bloodless revolution shapes minority government

Now that the 19th Amendment to the Constitution has been enacted. What is the way forward?  
Once it is certified by the Speaker, we will implement it. Especially, we have to go for the relevant appointments to the Constitutional Council and independent commissions.   The formation of the Constitutional Council will be the first task. After that, the appointments will be made to the independent commissions. 



There is lack of clarity regarding the new Constitutional Council law among the people. As  the justice minister, how can you explain the law to the general public?

Initially, this was the same model found in the 17th Amendment to the Constitution which provided for the establishment of the Constitutional Council.  Except three ex -officio members-the Speaker, the Prime Minister and the Opposition Leader- seven other persons from civil society were to be appointed to it. But, due to objections, we were compelled to compromise to have the majority of members from Parliament that will amount to seven. The remaining three members will be hand-picked from civil society. 



Initially, what were your reasons to consider initially  more slots to civil society representatives in the Constitutional Council?
But, the argument raised by the Opposition was that Parliament is the repository of the power of the people, and that it should not be alienated to third parties. On that argument, we also agreed for a compromise. 



However, the government had a different stance to it. Why was that?
Our view was to give more weight to civil society representation that was accepted by the people in 2001 in the Constitution of the 17th Amendment. We were following the same principle. But, due to heavy opposition, we had no option. 



Other than that, the Government had to give into the Opposition during the committee stage of the debate. What do you feel about it?
During the committee stage, I accommodated only three amendments. One was about the composition of the Constitutional Council.  Second, it was the jurisdiction of the lower courts regarding action against MPs in cases of crossover or similar issues. We wanted to take away that jurisdiction from lower courts. But, the Opposition did not agree so we compromised it. 

We have decided to deal with this crossover subject in the enactment of electoral reforms as the next amendment to the Constitution.  

Also, we accommodated an amendment proposed by Lanka Samasamaja Party (LSSP) where Prof. Tissa Vitharana expressed an opinion that the independent commissions should be held answerable to Parliament.  There is nothing new in it; in fact we were to do it. We have accommodated it this amendment, and it is included in the Constitution. We had mentioned that there would be a mechanism in this regard under Standing Orders of Parliament.   We did not deviate from this requirement. 

The Democratic Left Front Leader Vasudeva Nanayakkara also sought a clarification of what the National Government is.  I verbally spelt out the definition of the National Government. Finally, out of 70 odd amendments they brought in, we accommodated only three. Prior to the committee stage a number of amendments brought in during bilateral discussions but we reached an understanding with the opposition leader. We also dropped the penal provision regarding journalists. 

We also did away with the provision that stipulated that the president should consult the chairman of the Sri Lanka Association of Justice in the appointment of Supreme Court judges. 



But, there is a public perception that this Bill did not extend to political reforms pledged during election time. What are your views on it?
We never said that we will fully scrap the Executive Presidency but that we would remove presidential powers that would not require a referendum. In fact, we faced the stiffest opposition to the provision that the president should act on the advice of the prime minister in the appointment of Cabinet Ministers.  But we retained this clause by convincing the (the Opposition) that the provision should be retained because without it, Parliament can’t function.

Now, the president has to act on the advice of the PM and we thank the Opposition for supporting it. Yet, the provision we brought making it mandatory to consult the PM in the assignment of subjects to Cabinet Ministers was omitted because it needed a referendum to be approved. 



After the next general elections, you are planning to bring about more constitutional changes. What kind of reforms will they be?
We are intending to bring in a new Constitution because the present one has been tinkered with too much. It has gone out of shape as a result.  We need two years to formulate a new Constitution..



In doing so, do you consider power devolution to the periphery?
 We have studied that aspect on our own and we have to do it. In this connection, proposals made by the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission, All Party Representative Committee (APRC) and the pledges made by former President Mahinda Rajapaksa will be considered.    



Are you seeking to strengthen the parliamentary system further?
 Actually, that is to strengthen the people more.  Parliament and the Executive Presidency are mere institutions or mechanisms to ensure the strength and protection of the  people. We are not following either the American system or the British system- we want to have our own one. The president’s immunity regarding fundamental rights has been removed  in the new Constitution. Now, decision making has been transferred to Parliament  mostly, the Constitutional Council and independent commissions 

With less than one third of MPs we have formed a government of our own. It has never happened in history. And the party that ruled with a two-thirds majority is in the Opposition. It was a revolution. But, it takes 30,000 -40,000 lives any revolution of this nature to take place in any country. But we achieved it without any blood shed whatsoever. 



A compromise was also made on the size of the Cabinet in the event of a national government formed between the two main parties. What is your view about that?
We left it open to Parliament[ to decide].   Though it was a compromise, it will benefit the Government.



What is your position regarding electoral reforms?
We are going ahead with them. The concept paper has been presented. Basically, we have agreed that there should be one member responsible for each electorate. Then, there is no preferential voting. 

There are several optional proposals. Finally,   I proposed 160 from the First Past the Post System, ten from multi-member constituencies. Then, out of 85 members left. 60 would be proposed under the district or provisional Proportional Representation System and 25 on the National List. 
Alternatively, 70 members could be proposed from the Proportional Representation System and 15 from the National List. The minority parties suggested 50 per cent from the First Past the Post System and 50 per cent from the National Proportional representation System, and 85 from the National List. 
There is no difference between SLFP and UNP approaches.  And, we are concerned that none of the minority parties are excluded.      



Some SLFP- led alliance factions were more critical of the government. So, how can you say the entire SLFP is with you?
We are closely working with MPs such as Nimal Siripala de Silva, Dilan Perera, Anura Priyadarshana Yapa and Susil Premajayantha. We know their stand. But barring the SLFP, other parties entertain some concerns.