Courtesy The Daily Mirror

The Mahanayake of the Asgiriya Chapter Most Ven. Warakagoda Gnanarathna Thera said on Tuesday that Western countries should not infringe on Sri Lanka’s internal matters.

The prelate expressed these views when Buddha Sasana Affairs Minister Udaya Gammanpila called on the Thera.

The Ven. Thera said following the change of the Government, it was now possible to save many resources that were about to be surrendered to the foreign countries.

Western forces had become displeased over the sudden political change happened in Sri Lanka without their knowledge and we have to confront strong foreign forces such as the USA, India and Europe and therefore we should not engage clashes over minor matters within the country,” Minister Udaya Gammanpila said.

He said the process of appointing Mahinda Rajapaksa as the Prime Minister was done very secretly and it was not known even to his family.

These foreign forces do not recognize our Government and engage in doing all that they can do to obstruct the Government and our aim is to strengthen our power through an election. The President has decided to hold an election to show peoples sovereignty under the democracy.

Minister further said that UNP was able to get only 29.65 per cent of votes which shows 70 per cent of people opposing them and they were attempting to divide the country into nine through a federal constitution which was to be presented in parliament on 07 November. However, this attempt was thwarted with the prorogation of the parliament.

The Anunayake of the Asgiriya Chapter Ven. Anamaduwe Dhammadassi Thera said in the recent past there was instability in a country over some matters and movement of parliamentarians to and fro and it is a matter for regret to see them changing the parties.

Changes for the monetary gain is inappropriate unless it is on policy matters,” he said.

This change has averted the transferring of nation’s assets to foreigners. We all should unite to achieve the full benefit of the change without leaving the opportunity for the rivals, he said.

The Minister also visited the Dalada Maligawa and received the blessings. The Kandy Buddhist Affairs Commissioner Parakrama Jayawardena were also present on the occasion.

The Minister also visited the Malwatte Chapter Maha Nayake Most Ven. Thibbatuwawe Sri Siddhartha Sumangala Thera. (Nadeeka Daya Bandara)

Courtesy Adaderana

In a letter to the Speaker, President Maithripala Sirisena says that the Speaker of Parliament has ignored the Constitution, Standing Orders and Parliamentary traditions in passing the no-confidence motion against the Prime Minister.

The letter is a response to the letter and attached documents sent by Speaker Karu Jayasuriya to the President regarding the motion of no-confidence passed during the parliament session this morning, against Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa or the Cabinet of Ministers and government appointed on or after 26th October 2018.

The motion had stated that the Gazette Extraordinary Nos. 2094/43, 2094/43A and 2094/44 dated 26th October 2018 promulgated by the President, and the purported acts and appointments referred to therein, are unconstitutional, and are null and void and of no force or effect in law.”

However, the President in his letter to the Speaker says that the Gazette notifications in question were issued in accordance to the powers vested in him by the Constitution of Sri Lanka.

He accused the Speaker of acting while ignoring the Constitution, Standing Orders and Parliamentary traditions although the Constitution and Standing Orders explain how a motion of no-confidence against the government should be presented and the process which should be followed to pass the motion.

The President states that while the Constitution dictates that he appoints the Member of Parliament who commands the most confidence in the Parliament according to his opinion as the Prime Minister, there is no need or parliamentary tradition to show whether the Prime Minister or government has or does not have a majority.

He also expressed regret over the Speaker’s attempt to confirm the passing of the said motion of no confidence by sending him a list of signatories not properly certified by the Parliament.”

In his letter to the Speaker, the President also categorically rejects the statement in the motion that the purported acts and appointments referred to therein, are unconstitutional.

He emphasized that his decision are legal and comply with the Constitution.

The President also points out that the date on the list of signatures of the MPs sent to him has been erased and the date of November 14, 2018 inserted on top.

Previous

By C. A. Chandraprema Courtesy The Island

November 14, 2018, 9:51 pm

With the suspension of the gazette notification dissolving Parliament till the 7th December, the political uncertainty in the country is set to continue for three more weeks. When one looks at the petitioners who went to the Supreme Court against the President’s decision to dissolve Parliament and hold fresh elections, we cannot help but notice that they were the same political parties that colluded with one another to change the local government elections system in August 2017 in order to delay holding elections to local government bodies that had been dissolved more than two years earlier in March 2015. As the pressure to hold the local government elections which had been delayed by two years and four months mounted, the government made changes to the local government electoral system creating constituencies and then delayed the local government elections further by citing delimitation disputes. The manner in which the local government elections system was changed was also unprecedented.

Instead of gazetting a Bill to change the system of elections and then giving the people an opportunity to have its constitutionality examined by the Supreme Court, the entirely new system of elections was brought as committee stage amendments to a Bill that had been gazetted and then introduced in parliament to correct some technical glitches in the local government elections law. Thus, the Bill that was gazetted and introduced in parliament and even read the second time, was not the Bill that was finally passed by parliament after the committee stage, but something totally different. Having changed the local government elections system in this devious manner, the then government appointed a delimitation committee and delayed the local government elections further by citing delimitation disputes. After having run around in circles for several months and after dodging persistent questions from journalists about the delay in holding local government elections, the government then got some of their supporters to file action in courts against the delimitation of wards in a large number of local government institutions so as to delay the election further.

