Bipartisan approach triumphs

Making another significant milestone in parliamentary history, the Government and Opposition parliamentarians on Wednesday extended their fullest cooperation to pass the amendments to the Local Government Elections law unanimously with the objective of reforming the Local Government election process and to do away with the much abused Manape system which has been blamed for the rise in election-related violence.

Local Government Minister A.L.M. Ataullah introducing the amendments told the House that the historic amendments to the election law will enable people to elect members to Local Government bodies responsible for their areas. These far-reaching changes to the elections law, which will put an end to the divisive “Manape’ system were welcomed both by the Government and the Opposition members. The Minister said changing the election culture which continued for the past 23 years based on the preferential system, is a significant victory. He gave an assurance that this would be the initial step and it will extended to cover all other elections in the near future.

Opposition Leader Ranil Wickremesinghe welcoming the amendments said, that this new system should be considered as a pilot project for other elections as well. He said the Opposition would support the amendments to Local Authorities (Special Provisions) Bill and Local Authorities Elections (Amendment) Bill and hoped it would be a success.

Wickremesinghe recalled that when he was the Prime Minister, he appointed a committee under the chairmanship of Minister Dinesh Gunawardena in 2002 to effect electoral reforms. Even though Justice Minister Rauff Hakeem, Opposition MPs Anura Dissanayake and Ajith P. Perea wished to propose some amendments to the Bills, they told the House that they did not move the amendments as they fundamentally agree with the contents of the Bills. UNP Mps Sajith Premadasa and Rosy Senanayake proposed to increase women’s representation in politics up to 25 percent.

However, after the two Bills were passed with amendments, both the Government and the Opposition Parliamentarians expressed their views on this significant piece of legislation. The Speaker said that the Bill was passed with the support of all parliamentarians and called upon everybody to treat this as a precedent.

Leader of the House and Irrigation and Water Management Minister Nimal Siripala de Silva said the bipartisan approach in the House was commendable. Discussions are under way to introduce effective electoral system to the country starting at Local Government level. Drawing the attention of the House, he siad that the responsibility had been cast upon all Parliamentarians to propose a suitable electoral system for the country after discussing the shortcomings of the existing system.

The Minister hoped that the government and the Opposition members would extend their cooperation to extend the new electoral system to every segment. He commended the assistance given by the President to pass the new legislation and told the House that the President never attempted to gain political mileage out of this.

Construction and Engineering Services Minister Wimal Weerawansa said the people were badly affected due to the “Manape” and they expected a change in the system. Initially the Government has been able to effect changes to the Local Government election system. The people should extend their gratitude both to President Mahinda Rajapaksa and Minister Dinesh Gunawardena for their initiative.

The proposal by UNP MP Sajith Premadasa to increase women’s representation in politics came under severe criticism by UPFA MP Kamala Ranatunga. She said even if Sajith Premadasa wants to increase women representation in politics, his late father President R. Premadasa did not want to do so. She recalled how she was assaulted during the UNP regime.

Speaker Chamal Rajapaksa gave a landmark decision as regards, non compliance with the constitutionally laid out procedure to be followed when Bills are challenged before the Supreme Court for their constitutionality. The Speaker’s statement, made in agreement with all Party Leaders in Parliament, came in response to the ruling made by the Supreme Court at the time when preliminary objections were raised on the procedure adopted when the petitions were filed challenging the constitutionality of the Divi Neguma Bill.

The Speaker announcing his decision told the House that the Article 121 (1) of the Constitution states that when the petition of a citizen is sent to the Supreme Court, a copy thereof shall at the same time be delivered to the Speaker and not to the Secretary General (SG) of Parliament. Such delivery to the SG of Parliament shall not be treated by the Parliament as due compliance with the terms of Article 121 (1) of the constitution. He said there is a compelling rationale underpinning this mandatory provision of law.

The Speaker in his lengthy statement differed from the opinion expressed by the Supreme court and said that if the Secretary General of Parliament is to be substituted for the Speaker, the Constitution will have to be amended accordingly, which is a matter for the Legislature.

The Speaker told the House that as a senior Parliamentarian he relied on his own experience and the previous rulings by his predecessors, and he was especially inspired by the brilliant exposition of parliamentary practice by the late Speaker Anura Bandaranaike who gave a ruling striking down a judgment where three judges of the Supreme Court attempted to issue a stay order restraining the Speaker from appointing a Select Committee to inquire into the conduct of a former Chief Justice consequent to a impeachment motion against him referred to the Speaker in terms of the Constitution and the Standing Orders, and courageously upholding the supremacy of Parliament against encroachment by the Supreme Court.

Speaker Chamal Rajapaksa having studied the matter carefully that the Supreme Court has erred in perusing the unambiguous provisions relating to the Speaker in the Constitution which if allowed to remain in its present form, said will cause irreparable harm to the procedure and practice of Parliament. It is a lethal deficiency that requires a simple cure. It is necessary, as well, to rectify a bonafide error made by the Supreme Court.

He made the point that the constitution cannot function effectively if there is any encroachment or abridgement of the rights and privileges of Parliament. If there are conflicts and confusion within or between the tripod of power, it is the People - the repository of sovereign power as whose representatives we have assembled- who will suffer the consequences. The Speaker announced that in this event, proceedings in Parliament in relation to the impugned Bill will continue without interruption, and may culminate in the enactment of the Bill as an Act of Parliament. Thereafter the legislation is protected from challenge.