Maithri has to address the Ranil-aberration

Who backed out from which pact and what's the back-out price?

Maithripala Sirisena could not have dreamed of defeating Mahinda Rajapaksa without the support of the United National Party (UNP).  This is why he had to forge a pact (or have one forged for him) with the leader of the UNP, Ranil Wickremesinghe.   The UNP would help him and if he won (which he did) the UNP would offer parliamentary support to see that the reform package pledged in Maithripala’s manifesto is successfully implemented. 

Maithripala counted on securing the support of the SLFP in the event he won.  He got that support and indeed took control of the party.  With UNP support he would have the numbers to amend the constitution as promised.   It was to happen in the first 100 days of his presidency.  The 19^th Amendment was passed with a lot of difficulty.  The UNP wanted a Helping-UNP Amendment.  The SLFP tried to play ‘Opposition’ as per the sad tradition of objecting to everything the Government proposed.  The JVP was clueless; they didn’t see the error of the UNP version and ranted and raved over all objections, pernicious as well as logical. 

Three other important items in the reform agenda are now effectively ‘On Hold’.  Sure, there’s talk about electoral reform but it’s all countered by talk of imminent elections even without reform (as per the 20^th Amendment).  The most worrisome part of the story is the Prime Minister’s assertion that there won’t be any more bills taken up in Parliament.  That effectively rules out the Right to Information Act.  We can also forget the ‘Code of Conduct for MPs’.  

Wickremesinghe has said that such things will be addressed by the Government that the people will elect next.  That’s assuming a lot.  He cannot speak for an as yet unelected Government nor impose his fancies on that Government’s prerogatives.  What’s left to be seen cannot be used as excuse for not doing what’s possible here and now.  Well, not only ‘possible’ but necessary for the continued legitimacy of this Government and the Maithripala Sirisena presidency. 

It has to be understood that amendment requires a two-thirds majority and that it is unlikely that anyone will secure the numbers at the next election or, failing which, can obtain the support of other parties they would probably fight with bitterly in the campaign.  It is not easy even now with people seeking to cut deals left and right even as they are not averse to cutting the throats of would-be deal-partners.  Still, this is as good an opportunity as any and saying ‘maybe next time’ is a poor show on all counts. 

With this statement, however, Wickremesinghe has clearly indicated that he’s backed out of the pact with Maithripala Sirisena.  Whether or not it displeases Maithripala we don’t know, but just as there was a pact between these two gentlemen there was a pact between the President and the people of this country.  Ranil Wickremesinghe’s role has been scripted into that agreement.  If he balks, they he must walk. 

A prime minister from a party that is a minority in parliament is by definition and aberration.  That aberration can be suffered but only to the extent that he abides by ‘contractual obligations’ as per his pre-election pact with the candidate.  He has effectively torn that agreement to pieces.  Now he is an insufferable aberration.   

If Maithripala Sirisena is interested in keeping the spirit of representative democracy alive, then he has certain options.  He can dissolve parliament and let the voters produce parliamentary and governance clarity.  This, without electoral reform, however, would mean that he cheated the people and that his manifesto was a monumental lie. 

He has the power to see the reforms through notwithstanding Wickremesinghe’s bullish and anti-democratic maneuvers.  If Wickremesinghe does not play ball, however, the President has to show him the door.

It’s simple.   Maithripala Sirisena could not have dreamed of defeating Mahinda Rajapaksa without the support of the United National Party (UNP).  Ranil Wickremesinghe would never have defeated Mahinda Rajapaksa on January 8, 2015 had he (Ranil) contested, regardless of who he aligned himself with. Period. 

The ball is with the President. 

Read more

Presidentiality Restored?

President Maithripala Sirisena has appeared to have preferred a backseat in political affairs since being elected.  He informs us that this is not true.  Indeed it can be argued that being President is more than making a song and dance about each and everything one does. Work is one thing, talking about it and getting it all recorded and disseminated is something else.  The former is what is preferred.

The President’s address to the nation on Thursday was clearly timed to mark the completion of 100 days after being election.  It was as good a moment as any to come out from what appeared to be a long sojourn in a political shell where he deferred to the Prime Minister the larger task of running the country. 

And he scored.  Heavily.

