Abolishing the Executive Presidency
Fundamental changes to constitutional structure needed - Dr
Jayampathy
Interviews by Manjula Fernando
Q: Is there a necessity for a new Constitution for Sri Lanka.
India's Constitution was drafted in 1950 and even after 100 amendments,
no government thought of replacing it?
A: In India, according to the Supreme Court, the basic
structure of the Constitution cannot be changed. But in our case, the
1978 Constitution was modeled on a presidential form of government with
a strong executive at the centre. Today there is a mandate for the
abolition of the Executive Presidency. It calls for fundamental changes
to the present constitutional structure. No new Constitution can be
built on the existing structure, that is the reason why we need a new
Constitution.
Q:
The main allegations against the two Republican Constitutions of Sri
Lanka is that they were violent and caused division and heightened
suspicion among communities. Your comments?
A: The 1972 Constitution and 1978, as originally enacted are
basically majoritarian Constitutions. While the 1972 Constitution had
very good features such as the breakaway from the British crown, the
introduction of fundamental rights, it also set up a centralised
structure dominated by the majority.
For example even the safeguards for public servants were taken away.
I understand the need to ensure that the public service works in
accordance with the decisions taken by the executive but without
stopping there even appointments, transfers, disciplinary control and
dismissal of public service and the police were brought under the
Cabinet of Ministers. The 1978 Constitution followed suit and made it
worse.
Q: How do you propose to do that, have you come up with any
suggestions ?
A: Yes and no. These issues have been talked about for the
last so many years. With regard to the presidential form of government,
we have been having a 37-year-old debate. The people's voice is clear -
they want to do away with the Executive Presidency.
The APRC proposals were tested a few months before the end of the
war. A large number of people, even among the Sinhalese endorsed these
proposals. When the poll was re-conducted one year after the war, the
support for an APRC type of a political solution had shot up to nearly
80 per cent. These figures speak for themselves.
A Tamil academic told me once,Tamil hardliners don't want a political
solution but a hardline government in Colombo because they stand to
benefit from that.
Q: But there are concerns that the LTTE is re-grouping
elsewhere and the demand for a separate state is still valid?
A: The LTTE was defeated in Sri Lanka but the LTTE is out
there.The LTTE is a fringe group now.
Some individuals in the Tamil diaspora whose names were taken out
from the banned list, used to be pro-LTTE and argue with us. But its
refreshing to see that some of them have renounced violence and accept
that the ethnic issue needs a political solution.
Q: There will not be any loose provisions in the new
Constitution to fuel cessation?
A: There will be clear safeguards against cessation, in fact
there were such safeguards in the 2000 draft Constitution also,
provisions to outlaw separatism.
Q: There is the 1987 example, former Chief Minister
Varadarajah Perumal unilaterally declared independence.
A: I am not defending what the Vardarajah Perumal
administration did. But what led to that was the negation of the 13th
Amendment and mollycoddling the LTTE. The LTTE wanted to eliminate the
Varadarajah Perumal administration. The declaration was foolish and they
accept it now.
But when separatist elements are roped into a political solution,
those devolved powers were never used to separate. There is not a single
example in the world.
In Scotland, it was on the brink of leaving the UK. It was a separate
kingdom forced into the United Kingdom against the wishes of the
Scottish people.
But since there are people in the country who think that devolution
may lead to separation, we have to address their concerns, and therefore
we need to put in place, constitutional safeguards, against cessation
and against any powers devolved in the provinces being misused.
Q: How will it affect the day-to-day life of the people -
Devolution and a new Constitution ?
A: A political solution would mean that this country makes
peace. We won the war but we did not win peace. If we regain peace in
that way, then, relations between the communities will be much better.
Defence expenditure can drop. That is as far as the ethnic issue is
concerned. Devolution will also solve the development of underdeveloped
areas.
I was born in a remote village called urukohogama in the foothills of
the Knuckles range. My grandfather went to teach there and we became
naturalized Kandyans. When I came to a big school in Kandy city, I
realised the difference. The village is much better now but the
development gap between Kandy and Kurukohogama is still wide.
You need devolution not only to solve the ethnic issue but also to
strengthen the periphery. It must be done genuinely.
Q: There is a committee of parliamentarians and an expert
committee appointed to discuss the draft Constitution, when will the
people and civil society come into play ?
A: Last Saturday the Cabinet Sub-committee met and decided to
go ahead with the parliamentary process. Parliament will appoint a
Commission to lead the public consultation process.
The Cabinet committee itself will call for public submissions within
the next few days, even before the Commission is appointed. A group of
researchers and volunteers will assist in the process to analyze the
feed back. We will encourage civil society to have their own campaign in
this process.
Q: Is this a time bound process ?
A: There is no time bar. We would like to finish it in six
months ideally.
Q: We were on the brink of introducing the 20th Amendment with
electoral reform?
A: The new Constitution will have a new electoral system as
well. In my opinion the 20th Amendment failed because it was too close
to a general election. Despite what they say in public, most of the
political leaders are comfortable with the old electoral system. They
had not nursed their electorates.
Q: How can you strike a balance between the protection of
citizens and the protection of human rights?
A: I am for a strong Bill of Rights. The trend worldwide is to
have a strong Bill of Rights. It must not be limited to civil and
political rights but must include social, economic and cultural as well
as women and children's rights.
Q: We are discussing repealing the PTA and Emergency
regulations, the West is ready to introduce tougher anti terrorism laws.
A: We need to have an anti terrorism law. But such law should
be on par with international standards.
There have been international studies on that. Terrorism is a global
phenomenon, it has to be met domestically and internationally. There has
to be cooperation between governments, but at the same time you need to
have protection for people who may be rightly or wrongly accused of
terrorism. We need to ensure that they get a fair trial. We also need to
have specially trained prosecutors and judges as well as laws to protect
witnesses and victims.
Q: Will there be provisions for Hybrid Courts in the new
Constitution ?
A: No. Firstly the government has not agreed to a Hybrid
Court. It will be a domestic mechanism and will encompass the four
corners of the Constitution. That is clear. |