National goals reign supreme - Minister Navin Dissanayake

By Uditha Kumarasinghe

Public Management Reforms Minister Navin Dissanayake said that Parliament will go ahead with the impeachment against Chief Justice Dr. Shirani Bandaranayake.

The national goals and priorities of both the Executive and the Legislature have to be kept in mind.

When there is an imbalance, it has to be corrected. This is not something new to Sri Lanka. It has happened in India, US and other democracies as well, said Public Reforms Management Minister, Navin Dissanayake in an interview with the Sunday Observer.

The Minister said it was the same procedure that was adopted in the case of former Chief Justice Neville Samarakoon. The Minister said that he does not agree with the Supreme Court judgment that it has the sole authority to interpret the Constitution. Many constitutional experts have also expressed this view.

The Constitution is very clear when it says “by Law or by Standing Orders.” Here there is no specific law as in India and we have followed the Standing Orders. That is the correct approach.

Minister Dissanayake said it is his opinion that the Supreme Court has not looked at the totality of the whole question of impeachment. They have conveniently left out the question of what says,” by Law or Standing Orders” of Parliament.

When there is no particular law, the Standing Orders have provided for it very clearly. Parliament has followed the Standing Orders.

Excerpts of the interview:

Q: The average citizen does not know who is supreme, whether it is Parliament, Constitution, Judiciary or Executive. Could you briefly explain this?

A: In a democratic country, there are three organs of government - Judiciary, Legislature and Executive. Tradition has it that these three organs will work together towards a particular goal. It had been the system in Sri Lanka and other democratic countries as well. Sometimes imbalance occurs. When it happens, Parliament is regarded as the supreme body and there is no question about it. People elect their Members to Parliament and their rights and privileges cannot be constrained. The Executive is also elected by the people and as such it is directly answerable to the people.

The Judiciary is the third limb which should be independent and there is no question about it. It should however, keep in mind the national goals and priorities of both the Executive and the Legislature.

When there is an imbalance, it has to be corrected. This is not something new to Sri Lanka. It had happened in India, US and other democracies as well. When there is an imbalance, the system itself corrects it. That is how I look at this current situation.

Q: The Supreme Court maintains that it has the sole authority to interpret the Constitution which is contested by the legislature. Could you explain this?

A: The Supreme Court has the right to interpret the Constitution and there is no argument about it. But in this particular matter, it has only interpreted and looked at the Constitution with the greatest respect to the Court and the judges. In my opinion, it has not looked at the totality of this question.

It has conveniently left out the question of what says,” by Law or Standing Orders” of Parliament. When there is no particular law for that the, “Standing Orders” have provided for it very clearly. Parliament has followed the Standing Orders. Earlier the same procedure was followed in the former Chief Justice Neville Samarakoon’s case. Hence the Standing Orders of Parliament are as good as laws.

With greatest respect I don’t agree with this judgement. Many constitutional experts have also expressed the same view.

The Constitution is very clear and it says, “By Law or by Standing Orders”. Here there is no law as in India and we have followed the Standing Orders. So I think that is the correct approach.

Q: The final decision on the impeachment will be made by the President himself. Former Chief Justice Sarath N Silva was of the view that the Chief Justice should make a wise decision in the interest of the justice. Would you like to give your views on this?

A: Former Chief Justice Sarath N Silva has been very explicit in his thinking. He has said that Parliament is the sole authority once an impeachment is signed and tabled in Parliament. We had a Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) and the evidence given before it. We also have the PSC report.

*When you are going to publish my interview, the vote on the impeachment motion would have been taken. We assume that a large majority - two thirds will vote in favour of the impeachment motion.

Former Chief Justice Sarath N Silva’s interpretation is hundred percent correct. It is up to the President to decide on it. Impeachment divides people. That is not a good thing. What we should do is basically take a step back and then decide on our course of action. When there is a rift between the Executive and the Judiciary, either one has to step down. The Executive will not do so. So the Chief Justice should have made a decision in the interest of the country. That is my point of view on this matter.

I had gone through the impeachment procedure earlier. My father late Minister Gamini Dissanayake was involved in the impeachment of President R. Premadasa. So I know the agony and the divisions it caused. This is not the first impeachment motion moved against a Chief Justice in Sri Lanka.

Former Chief Justice Neville Samarakoon’s impeachment was there and former Minister Lalith Athulathmudali presided over its PSC. I was also a signatory to the impeachment against former Chief Justice Sarath N Silva. It was never tabled in Parliament because the then President Chandrika Kumaratunga dissolved the Parliament. There is a history behind all this and I think we should be wiser and learn more from each experience.

Q: The Court of Appeal has invalidated the PSC findings while the Parliament was determined to proceed with the debate. Could you explain this situation?

A: I don’t agree with the court decision, because we hold that Parliament is supreme. Parliamentary rights are inviolable and nobody can give orders to Parliament. We are going on that basis. It is a historical fact that Parliament is supreme. I don’t think any institution can give orders or take decisions against parliament.

Q: It was reported that President Mahinda Rajapaksa had appointed a four member committee to review the PSC report. How do you look at this situation?

A: I think the President will appoint an independent body as he had expressed his desire to do so. If an independent body could review this report, it is good for the country. They might be able to elicit certain things either in favour of the Chief Justice or against her which the PSC couldn’t do.

Q: In spite of what the Deputy Speaker said DNA and TNA Parliamentarians appeared before the Appeal Court with regard to Chief Justice’s issue. What would be the fate of these two MPs?

