Sumanthiran while conceding snags in 19A says that is no reason to throw away its positives

By Saman Indrajith

Some of the powers that had been vested with Parliament and judiciary by the 19th Amendment are being transferred to the hold of the executive presidency by the 20th Amendment paving the way for an autocracy, Jaffna District MP M.A. Sumanthiran told Parliament yesterday.

Participating in the second reading stage debate on the 20th amendment, MP Sumanthiran said: A sense of deja vu comes to my mind as I stand up. Ten years back on Sept 8, 2010, when the 18th Amendment to the Constitution moved in this House, I spoke at length and I expressed my dismay. In April, 2015 when the 19th Amendment was brought up I stated that I did not expect to dismantle the 18th Amendment by the very same Parliament which had passed it. Now, today before us is the 20th Amendment and the process has completed its full circle. We are trying to remove the 19th Amendment and going back to the 18th amendment effectively.

“I register my opposition to the bill before us because this is in the wrong direction. Out of the 20 amendments that came to this House and affected the Constitution, there are two amendments that had more than 200 members voting for them. That was the 17th amendment which was passed here with one member abstaining and the 19th amendment that had been passed with only one member voting against it. Sarath Weerasekera voted against it. Although I do not agree with his standpoint then and today, I should respect Sarath Weerasekera for his consistency he had shown in opposing the 19th Amendment then and now. The others cut very sorry figures here today, having raised their hands for propositions that are diametrically opposite, in opposite directions. That is the vicissitudes of politics, they might say, but it is not an honourable conduct. When the 17th and 19th Amendments were passed, why did almost the whole House vote for them. It did not happen with any other amendments. Because those amendments had the total approval of people of this country and their opinion that this country must remain democratic. Messy as it is, democracy was chosen. But that was the right path. Democracy is messy, costly and time consuming in its deliberations but that is the path that we should take. I vividly remember that discussions we had in and outside the Chamber and how the committee stage dragged till midnight with the then Justice Minister Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe led us through explaining the content of that bill. So many amendments were moved from the opposition side by Dinesh Gunawardena, Prof Tissa Vitarana and Vasudeva Nanayakkara. All but one got together and agreed to those amendments. I agree that the incumbent Justice Minister quoted me as saying that I conceded that there were problems with the 19th amendment. Yes, I agree that the 19th Amendment has some snags. It was the first step in the process towards abolishing the executive presidency. There has been a consensus in this country since the mid-1990s to abolish the executive presidency. For a quarter of a century the country had repeatedly granted mandates to remove the executive presidency. The 19th Amendment created two centres of power as it reduced some powers of the executive presidency. But that was only a temporary measure because it was meant to move forward towards democracy.

This country did not give a mandate to President Gotabaya Rajapaksa to strengthen the executive presidency. The mandate was given to do away with the 19th Amendment which had problems. Those problems have to be identified, and those ought to have been corrected. You do not have to go in reverse gear; you do not have to travel in the opposite direction of democracy towards autocracy. That is wrong and that wrong is done by this amendment. That is why we oppose it.”