He showed leadership and vision. My friend Nandana Perera would say 'don't be too hasty'.  I would agree (this original version of this piece was written on April 24, 2015).  Both 'leadership' and 'vision' can be used to describe the speech only in a relative sense: relative to what he has been the past three months and relative to the jokers around him (and opposing him!).  The headline of the original article didn't end with a question mark, please note.  

[Nandana puts it well: 'I only hear his outpouring inferiority complex. Jaaathayantharayee senehasa (affection of the international community)! No kidding !!'] 

Most importantly the speech was calculated to put to rest any doubts about his willingness and ability to exercise the powers of his office which, even in the self-truncated form remain considerable.  In fact the nature of the power he enjoys is clearly evidenced by the fact that all it takes is a single speech to put all opponents (and indeed would-be opponents) on the back foot.    

If anyone entertained illusions about Maithripala Sirisena’s political naiveté these were unceremoniously laid to rest.  He cleverly took credit for the (for-the-time-being) suspension of hostility from certain sections of the international community.  He was correct in pointing out that there have been positive changes in political culture of the country since he assumed office, in particular when it comes to freedom of expression and freedom from feeling stalked and/or under surveillance. 

At the same time he subtly deflected criticism over the delays in reforming the constitution, putting the onus on the Parliament.  Nothing was said about the abject failure of Ravi Karunanayake’s ‘interim budget’ in bringing down the cost of living.  Nothing at all about the fiasco of the Central Bank bond issue.  He claimed he has not interfered in any investigation.  That was neat move.  Therefore the guilt in acts of omission and commission, would naturally fall into the account of Ranil Wickremesinghe.  The President has effectively retained some trumps for later use.  

The President, for all this, must understand that things can change very fast.    Friendships with international players come with costs and friendships can sour. Very fast.  Political culture can improve.  It can also decline.  Crooks can be apprehended, charges proven and sentenced, but stopping theft requires that structures that permit such things are corrected.  Talk won’t take anyone too far, for it is far too cheap. 

Therefore the presidentiality demonstrated through a well crafted speech has to be complemented by constitutional reform.  He has to deliver on the 19^th and the 20^th Amendments, the first to divest from his office dictatorial powers and the second to correct a horrendously flawed electoral system.  If this is not done he will retain all the dictatorial powers that J.R. Jayewardene created for himself plus the goodies that Mahinda Rajapaksa got for himself.   As would his successors, we must add.  And who knows who that could be!  If that is what results then this speech would sound utterly hollow and its ‘presidentiality’ duly lampooned. 

He’s behind schedule.  The speech bought him time.  Indeed, few would grudge the President a few more months to see the reforms through. 

We applaud his intentions and wish him well.  

Read more

Maithripala Sirisena holds the aces

The JRJ Constitution gives the Prez all the aces

The ‘100 days’ are done.  Much of the key elements of the ‘program’ part of it remain undone.  This should not worry President Maithripala Sirisena.  An electorate that has been burdened by a draconian constitution for more than 36 years can wait a few months more.  Indeed they have no option but to wait, at least until the next General Election.  At most they have to wait for just one more year.

The question now is whether or not the promised reform will see the light of day.  If the delay is only related to logistical issues then there’s little need to worry.  The problem is that the entire process has been marked by political brinkmanship with both major parties, the United National Party (UNP) and the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) showing less concern in democratization than in what the party could gain (or lose) in the process. 

All this is understandable.  Although there are UNPers and SLFPers in the cabinet, the decision-making power rests with the Prime Minister, who is the leader of the UNP.  Although it is officially and in appearance a ‘national’ government, there are SLFPers in both what is called ‘government’ and what is called ‘opposition’, even though the man who wields almost dictatorial powers courtesy constitutional provision is also the leader of that party.  In short it is a confused state of affairs, the confusion directly deriving from the fact that the chief executive has chosen to remain aloof in the day-to-day running of the country.

The flipside of this is that until such time the 19^th Amendment is passed, the President can at any moment and with the greatest of ease change the political equation as per whim and fancy.  All the more reason to get the 19^th passed, one would think.   As of now the only consolation is that President Sirisena has refused to limit the exercise the powers to less important matters.  However, if the 19^th is not passed due to the UNP and SLFP trying to see who will blink first, then he would have what Mahinda Rajapaksa had with a useful excuse, ‘by default’, i.e. the default of Parliament being patently uninterested in democratizing the constitution. 

