

In mid-March this year, the Commissioner of Elections announced the long overdue local government (LG) elections would be held on May 6 this year. God willing, this time around, the LG elections will hopefully be held in a timely fashion. The term of office for 340 out of 341 local government authorities expired on March 19, 2023.

However, LG elections, originally scheduled for 2022, were postponed by President Gotabaya Rajapaksa due to the economic crisis. He extended the term by a year. The Commissioner of Elections set March 9, 2023 as the new date for the holding of LG elections.

Our immediate past President Wickremesinghe too, did not hold LG elections on the due date. Wickremesinghe argued elections should not be held during the crisis due to financial constraints. 

The president’s scorning of the court order did little to help the rule of law in the country or people’s faith in the system of justice.

Shortly after his election as president of this country, President Dissanayake promised to hold the long overdue LG elections. Dissanayake has lived up to his promise regarding the holding of the local government elections.

Regional political parties in the north accused the president of violating election laws by threatening to withhold central government funding from local bodies which do not elect his party into power. The spokesman of a northern party claimed that, through his speeches, the president was attempting to bribe electors into voting for his party—dangling central government funding to victorious local bodies headed by his political outfit—the NPP.

In the south of the country too, the president has voiced similar sentiments regarding disbursements of funds to local government bodies not controlled by his own political party. These comments have raised a literal stormin a teacup.

There is a question of whether the President did infact threaten to withhold funds from local bodies not led by his political party. He spoke of scrutinising and rescrutinising proposals and delaying central government funding in the disbursement of central government funds to local government institutions not controlled by his party. 

The reality is that the president has no role in the disbursement of central government funds to local bodies.

Even an executive president cannot withhold central government funds from local government bodies.To receive central government funding, local bodies present their proposals to the District Co-ordinating Committee (DCC), where proposals are vetted. After scrutinising the proposals, the DCC either accepts or rejects one or other proposals. 

President Dissanayake is, in fact, speaking half-truths and attempting to mislead the people into voting for his party—the NPP. The JVP/NPP seems to have fallen into the same trap the ‘old left’ political parties fell into during the regime of Sirimavo Bandaranaike—hiding behind the fig leaf of half truths and defending the indefensible. For their failures, the old left parties have been completely rejected by the masses since the General elections of 1977. The same fate awaits the JVP/NPP combine it limits itself simply to ‘talk and not walk the talk’.

What is strange however, has been the silence of the Office of the Commissioner of Elections regarding the alleged controversial comments made by the president regarding the dispersal of central government funds to local bodies. Despite complaints being made to his office, the Commissioner has remained silent.

Election monitoring bodies too, who are normally very vociferous during the run-up to any election, have been rather muted regarding the issue. The Centre for Monitoring Election Violence (CMEV) however has lodged two complaints with the office of the Elections Commission giving exact details of particular meetings as far back as in the first week of April. According to the CMEV, the Commissioner of Elections has not acknowledged receipt of the complaint. 

The question which arises is why the Commissioner of Elections has chosen to remain silent, despite his office having received at least two complaints from the election monitoring body. We hope it is not fear of repercussions that has caused his silence.