The only reason why we had a local government election in February this year was because the head of the Elections Commission Mahinda Deshapriya announced that they would go ahead and hold elections to the 93 local government institutions in respect of which there were no delimitation disputes real or contrived. At that point the government caved in and decided to have elections to all the local government institutions because the damage would be done anyway even if elections were held for a limited number of local government bodies. The cases that had been filed against the delimitation report were then miraculously withdrawn to enable the local government elections to be held. That made it only too obvious that the judicial process was being abused by that government to delay elections. One month after the local government elections system was changed in the manner described, the government also moved to change the system of elections to the provincial councils as well. There was an urgent need to change the system of elections to the provincial councils because the Sabaragamuwa, North Central and Eastern provinces were to stand dissolved in late September and early October 2017.

Once those provincial councils stood dissolved, the process of holding elections would start automatically without the need for anybody to initiate the process. When a provincial council stands dissolved, the elections commissioner has to fix the dates to call for nominations within a certain period. Then the returning officers in the districts where PC elections were being held will have to fix the date of the poll, once again within a specified period. So if the intention of the government was to postpone elections, they had to move fast and change the system of elections so that a delimitation committee can be appointed and the elections process stalled. Sure enough in September 2017, just a day or two before the Sabaragamuwa, North Central and Eastern provincial councils were to stand dissolved, the government changed the provincial councils elections system. Once again the method in which this change was effected was by bringing sweeping committee stage amendments to a Bill that had originally been gazetted and introduced in Parliament to increase women’s representation in the provincial councils.

Horse trading to dodge PC elections

On the day that Parliament was to make changes to the system of elections to provincial councils, at around 5.00 pm the Attorney General by virtue of the powers vested in him under article 77 of the Constitution informed the Speaker that the Bill to increase women’s representation in parliament which had now been changed completely to become a Bill to change the system of elections to the PCs, could not be passed without a two thirds majority in parliament. When the AG said that the government would need a two thirds majority in parliament to get that Bill passed, the government which was desperate to stop the provincial councils election from taking place at any cost, filibustered in parliament until they were able to collect enough MPs to make up a two- thirds majority. Even when the two-thirds majority had been assembled, that was not the end of the story. Some of the smaller parties made that an occasion to extract their pound of flesh. They demanded that the proportion of candidates elected on the basis of the constituencies and proportional representation be changed from 60%-40% to 50%-50%.

This major change to the elections law was made at the last moment literally on the floor of the house in order to prevent the smaller parties from voting against the proposed amendments. Thus we have the anomalous situation where the proportion of constituency-based seats and proportional representation seats is 60%-40% at the local government level and 50-50 at the provincial council level! So shameless was that government’s headlong scramble to avoid holding the provincial council elections. To this day no provincial council elections have been held and now six provincial councils are without functioning provincial councils. The manner in which the PC elections have been stalled is somewhat different to the manner in which the local government elections were postponed. At the LG level, the delay was executed by manufacturing delimitation disputes. At the provincial council level it was by delaying the delimitation process itself.

According to the Act that was passed in September 2017 changing the provincial councils elections system, the delimitation report had to be completed within a period of four months and then tabled in parliament by the Minister in charge of the subject. Within one month of it being tabled in Parliament, the delimitation report had to be passed with a two- thirds majority. Even though the delimitation report was tabled in parliament in March this year, it was not passed within the stipulated period of one month. Thereafter, there was a long delay of several months. When it seemed as if the Joint Opposition was about to go to the Supreme Court to get a ruling that the amendments made to the Provincial Councils elections law were now defunct, the government suddenly placed the delimitation report on the order paper and after a debate, even the Minister who presented it to Parliament voted against it to buy further time.

Under the amending Act of September 2017 if Parliament does not pass the provincial councils delimitation report, the next step in the process was for the Speaker of Parliament to appoint a Review Committee comprising of the Prime Minister and four other members which would make recommendations within a period of two months to the President and the latter was to gazette the delimitation report with any changes made by the Review Committee. There was no provision in the law to extend the two month period. This period expired on the 28th of October and no report has been submitted by the Review Committee to the President. Under the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Interpretation Ordinance, if an amendment brought to an Act is, for some reason, inoperative then the previous provisions of the law before amendment continue to apply. Thus, the so called independent Elections Commission had the power to call for nominations to the delayed provincial councils, any time after the 28th of October but nothing happened.

EC Member allergic to elections The Supreme Court in the 1998 case of Karunatilleke and Another Vs Dayananda Dissanayake, Commissioner of Elections made it quite clear that the task of the Elections Commissioner was to hold elections and not to collude with the government in postponing polls. That judgment also stated the extent of the Elections Commissioner’s discretion in this regard. There was no need for the Elections Commissioner to go before the Supreme Court to obtain a ruling as to whether the Act that sought to change the system of elections to the PCs was inoperative. They could have if they wanted to, simply started the process of having elections according to the old system and told anyone who was against holding an election to go before the SC if they so wished. However another option available to them after the 28th of October was going before the Supreme Court to obtain a ruling on the matter. However very significantly, not one of the three members of the Elections Commission ever went before the SC in that regard.