The irony is that only the President stands to gain if the 19^th is not passed and only the President (at this point) is able to persuade the two parties to ‘see reason’.  He has the interesting and ‘good’ headache of being able to ensure that the process is scuttled even as he appears to be doing his very best to see it to a satisfactory close.  All this, by the way, re-emphasizes how perniciously anti-people the 1978 Constitution is. 

The President can take his time.  The only thing that might force his hand is the ‘Mahinda Rajapaksa Factor.  In the absence of parliamentary coherence with it being hard to find out who is in government and who in the opposition, and given the manifest (and deliberate?) sloth in investigating corruption charges against the previous regime, one has to wonder how close things have come to ‘too late’. 

It is clearly in the UNP’s interest to go slow on investigations because it can help divide the SLFP.  If the ‘due date’ elapses then action will run into problems associated with political ‘doability’.  The UNP is walking on eggshells because all the negatives will fall into its account.  As of now the Central Bank Governor’s issue related to bonds is driving a wedge between the UNP and its traditional base, the business community.  This has obvious and serious implications for the party. 

Managing that discontent while trying to divide the SLFP is no easy task, especially since the President with a few deft moves can trump the UNP and/or the Mahinda Rajapaksa ‘fan club’.  He can trump the UNP also by co-opting the Mahinda factor.  He has many options.  Others have few or none.  Again we see how pernicious the 1978 constitution is. 

The problem for the country is that while all these political developments are interesting in and of themselves, they also make for serious lack of clarity, coherence and stability which naturally does not bode well for the economy.  This, more than other political factors, is what constitutes a limiting factor for the President. 

In this sense, we won’t or we can’t be having too much time to wait.  The 19^th and 20^th are due to be taken up in Parliament next week.  As was seen earlier this week it doesn’t take much to distract our parliamentarians.   There will be costs of course, but if it is people and not individual MPs who have to pay, it won’t matter to them. 

It is Maithripala Sirisena’s hour.  He holds the aces AND the trumps. Let us see how he plays his hand.   

Read more

Change or Short-Changed?

The much talked of 100 days of the ‘100 Days Program’ that was part of President Maithripala Sirisena’s election campaign is now completed.  The President himself has come out with a statement which can be read as 'observations on progress' (see pages 4, 8 and 9). The Government claims that much was done.  Others claim that it’s mostly talk and that nothing significant or lasting was achieved. 

There are two ways to assess performance here.  The first is to go with items, divide the ‘done’ by the ‘promised’, multiply by 100 and come up with a percentage.  The braggers can gloss over the importance or otherwise of each line item.  They can ignore sustainability.  For example, the cuts in fuel prices can be marked as a ‘plus’, but only if it translated into significant drops in prices of related goods and services (e.g. bus fares, school van fares, vegetables and other goods that require transportation).  Factor these in and the brag loses its punch. 

The other method of evaluation would begin by giving weight to measures that correct flaws in structures and processes so that lasting value accrues to things such as the rule of law, citizenship, democratic freedoms, transparency and accountability. 

Right now there is a palpable sense of greater freedom when it comes to expression, movement and association.  Right now there is confidence that more value has accrued to that which is called ‘due process’.  However, the rosy picture has been compromised by the selectivity that has marked investigations.  It is, as of now, bordering on vindictiveness and has taken a witch-hunt character.  ‘Influence’ moreover still counts at all levels when it comes to the affairs of ordinary citizens.  This is evident in state institutions including police stations.

More serious is the unprecedented and scandalous matter of the Central Bank bond issue.  The home-investigating-home kind of process that the home-owner launched in this regard could not find evidence that the Governor had indulged in any wrongdoing.  What the investigators said was ‘He was not directly involved’.  However, they found that the organization owned by his son-in-law had ‘behaved strangely’ and recommended that the Bank of Ceylon (which facilitated a deal that helped him) be investigated.  Banks are supervised by the Central Bank.  The problem is information leakage.  This is ascertained by circumstantial evidence.  If the Governor was not directly involved the circumstances indicate, in the very least, that he may have been indirectly involved.  There is enough suspicion to demand removal, clearly, especially given the importance of the position.  This alone can outweigh all the positives of the past 100 days.

