Defend Democracy: Reject Ranil’s ‘Reforms’, Defeat Him At A Referendum

by Dr. Dayan Jayatilleka

In the wake of the war crime of the strike on the Baptist hospital in Gaza which killed at least 500 innocent civilians, maybe more, demonstrations erupted throughout the region. A notable anomaly were the demonstrations in Ramallah, which were primarily directed against President Mohammed Abbas and the Palestinian Authority. The charge was that he was too inactive and too conciliatory towards the Israeli aggressors.

It is surprising that for similar reasons and in similar vein there are no demonstrations outside the offices of all the Sri Lankan parliamentary Opposition parties without exception. This Sri Lankan Parliamentary Opposition is the weakest I have seen in 60 years, though it is by no means the smallest.

I say this for two interconnected reasons.

Firstly, we are but a year away from elections and all previous Oppositions have been on the offensive in the year running up to the major national election. The current Opposition is the exception.Secondly, and more importantly, the very holding of the major national election on schedule is in question, or more correctly, under manifest threat.

Deadly Referendum

We experienced a Referendum in December 1982 and lived through the results of the postponement for six years of the parliamentary election that was scheduled for early 1983. The gates of hell opened for Sri Lanka as a result of that decision. Now, we face the same danger several times over.

In 1982, JR Jayewardene had held a presidential election and defeated his opponent, Hector Kobbekaduwa. Even he never dared to contemplate a referendum which entailed the non-holding of the Presidential election. Yet what we are hearing now is the possibility of a referendum to do away with the earliest election available: the presidential election due in exactly one year.

If the postponement of the parliamentary election set off a chain of events which resulted in a continuing bloodbath, what will the use of the referendum to deprive people of the earliest available election do?

We are told there are two sets of ‘reforms’ on the agenda. One is a change in the electoral system. The other the abolition of the executive presidency. We have tried out one on a smaller scale and know its results. The Provincial Council system has been brought to a halt, with no elected councils because there are no elections, thanks to such efforts at ‘reform’. The imminent reforms of the national electoral system and the time taken for systemic conversion, will surely delay the holding of any parliamentary election.

‘Reform’ has been used before to delay scheduled elections. The 1972 Constitution extended the life of Parliament by two years. It is during this ‘extra time’ (1975-1977) that the United Front coalition’s fate of electoral extinction and the successor UNP administration’s 5/6ths majority were determined.

Abolishing Executive Presidency

The second prong of the proposed reform is the abolition of the executive presidency and its replacement by an executive Prime Ministership. This will give rise to several intrinsic problems.In a system without the directly, nationally elected executive presidency, the architecture will have no overarching ceiling or apex.

Add to this Ranil Wickremesinghe’s awful idea of a Madurai-Mannar power-connectivity which would enable Tamil Nadu to do a Gaza-style shutdown of power on Sri Lanka someday.Abolition of the directly elected executive presidency would mean the gap between the parliament and the potentially centrifugal Provincial Councils will be reduced as will the ability of the Centre to control the ethnic periphery, which would have been already hooked-up with India in many ways (Trincomalee etc).

At a Referendum, it will be easy for anyone—perhaps Wimal Weerawansa-Udaya Gammanpila, or Dilith Jayaweera and Anuradha Yahampath’s new party– to do what Boris Johnson, Nigel Farrage (and a large bus) did during the Brexit campaign.

While a resounding NO vote at such a referendum would be a most excellent thing, a jump-start for an ultranationalist-populist New Right would not.

Quite apart from complicated matters of content such as this, the proposed abolition of the executive presidency at this time, would mean an extension of the rulership of unelected Ranil Wickremesinghe. This is because the abolition of the executive presidency is not meant to be coterminous with Mr Wickremesinghe’s graceful retirement.

Beyond CBK’s Trick

Going by media reports he is trying to pull the old CBK trick, namely use so-called transitional provisions to stay in office. This is what gave Ranil the opportunity as Opposition Leader to burn the bipartisan draft Constitution which his deputy, Karu Jayasuriya and CBK’s representative GL Peiris had negotiated in August 2000.

New Constitutions are usually a device for Sri Lankans politicians to extend their tenure in office, either by building in a provision that the sitting President would end his/her term and the new Constitution would kick in only after that term ended, or to insist that the incoming executive Prime Minister be the outgoing executive President.

It is in order to secure LTTE support which would guarantee TULF/TNA support in Parliament for her new Constitution with its elastic ‘transitional clause’ which ensured her extended tenure, that CBK chose not to follow up her liberation of Jaffna (1996), the LTTE assassination attempt on her (1999) and/or her stellar defence of Jaffna after the loss of Elephant Pass (2000) with a rolling counter-offensive overseen by Anuruddha Ratwatte which could have achieved what Mahinda Rajapaksa eventually would—and instead went the Norway-Solheim-PTOMS route, with the support of Mangala Samaraweera and Jayantha Dhanapala and against the advice of Lakshman Kadirgamar.

Ranil Wickremesinghe is about to try CBK’s ‘new Constitution/transitional provisions’ trick but with a crucial difference which makes it infinitely worse in terms of its implications for democracy.CBK had won two Presidential elections. Had her ‘transitional trick’ worked, it would have meant an elected and re-elected President, i.e., a leader with the legitimacy of a popular mandate, becoming the first executive Prime Minister.

However, if Ranil Wickremesinghe were to succeed in a similar move, it would mean that an unelected executive President would become the unelected executive Prime Minister.The term of an unelected leader would be prolonged. Moreover, it would be prolonged by overriding through simple deletion, the first chance at a national election our citizens have, namely Presidential election 2024.

So, an unelected President would become an unelected Prime Minister and rule us open-endedly without a popular mandate and legitimacy. Why do I say open-endedly?

Given that the PC elections have been delayed for years by electoral reforms, and that Mrs. Bandaranaike’s government extended its term of office by two years when it introduced the new Constitution, there is no guarantee that the Ranil-Rajapaksa Government would not extend its term – and that of Wickremesinghe– beyond even 2025 when the Parliamentary election is due. Thus, it could be pretty much open-ended.

Inviting Violent Revolution

What does all this mean in systemic and scientific terms? On the first page of his book Guerilla Warfare, Ernesto Che Guevara wrote as follows:

· “Where a government has come into power through some form of popular vote, fraudulent or not, and maintains at least an appearance of constitutional legality, the guerrilla outbreak cannot be promoted, since the possibilities of peaceful struggle have not yet been exhausted.”

Thus, for Che, the master guerrilla commander and rigorous Marxist-Leninist, the issue of a ‘popular vote’ — ‘fraudulent or not’, and even ‘the appearance of constitutional legality’ were qualitatively decisive criteria and a firewall.

Logically, this means the converse is also true:

Where a government HAS NOT come into power through some form of popular vote, fraudulent or not, and DOES NOT maintain at least an appearance of constitutional legality, the guerilla outbreak CAN be promoted since the possibilities of peaceful struggle HAVE BEEN exhausted.

Sri Lanka’s ruler, President Ranil Wickremesinghe has NOT come to power through some form of popular vote, fraudulent or not. If he fails to hold the Presidential election on schedule, this time next year, he would be devoid of ‘at least an appearance of constitutional legality’.

Without a Presidential election, ‘the possibilities of peaceful struggle’ would have ‘been exhausted’. If there is no Presidential election by this time next year, the guerrilla outbreak or any variant of armed revolution, can ‘be promoted’.