However, when the President dissolved Parliament and declared a general election, one member of the Elections Commission petitioned the Supreme Court against the dissolution of Parliament and the calling of an election. In doing so he was joining the very same political parties the UNP, the TNA, the JVP and two Muslim political parties that colluded with one another to change the local government elections system and the provincial council elections system in violation of all the provisions in the Constitution and the Standing Orders of Parliament so as to delay elections. Thus the Elections Commission has been complicit with the UNP, TNA and JVP in delaying elections. When an election is declared, they go to courts against it, but do not go to courts against the indefinite postponement of elections! Such is the situation that Sri Lanka finds itself in today. When the yahapalana government was formed after the August 2015 general election, they divided up the government and opposition positions among themselves with the JVP and TNA taking over the opposition and the UNP and UPFA taking over the government and they appointed a Constitutional Council consisting only of yahapalanites.

The partisanship of some members of the Elections Commission is only too plain. The reason why that government delayed holding the local government elections is because of the fear that it would lose. When it was finally held they did lose. The reason why they have postponed the provincial council election is also because of the fear they would lose. The reason why they went to court to challenge the dissolution of Parliament and the calling of a general election is also because they believe they will lose. All this while, the conventional wisdom in this country was that no political party should postpone elections because the people will turn against them when an election finally comes along. If that is so, what is the harvest that the present lot can expect to reap after having made it so painfully obvious that they are against the holding of any election? What kind of a political party would go to courts against the holding of an election and when the court issues a stay order temporarily suspending the dissolution of Parliament and the elections process until the end of the hearing, hail that as a victory?

We were given a demonstration of the extent of the yahapalana reluctance to hold elections when in August this year, the yahapalana government voted against their own PC constituencies delimitation report just to buy an additional two months time. So that is the kind of people who have petitioned the Supreme Court against the Parliamentary election. Once a government paints itself into a corner where it is unable or unwilling even to think of holding elections and will go to any lengths to avoid having one, where do we go from there?

Editorial Thursday 15th November, 2018 Courtesy The Island

November 14, 2018, 9:54 pm
The country finds itself in a perfect mess. It has two Prime Ministers and two governments. The Speaker and the President are acting like two private bus drivers disputing the lead; they have already brought the institutions they represent—the legislature and the executive—on a collision course besides creating some bad precedents which will not just go away after the dust settles on the political arena sooner or later. There’s the rub. As for the current situation, one may say, antho jata bahi jata (‘conflicts within, conflicts without’).

President Maithripala Sirisena has drawn heavy flak for the way he sacked the UNP-led government. The issue of the dissolution of Parliament is currently before the Supreme Court and it is best left to the learned judges. The manner in which the UNP and its allies acted in Parliament yesterday has also left a bad taste in many a mouth. Their haste was unwarranted; it smacked of sheer desperation and lack of respect for parliamentary traditions and values they claim to uphold. They were confident of having a majority in the House and, therefore, they should have waited until the next sitting to have their no-confidence motion placed on the order paper and call for a division with the mace in its rightful place.

What we witnessed, yesterday, in the House was more like a fish market brawl than a parliamentary sitting. The stramash made it impossible for anyone to figure out who said what, but a voice vote was taken and the result announced! That unfortunate situation was not without a precedent, though. It may be recalled that last year a bill pertaining to one of the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe government’s Geneva commitments was ratified in the most despicable manner. The House was in turmoil, but a vote was taken. Minister Mahinda Samarasinghe, who was then an ardent defender of the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe government claimed, at a subsequent media briefing, that the proper process had been followed and the vote was valid. We pointed out, in this space, the absurdity of his contention and warned that it would set a very bad precedent. Today, Samarasinghe’s party is crying foul over the manner in which yesterday’s vote was taken.

There is no reason to doubt the UNP’s claim that it and its allies have a majority in the House even if the outcome of yesterday’s vote is not be taken into account. Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa, obviously, lacks a working majority and that was why Parliament was first prorogued and then dissolved. But it is not clear whether those who have opposed the appointment of Prime Minister Rajapaksa will get together to form a government.

The UNP had the highest number of seats (107) in Parliament before the change of government on Oct. 26. There were some defections from its ranks thereafter, but yesterday some MPs crossed over to its side. How many seats does the UNP have now? If the number is lower than 113, how does it propose to muster a working majority? Will the TNA undertake to back it? Or will there be a hung Parliament? What will the UNP do if President Sirisena refuses to appoint its leader Ranil Wickremesinghe Prime Minister again? Will the Speaker declare that pre-Oct. 26 status will prevail and recognise Wickremesinghe as the Prime Minister? Will such a move be legal? These are only some of the many questions that may arise anent the present chaotic situation.

Meanwhile, there is a situation where the SLPP-SLFP combine is scared of facing votes in Parliament and the UNP and its allies need elections like a hole in the head. The former wants the current political battle taken out of Parliament and the latter is doing its damnedest to confine it to the banks of Diayawanna, where its defences are strong.

Only the people can resolve this conflict once and for all. They are the best judges as attempts by other to tackle it have come a cropper.

Courtesy NewsIn.Asia

Colombo, November 14: Sri Lankan President Maithripala Sirisena on Wednesday refused to accept a letter sent by parliament Speaker Karu Jayasuriya explaining  the happenings in the House earlier in the day, according to a ruling party member Dayasiri Jayasekara. Instead, he issued a statement saying that the Speaker had flouted parliamentary procedures in getting the No Trust Motion passed.

