Unhappy over Speaker’s actions: Govt. to boycott Parliament
Posted on November 23rd, 2018
Ajith Siriwardana and Yohan Perera Courtesy The Daily Mirror
House Leader and Minister Dinesh Gunawardane said today they had decided to boycott parliamentary sessions until Speaker Karu Jayasuriya acted according to the Constitution, Standing Orders and parliamentary tradition.
He told a news conference held at the parliament complex that they would take a decision on attending parliament sessions after considering the order paper for the next day.
“We walked out of Chambers in protest of the Speaker’s actions,” Mr. Gunawardena said.
He said even minority governments had been given a majority in the Committee of Selections in the past and neither had a vote been taken on such a committee in parliamentary tradition.
“The vote was taken on a request made by Anura Kumara Dissanayake and Lakshman Kiriella,” Mr. Gunawardena said.
He said the Speaker would be able to act illegally only till the Supreme Court gave its verdict on December 7.
He said the Speaker was convening parliament disregarding the Parliament calendar and without printing the order paper given by the government. ()
November 23rd, 2018 at 5:12 pm
Does that mean the JO has accepted it has no majority in parliament?
If they don’t attend, subject to quorum, the others can defeat Mahinda in another (third) no confidence motion. Even when the JO was there, they could not save Mahinda from two no confidence motions. So nothing changes if they don’t attend.
November 23rd, 2018 at 11:44 pm
None of the parties ( of coalitions) have majority. Therefore any government formed now is a minority government.
From their statements MR government want the whole world to accept them as THE GOVERNMENT simply because THE PRESIDENT appointed a cabinet and they argue THE PRESIDENT is THE EXECUTIVE.
What really happened here was that the PM president appointed , in his opinion, has the support of the parliament does not have that support. It means president’s opinion was wrong.
Main thing is this EXECUTIVE cannot remove a PM according to the constitution. Only the parliament can do it. Therefore, Sri Lanka’s president, after 19A is not an executive president but the constitution names the president as the EXECUTIVE!
Moreover, there is no provision in the constitution what should be done when president’s opinion is wrong, even though there is room to remove him if he has deliberately violated the constitution !
What is clear in the constitution is that a government can be removed by a no confidence motion.
In my view Sirisena has unintentionally violated the constitution by removing PM and his opinion was wrong when appointing a new PM and cabinet. Thus, different people ans different legal experts may have different opinions.
Therefore the president has to correct all his mistakes ASAP. We, unfortunately cannot blame international or national community for repeatedly asking him to do so, without this legal position is confirmed by the Judiciary.
Both sides should seek immediate approval of the Judiciary on this matter than repeating that their opinion is correct and fighting while the country is going down the hill. All these people regardless of their BIG names, are NOT PATRIOTS.