A: I don’t think this would be a problem. As Opposition Leader Ranil Wickremesinghe told Parliament, there is no bar on MPs attending courts. I think it’s an internal party matter and not relevant to privileges or conduct in Parliament. I don’t think it will be a big issue at all.

Q: Do you think certain sections in the country and international forces deliberately attempt to make use of this impeachment issue to create a rift between the judiciary and the legislature?

A: When an impeachment is moved, it naturally causes divisions. I personally know some of those lawyers supporting the Chief Justice. Their motives are pure. I don’t have any doubt about their motives. They feel that it’s not just and that the Chief Justice should have been given a hearing. She was given a hearing. She walked out of the PSC proceedings without answering the questions raised at the hearings. Personally I don’t know whether any international forces are behind these people.

There may be, but I have no evidence of it. Many of young lawyers are governed by their own political ideologies. Young apprentice lawyers clamouring for the Chief Justice have only their personal political views on this. Of course, we have to remind the readers of your esteemed newspaper that not long ago, it was the UNP and the JVP which vehemently attacked the Chief Justice on her husband’s conduct. We can never forget it.

In fact, it was the UNP and a JVP MP who went to Bribery Commission to complain against her husband. It’s a very interesting story of what had happened. We have to face it. All these are decided on party lines. Independent lawyers may not be very happy over the conduct of the PSC. I personally think there are some shortcomings. There is no possibility of compromising now. That is how it stands.

Q: Human rights abuse is only a pretext by the LTTE-backed lobbies to scuttle the CHOGM to be held in Sri Lanka. Would you agree with this?

A: Yes, I fully agree. CHOGM has been something that was decided five or six years ago. We will be having this important Commonwealth Heads of meeting in Sri Lanka this year. It is an honour to our country to have this event held here as it is a very prestigious event.

The pro-LTTE Tamil diaspora is very bitter about what happened in the past with the LTTE being wiped out from Sri Lanka. So they are continuing to make false allegations against Sri Lanka. The Government has taken many remedial steps as recommended in the LLRC report. The External Affairs Ministry is monitoring the LLRC report monthly. There is a special team going into all aspects of the LLRC and it is being implemented. As a country, we are not going to satisfy all these international forces. The Government has its own agenda. The Government has a duty entrusted by the people. President Mahinda Rajapaksa has successfully performed that duty by wiping out terrorism. So the next step is to build the country. They must allow us space and time to do it.

Q: How will Divineguma help promote the livelihoods of poorer classes?

A: Actually Divineguma Bill is a consolidation of three institutions-Southern Development Authority, Samurdhi Authority and Upcountry Development Authority. This will bring all resources of these three institutions together. So we can have a more meaningful and target-oriented poverty alleviation program. The Government is determined to get rid of poverty from Sri Lanka. All these three institutions together have a vast amount of resources. These resources now coming under one umbrella organization can be channelled in a more constructive manner to tackle day to day poverty-related issues in our country.

Q: The serious crimes such as rape and murder are on the increase. What is the Government’s stand to safeguard the precious human lives?

A: I met the IGP two weeks ago and we set up the “Reform Cells” that comes under the Police and my Ministry as well. The IGP gave me all the statistics which indicates that the crime rate in our country has not increased. What has happened is certain crimes such as snatching gold chains has increased.

Major crimes such as rape and assaults have not increased. What happens when a crime is reported from somewhere, is that the media goes on the basis that bad news is good news. Immediately they rush in there and highlight it. The people, however get the impression that there is a huge crime wave in the country. The Police arrested five suspects within 48 hours in the killing of Kelaniya Pradeshiya Sabha member.

We have to understand the sociological factors as well. We have just finished the war against terrorism. I think we have 50,000 army deserters who know how to handle weapons. Sri Lanka is being used as a major transit point by the hardcore drug smugglers. Many criminal activities are planned. Police has lots of issues with certain personalities. The Police has not got a proper Crime Laboratory as yet. Given the mounting pressure on the Police, I think they are doing a good job.

Q: Is the existing mechanisms in Sri Lanka capable of protecting gender rights and uphold the dignity of women?

A: That is another important issue. There are lots of cases against women. In Police stations, there is a special Women Police Constable (WPC) to entertain women's complaints. Women are not given adequate security and assured of mental peace when there is a crime committed against them. They are still under a cloud of fear why they go to the Police station to make a complaint. Many

incidents of rape and molestation are reported while even little girls are being harassed. These incidents are not reported. We have to adopt a system where women can make complaints without fear through mobile phones. The social stigma on rape victims should be eliminated. I feel there is a new thinking in the country. A Fifty three percent of the country's population are women. Many decision-makers are also women. The situation in Sri Lanka is not as bad as in certain other South Asian countries.

Q: Are there any public management reforms under your stewardship to make the public service more receptive and responsive to the public?

A: We are conducting many training programs for public servants such as first year and second year training programs, attitude changing programs and leadership programs. We want to introduce structural changes to the state institutions. We want to have a performance-based promotion program and a grievance-handling system for all institutions. We will also introduce people- friendly public servants and modern management methods for public institutions like 5 S-system. If you go to a Divisional Secretariat Office, you will see that these changes are taking place. Many changes have also been introduced to the Immigration and Emigration Department. But it takes time, because it's very difficult to change attitudes at once. So we want to have a public service where talented people are rewarded. Those who don't work are not sidelined. People who have better capacity are given quick promotions. It has to be a system like that. That is our target and we want to achieve it. It won't produce results within a mere 24 hours. I think we can reach our targets within next two to three years.