Courtesy NewsIn.Asia

Colombo, November 14 (newsin.asia): Sri Lanka was for long a bastion of Western culture in social and political behavior. But these  markers, which distinguished it from its neighbors in South Asia for decades after independence from British rule, are fast disappearing in the political sphere.

Politics in Sri Lanka is now a crass and unabashed pursuit of self interest and power, irrespective of its impact on institutions so painstakingly built up and so carefully nurtured over the years since 1931 when universal adult franchise was introduced in the island for the first time in the British Empire.

The on-going sordid saga relating to the Premiership of the country involving the President, two Prime Ministers and the Speaker of parliament, brings out the nature of the disease in all its ugliness.

The malaise could become endemic if not checked in time. As on date, Lankans have little or no hope that it will be checked in the absence of a larger than life messianic figure who can take the people on a new path.

On Wednesday, parliament Speaker Karu Jayasuriya declared that a No Confidence Motion against the government of Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa was passed. But this was done in the midst of utter chaos, without a debate and without using the electronic voting system to make sure of the number of Ayes and Nays.

The Speaker said that the voices and the look on the faces of the MPs showed that the motion had the approval of the majority of the members and declared the motion passed.

It was on a questionable  basis that the motion was said to have got 122 votes in the House of 225 MPs.

Government spokesman Keheliya Rambukwella said that the Standing Orders of Parliament lay shattered” as the Speaker accepted a No Confidence Motion presented by the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake in his chamber and acted on it immediately.

Normally, it takes about five days for a motion of this sort to be taken up by the House. Firstly, all parties in parliament are consulted and dates are fixed for debate and voting.  Secondly,  as Minister Dinesh Gunawardene said,  the electronic voting system is used to leave no doubt about the figures for and against.

The Speaker flagrantly flouted norms. I say with responsibility that the current Speaker is the worst in the world,” government spokesman Rambukwella said.

Government benches led by Prime Minister Rajapaksa vehemently protested when the Speaker said that a Motion of No Confidence presented by the opposition Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) was being taken up. During the uproar,  Rajapaksa walked out. The Speaker declared the motion passed with alacrity and promptly adjourned the House till Thursday morning.

Perhaps anticipating trouble, President Sirisena was not present in the House, though customarily the President delivers an address on government’s policy on the day a prorogued parliament is reconvened.

Observers wondered why the Speaker and the opposition leaders took this controversial route when everybody knew that the Rajapaksa  government did not have the minimum of 113 MPs in its  pocket to survive a Vote of No Confidence.

Even on Wednesday, government MPs, AHM.Fowzie, Vasantha Senanayake, Manusha Nanayakkara, Piyasena Gamage and Vadivel Suresh crossed over to the opposition.

Under these circumstances the Speaker (who has identified himself totally with the opposition) could have stuck to the established procedure and waited for a few days to have a debate and vote on the No Trust Motion. But a peeved Speaker did not.

Due to this hasty move, the opposition has lost the moral high ground it had acquired when President Sirisena controversially sacked Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, appointed Rajapaksa in his place, prorogued  parliament and dissolved it pursuit of his self interest.

Sirisena could not get along with Wickremesinghe right from the word go in January 2015, though Wickremesinghe had put him up as the Joint Opposition  candidate in the January  2015 Presidential election and made him President. Wickremesinghe had been trying to grab power from the President to the utter annoyance of the latter.

At first, Wickremesinghe pressed Sirisena to sign an MoU with him surrendering  all his executive powers to him as the Prime Minister. But Sirisena refused saying that he would not surrender the powers vested in him as a directly elected Executive President in an avowedly Presidential System.

Wickremesinghe then used his political dominance to take all the economic ministries under his wing and started taking decisions without consulting the President, though the latter was the head of the cabinet and the government. The President’s party Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) was also ignored in the Council of Ministers.

With the Presidential system thus threatened and the cabinet not being able to function harmoniously, ministers and MPs from the President’s party the SLFP, pressed Sirisena to break ties with the UNP or sack Wickremesinghe.

SLFP cadres were also eager to tie up with the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) founded by former SLFP chairman Mahinda Rajapaksa especially after the latter swept the local bodies elections in February 2018.

But Sirisena hesitated to take such a precipitate step. But this did not prevent Wickremesinghe from pursuing his goal of isolating  the President and making a mockery of the Executive Presidency.

The breaking point came in October when the President felt that a perceived threat to his life from a foreign backed assassin was not properly investigated by the police under Wickremesinghe.

President Sirisena then sacked Wickremesinghe and swore in Mahinda Rajapaksa as Prime Minister, though this was bad in law.

Ahe 19 th.Amendment passed in 2015 clearly says that the Prime Minister cannot be asked to go unless he loses a Vote of No Confidence or resigns on his own or ceases to be an MP.

But the President used a single line in the constitution that says that he can appoint any MP as Prime Minister, who in his opinion, enjoys the confidence of parliament, to sack Wickremesinghe and appoint Rajapaksa.

However, Rajapaksa did not have the required 113 MPs to survive a Vote of No Confidence. The President prorogued parliament from October 27 to November 15,  allegedly to allow Rajapaksa to get MPs to cross over (with  inducements of course).