President  Sirisena correctly pointed out that when ‘freedom’ is new it is natural for the ‘incarcerated’ to cling to incarceration.  He did not mention the flipside of this: those who have for decades helped perpetuate restriction are not easily weaned of habit.  More importantly ‘new found freedom’ is a natural companion of regime-change.  It is generally referred to as the honeymoon period.  Extending that period is inextricably linked to institutional reform. 

One hundred days have passed since Maithripala Sirisena assumed office.  If he promised T-shirts to 4 persons and a million rupees to a fifth and if he delivered the T-shirts and not the bucks, it would be silly to say ‘I’ve delivered on 80% of the promises’.  The 19^th and 20^th amendments and the Right to Information Act together make the equivalent of the million rupees above.   They remain ‘iffy’.  

If assessment is strict, then we would have to conclude that the people have been short-changed and so short-changed that even ‘cheated’ can be used.  However, if one considers that promising is easy and even ‘normal’ while delivery is tough, one can afford to be generous and interject ‘better late than never, they say, so let’s wait and see a bit longer’.   

It all hinges on structural change, the consummate ‘toughie’ in all this.  

Read more

Electoral reform, anyone?

So who wants true representation after all the cheers are jeers are done?
[Pic courtesy sarynippf.wordpress.com]

The existing electoral system is seen as a serious problem and one which encourages corruption and violence.  This was observed by President Maithripala Sirisena in his manifesto.  He also observed that it is an issue that successive governments failed to address.  He pledged to abolish the existing system.  The replacement would be a mix of the first-past-the-post system and the proportional representation system.  Through this, he argued, every electorate would have a representative over and above the elimination of corruption and violence (see page 15 of Maithripala Sirisena’s manifesto).  

In the 100-days program designed to operationalize key elements of the manifesto, the following were pledged: “On January 28 An all party committee will be set up to put forward proposals to replace the current Preference Vote system and replace it with an Mixed Electoral System that ensures representation of individual Members for Parliamentary Constituencies, with mechanisms for proportionality.  On Monday March 2 new elections laws will be prepared in accordance with the proposals put forward by the all party committee.  On Tuesday March 17 Amendments to change the system of elections will be placed before Parliament and passed as swiftly as possible.”

Even the most ardent supporters of this Government would concede that the 100 Days’ Program is extremely ambitious.  On the other hand very few, including the most ardent critics of the Government, would trash every element of the manifesto and this program. Even fewer would defend the existing electoral system.  As such, no one would object if it took this government more than 100 days to put in place a different system that effectively eliminates violence and corruption while making for more wholesome representation.  Thus, a few days’ delay is eminently forgivable not least of all because this is a system that the people have had to live with for almost 26 years. 

Thus is it possible to offer a generous reading of the silence and inaction of the Government on this process which by the President’s own admission is all-important and certainly a cornerstone of institutional reform.  However, given the ‘Robin Hood Budget’ that is total antithetical to the general thrust of the United National Party’s thinking on the economy, one must wonder if everyone is thinking more about election than about electoral reform.

A change in the system would certainly put at risk the parliamentary seat of almost every MP.  The President’s manifesto speaks of a General Election sometime after April 2015.  That’s just three months away.  The Parliamentary Select Committee on Electoral Reform appointed by former President Mahinda Rajapaksa and headed by Dinesh Gunawardena deliberated for years before coming up with a proposal which of course was then left to gather dust.  It is hard to imagine that a new lot, even if more efficient than the committee headed by Gunawardena, would get cracking and give us a relevant amendment in six weeks. 

As things stand, the Government could say ‘we promised elections and we will hold them with or without electoral reform’.  However, that would mean the continuity of the same ‘corrupt and violent system’ rubbished by the President in his manifesto and the election of, yes, ‘the corrupt and violent’.  It would be far more sensible to take the time to amend the act and finish the delimitation exercise that must necessarily follow and then hold elections.  This parliament can sit through until April 2016, after all.  Why saddle the people for 5-6 years more with yet another parliament made of members elected through a flawed process? 

In any event, this mixed-system supposedly based on the ‘German Model’ (as proposed by the Gunawardena-led committee) does not include a key element of the template, the election of candidates by the respective membership of the particular party in each electorate (as opposed to being ‘selected’ by party hierarchies).  If democratization is the desire, then there cannot be shortcuts. 

The Government can and should take the time and trouble.  It is unlikely that the people will revolt if there’s a delay as long as it is evident that there is clear direction and commitment. 

Read more