But when it was clear after several days of assiduous horse trading that Rajapaksa was not going to get the required number ( given the hostility of the Muslim and Tamil parties), the President dissolved parliament  in the hope that Rajapaksa will be able to come back to power on a popular wave.

In the meanwhile Speaker of Parliament Karu Jayasuriya jumped into the fray and challenged the prorogation of parliament.He threatened to summon parliament on November 7, though he had no constitutional right to do so.

As per the constitution, only the President can summon parliament.

But given mounting international pressure and subtle hints of sanctions by the EU and US, the President  announced the convening of parliament on November 14.

However, knowing full well that Rajapaksa would lose a Motion of No Confidence which the opposition was going to move, the President dissolved parliament, again going against the constitution.

According to the 19 th.Amendment of the constitution, parliament cannot be dissolved before it completes four and a half years. But this condition was not met in November 2018.

This time, the opposition went to the Supreme Court challenging the dissolution. The government’s lawyers argued that the President has the right to summon, prorogue and dissolve” parliament and that it is a plenary right” which cannot be linked to any other clause.

But the litigants’ lawyers pointed out that another article in the same 19 th.Amendment gives the conditions attached to the exercise of this power. Parliament has no plenary power” as argued by the Attorney General, the oppositions’ lawyers contended.

Following this, parliament met as scheduled. But a Motion of No Confidence was moved without following the due procedure. The Standing Orders were suspended to make this possible. The Speaker, in association with the opposition, hurriedly moved a motion submitted only on that day, and amidst chaos, declared that the motion was passed. He dispensed with the debate and a proper vote using the electronic voting device.

As expected the Rajapaksa group did not take it lying down. It  maintains that Rajapaksa is still the lawful Prime Minister. Further steps to establish this claim are being discussed,” said government spokesman Rambukwella.

(The picture at the top shows from left to right: Mahinda Rajapaksa, Ranil Wickremesinghe and Maithripala Sirisena. Photo. Getty Images)

Courtesy NewsIn.Asia

There was no debate, and no vote as such was taken. But the Speaker said that voices and the look on the faces of the MPs showed that the motion had the approval of the majority of the members.

Later, the motion was said to have been passed with 122 votes in favor. The House has a total strength of 225.

The government led by Prime Minister Rajapaksa vehemently protested when the Speaker said that a Motion of No Confidence presented by the opposition Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) was being taken up.

Government spokesman, Keheliya Rambukwella said that the Standing Orders of Parliament lay shattered as the Speaker accepted a No Confidence Motion presented by the JVP leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake in his chamber. Normally it takes about five days for a motion of this sort to be taken up by the House and that after consulting all parties in parliament. But on Wednesday the Speaker flagrantly flouted this norm.

I say with responsibility that the current Speaker is the worst in the world,” Rambukwella said.

Minister Dinesh Gunawardena said the vote was not passed as the Speaker had not followed normal parliamentary traditions by calling for an electronic vote.

During the uproar, Prime Minister Rajapaksa walked out and the Speaker declared the motion passed. He then promptly adjourned the House till Thursday morning.

President Sirisena was not present. Customarily the President delivers an address on government’s policy on the day a prorogued parliament is reconvened.

United National Party (UNP) MP Lakshman Kiriella told journalists following the adjournment that the No Confidence Motion was passed in terms of parliamentary procedure.

We have the majority and the proper parliamentary procedures were followed. The new government is no more.  Ranil Wickremesinghe will once again be the Prime Minister of the nation,” Kiriella said.

Meanwhile, some MPs and Ministers in the Rajapaksa government crossed the floor to the Opposition, further weakening the Rajapaksa camp.

The Ministers who left were AHM.Fowzie, Vasantha Senanayake, Manusha Nanayakkara, Piyasena Gamage and Vadivel Suresh.

As it is, the Sirisena-Rajapaksa government lacks majority. Its efforts to get 113 plus in the House of 225 since Rajapaksa took over as Prime Minister on October 26 upon the summary dismissal of the government headed by Ranil Wickremesinghe, had failed.

It is not clear what President Sirisena would do now.

We are still discussing the steps to be taken,” said government spokesman Rambukwella.

Possible Scenarios

Will President Sirisena call upon Ranil Wickremesinghe to form a government or will be calling someone from Wickremesinghe’s United National Party (UNP) like Sajith Premadasa to form the government?

Citing unbridgeable cultural, attitudinal and policy differences, Sirisena had declared that he will not be in office for even an hour if Wickremesinghe became PM.

While Sajith Premadasa might be more congenial than Wickremesinghe, he has time and again declared that he will not take up the Premiership under the present circumstances.

Can the President dissolve parliament? He cannot at this point of time because the Supreme Court is considering the issue in a case filed by opposition parties.

On Tuesday, the apex court had granted an interim stay on the President’s proclamation dissolving  parliament. The court said that it is staying the proclamation till December 7 and that it will hear the case on from December 4 to 6.

(The featured image at the top is that of Lankan Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa)

Courtesy NewsIn.Asia

Colombo, Nov 14 (newsin.asia) – Sri Lanka’s political crisis heightened further on Wednesday when ousted Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and former president Mahinda Rajapakse both claimed they would continue in government following a heated debate in Parliament earlier in the day.

Courtesy Ceylon Today

United People’s Freedom Alliance (UPFA) MP Dinesh Gunawardena today (14), said the UPFA does not accept the No-Confidence Motion of the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP), against newly appointed Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa, and the newly appointed Cabinet as a valid one, because no Motion was moved when the Parliament sitting was in progress.

Addressing a media briefing in Parliament, shortly after the adjournment of the Parliamentary sitting, Gunawardena said that as per the Order Paper of the day, there were only two items.

Those items are the announcement of the proclamation of the President summoning Parliament and the adjournment of the House. As the Leader of the House, I adjourned Parliament. Whatever happened after that cannot be taken as official,” Gunawardena said.

He also argued that when the no faith motion was moved, the mace was not in the bracket. The Sergeant-at-Arms removed it after I adjourned the House. Everyone knows that the mace is the symbol of authority in Parliament. It is only after the mace is brought to the House and placed in the bracket that the Speaker can come to his seat and commence the sitting. Once the mace is removed, the sitting is over officially. Whatever happened inside the chamber thereafter is not considered official. The so-called motion was nothing but an illegal move by Speaker Karu Jayasuriya,” he claimed.

Gunawardena claimed that the Speaker had exposed his alliances. It is very unfortunate and sad that Speaker Jayasuriya behaved in that manner. It is such a low and shameless act,” he said and added, The Government having a majority or minority in Parliament is not the question here. There have been many minority Governments in our Parliamentary history, but Speakers never behaved like this. For example, in 1960, there was Dudley Senanayake’s minority Government, which could have been overturned by others with the help of the Speaker. But the then Speaker upheld his unbiased impartiality, but today we have to witness the undoing of all such norms by the holder of the Speaker’s Office.”

Speaker Jayasuriya first recognized newly appointed Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa and the Cabinet. He also prepared to arrange seats for them. Suddenly, he changed and started to behave in this strange manner. He began to use Parliamentary traditions and Standing Orders to help the Party he was elected to Parliament from. Now, it is clear that the Speaker’s intention was to lead Parliament to chaos, and the country to anarchy.”

MP and purported Minister Nimal Siripala de Silva claimed that those who stated that the new Government was not official or was illegal, would not be able to say so going forward, as Parliament accepted the ouster of the Prime Minister, and appointment of a new one. Those documents have been tabled and that means this Parliament recognizes those two moves. Nobody can say that the appointments made by the President are illegal,” de Silva said.

Leaders of the parties in Government ranks were present at the media conference.

Two questions readers need to ask & answer. Firstly, who are objecting to people going to vote? Secondly, why did those who are objecting to people going to vote not file FRs against sacking Ranil as PM? From the point of view of the People’s rights which is more damaging? Answering this will clearly show the precariousness of the situation to the general public.

Let’s ask the question differently. Why was Sri Lanka’s parliament dissolved – simply answer is to allow the People to go for elections & vote. Wasn’t this the best form of democracy? That’s what we think, but over 10 petitioners including UNP, TNA, JVP, CPA, Transparency International, even a member of the Elections Commission doesn’t think so. They joined to  file Fundamental Rights against the dissolution of Parliament & holding of elections. How strange! Wherever, have you heard of Political parties & NGOs supposed to be promoting democracy & People’s power going to court to stop People exercising their power with the vote? What is more ridiculous is when embassy staff sponsoring these groups are also present in court to see if their stooges are actually following through on their orders! Are we living in 21^st century or have we returned to colonial rule? What is poignant is that none of these parties cared to go to Supreme Court against the sacking of RanilW as PM though all of them verbally protested & issued statements against the sacking too, but the very same parties filed FR’s against holding elections

What is now more than certain is that these parties filed FRs against the dissolution because they were afraid of going for an election & before the people knowing that the People would be ruthless in their vote. These very parties are fully aware that they lied to the people since 2015, that they haven’t delivered on their promises, that their promises were only campaign slogans, that they have giving nothing for the people and most of all they know the people are fuming over selling the assets of the country to foreigners & allowing the external parties to dictate terms far beyond their diplomatic protocols. People are not stupid. They are watching all these & waiting for an election to voice their anger. To prevent this the petitioners have filed action. Whatever the judgement, these realities is nothing none of the petitioners can evade accepting.

We are in exciting times – since 26^th October we have seen the sacking of a Prime Minister, a return of a democratically defeated President as the new Prime Minister, the proroguing of Parliament, the dissolution of Parliament & now an interim court order until 16^th December where the Supreme Court will declare judgement against those filing FRs against the dissolution of parliament to hold fresh elections.

We have also seen 3 addresses to the Nation by the President – citing why he sacked the PM claiming his name being associated to an attempt to assassinate the President, the ruining of the economy, the detrimental consequences to the nation from the sale of national assets, the behavior of the Speaker & the cultural differences of the former PM & himself.

But taking things positively inspite of so many attempts & plots baiting the public, they have remained restrained and not fallen into the Western traps that was part of their media build up.

As citizens we must all log our disgust at all the parties that have lined up to file FR’s against the dissolution because their arguments have nothing whatsoever to do with protecting democracy, honoring the constitution or abiding the rule of law except to protect themselves electorally as they are not prepared to go before the people at an election as they have not got their lying machines ready to fool the people with their xmas goody bag of bogus promises ….

Shenali D Waduge

 lanka C news

රට තුල ඇතිව තිබෙන දේශපාලන අර්බුදකාරී තත්වය ඉදිරි පැය 24 ඇතුලත නිමා වනු ඇති බව ජනාධිපති මෛත‍්‍රීපාල සිරිසේන මහතා සදහන් කර ඇත.

ජනාධිපතිවරයා අද පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේදී ඇති වූ සිදුවීම් සම්බන්ධයෙන් ජෙෂ්ඨ ඇමති පිරිසක් හා අදහස් පල කරමින් මේ බව සදහන් කර තිබේ.

Dr Sarath Obeysekera

Whole of Sri Lanka is falling into a constitutional trap and uncertInity looms in the horizon when  Sinhala politicians are playing balls ( pandu”) Tamil and other helpless minorities  is watching helplessly

I am  in Jaffna having a break combined with a task of combining a study to see how Tamils are co-oping  up with the new life style in unified Sri Lanka .I see teenagers riding bikes where some of them having funny hippy type haircuts with colouring as if they live in ,western society . Tuk Tuks are driven by middle aged people.Younger generation of of 30 to 40 years are not to be seen may be they were either  anihilated during the war or migrated to greener pastures.

Jaffna town is badly neglected where I noted an extremely polluted canal flowing though the town via much famous Jaffna teaching hopspital creating smell and repugnance. .I was wondering whether army and navy can move in to help the people to clean the mess up like in Colombo or Mr Wiggy can do something better rather than lamenting about the occupation by south.

I decided to travel outskirts and visited Port Hammen hiel which was built by Portugese in 1600 or so ,now converted to a somewhat unique boutique hotel .

It is 13th November , death anniversary of JVP leader Rohana Wijeweera  ( RW )killed by his own people of Sri Lanka for fighting against injustice.

During the tour inside the Fort I was shown where RW ( I wondered  whether a politician with same initials will also end up in isolation one day ? ) was incarcerated for few months before being transferred to Jaffna Fort.

There was something written on the wall of his cell and a picture drawn by him which gave some inspiration about the man we considered a muderer .

When you hear and read about the poltical  situation today where the Sinhala Leaders throwing insults and salvos to each other drowning our future ,I wondered whether Rohana and also Prabakaran who were identical in their ideology should still be living to teach the Sinhala. Politicians a long lasting lesson.

We crave for democracy and prefer to consume it rather than trying to find  your three meals per day .

If we had a more aggressive leader like RW ( surely not the champion of so called democracy of today’s RW !!) our politics will try to do sensible things due to fear.

I always preached to have a benevolent dictator when MS was selected , but I am disappointed to see that MS has become a dictator with no specific prefix

It is a pity that both RW and VP are no more .

They could have opened the eyes of today’s politicins to do more sensible things for the sake of the poor countrymen.

Port Mammen hiel made me sad when I saw his cell and wondered whether we should install statues for not only RW  but also to VP in one place and named the location Leaders who failed their missions but managed to open the eyes of others”

God bless both of them

Courtesy Adaderana

The President will take necessary constitutional steps after he receives the letter from the Speaker regarding the no-confidence motion, Co-Cabinet Spokesman Minister Mahinda Samarasinghe said.

මම ජනාධිපතිතුමා ගන්න තීරණයත් ඒක්ක ඉන්නවා

Courtesy Adaderana

Cabinet has decided to prepare legal draft to hold Provincial Council elections under the previous system, said Mahinda Samarasinghe.

He mentioned this today (14), at the press conference held to inform the cabinet decisions.

The compulsory 25% female representation will be ensured, he further said.

Cabinet has also decided to provide school uniform material for school children in 2019 instead of vouchers.

Courtesy The Daily Mirror

Glad to see the Sri Lankan Parliament is once again fulfilling its constitutional role, US Ambassador in Sri Lanka Alaina B. Teplitz said today.

The Ambassador had attended the reconvening of parliament this morning.

Honored to attend the reconvening of Sri Lankan Parliament this morning to see democracy in action. Very lively but glad this institution is once again fulfilling constitutional role,” she said.

Courtesy The Daily Mirror

The government today rejected that there was a no-confidence motion against Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa.

Minister Dinesh Gunawardane said they wont accept the motion which was submitted by the JVP as it was not taken up for a proper debate.

Courtesy Adaderana

The Office of the Speaker stated that a no confidence motion and a letter signed by 122 parliamentarians against the Prime Minister and the new Cabinet appointed by the President have been presented to the Speaker at the parliamentary session today (14).

Issuing a press release, the Speaker’s Office said that, the Parliament sat at 10.00 am today (14) in terms of Gazette Extraordinary No. 2095/50 dated 04 November 2018 issued by the President.

After the Speaker has made the announcements as the Business for the Day, MP M.A. Sumanthiran from the Tamil National Alliance (TNA), moved that the business of the House be proceeded suspending the Standing Orders of Parliament.

Accordingly, a division had been moved for suspending the Standing Orders and then the Standing orders were suspended with the approval of the majority of the Members.

Thereafter, MP Anura Kumara Dissanayake from Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP), moved a no confidence motion against the government and MP Vijitha Herath from the same party, seconded the motion. They further moved that a division should be held for the same today itself”, read the release.

The presented motion read that,

The Gazette Extraordinary Nos. 2094/43, 2094/43A and 2094/44 dated 26th October 2018 promulgated by His Excellency the President, and the purported acts and appointments referred to therein, are unconstitutional, and are null and void and of no force or effect in law.

For the aforesaid reasons, this House has no confidence in the Prime Minister Mr. Mahinda Rajapaksa or the Cabinet of Ministers and government appointed on or after 26th October 2018.”

The release read that, Then the Opposition party moved a division for that, and after the division bell has been rung, the Speaker ordered for voting.

A majority of the Hon. Members of Parliament voted in favor of the No -Confidence Motion and accordingly the Hon. Speaker announced to the House that the No -Confidence Motion was passed with a majority.

Subsequently, MP Lakshman Kiriella proposed that the House should be adjourned until 10.am tomorrow (15) and the House gave its approval for it.”

The Speaker will take steps to send the President a copy of the No -Confidence Motion and the decision of the House in that regard along with a copy of the letter signed by 122 Members of Parliament to the effect that the Prime Minister and the Cabinet of Ministers appointed by him recently are unconstitutional, in order to take appropriate action according to the Constitution, further stated the press release.

Courtesy NewsIn.Asia

Courtesy NewsIn.Asia

Ratanapala

14 Nov 2018

The Way Forward and What is to be done?

It is time the SLFP died its natural death and so too the UNP. These two geriatric political parties though brought into existence on lofty ideals, have over the years failed to bring peace and prosperity to the citizens of Sri Lanka. The only thing that they did famously is to divide the Sinhala polity in the middle. Together they have impoverished Sri Lanka, made politics in Sri Lanka the most corrupt in the region and the corrupt politicians rich and powerful. They also brought in the minority racists and religionists to the fray and made them kingmakers of Sri Lanka. The end result is for all to see – our past political history- the machinations and the deleterious effects of the doings of Chevanayakams, Amirthalingams, Sambandans, Thondamans, Ashroffs and now Hakeems, Mano Geneshans and Baithuddeens and add to this the Senanayakes, Bandaranaikes, Jayawardeens and Wickramasinghe.

Rajapakses too had a hand in that they failed to consolidate the war gains. Winning a war is not just the battles – it includes maintaining the peace. This is the reason the victorious Allies are still stationed around the world in strategic locations. Mahinda Rajapakse failed in this score because he is the one who commenced the withdrawal of Armed Forces from strategic locations in the North and East. No one within Sri Lanka or outside should dictate where Sri Lanka’s Armed Forces should be present or not. Then Army Commander – Sarath Fonseka’s assertion to increase the army was in fact correct strategically  as it takes more to maintain peace than fight wars. It took 30 years to finish off the war because we did not have enough soldiers to keep and defend the peace in the liberated areas! Finally, the war was won, because  the President Mahinda Rajapakse took a firm stand, the then Defence Secretary – Gotabhaya provided the necessary manpower and war logistics to hold onto and defend liberated areas while prosecuting the war elsewhere. In the immediate aftermath of the war ending Indians managed to break up the Sri Lankan the war winning team and Sarath Fonseka and Rajapakses parted ways!

After 70 years what the nation needs is time and space to move forward as one nation leaving behind the enmity and divisiveness. For this to happen the unity of the Sinhalese is paramount. Minority politics and their aspirations will never see daylight with only half of the Sinhalese agreeing. This is why the unity of the Sinhalese be they UNP or SLFP is of paramount importance for the good of all concerned, minorities included.

What ailed Sri Lanka during the last 70 years is the constant demands of minority Shylocks asking for their pound of flesh and more. In their own words, it is – Little now and More later! Even as we speak, these forces are at play 24/7 finding ways to keep Sri Lanka destabilized and a failed state. Even after making the TNA with only 16 seats in the Parliament the main Opposition Party, did they have anything to do with the governance of the nation? They abstained with scorn and enmity in their eyes, from every parliamentary activity that had to do with the governance of Sri Lanka and only participated in legislating actions that would lead to the balkanization of Sri Lanka and in the end her destruction as an independent political entity in South Asia. Their main purpose of occupying the position of the Opposition was to prop up the unpopular, traitorous, mega-thief Ranil and his cohorts – now famously referred to as the Butterflies”!

And so it goes for the Islamists spreading Wahabbism throughout the length and breadth of SrI Lanka. Just at the eleventh hour when there was a clear need for ousting mega-thief Ranil they left to Mecca indicating that they will return to enjoy the spoils! Patriotic UNPers and SLFPers should see this reality and leaving aside their petty differences unite to save Sri Lanka. This why they all must join forces under Pohottuwa, not because it is the best, but because it is ground reality and the only existing  common place where all from different political hues can gather and unite to end once and for all the tyranny of  Minority Politics. We must be in a position to muster a 2/3^rd majority to bring about the necessary constitutional changes as well as provide for reasonable minority demands that do not infringe on the security, wellbeing and continued existence of Sri Lanka as a separate, unitary and independent political and geographical entity south of the Palk Straits!

It is time, all those well-meaning Tamils and Muslims leave the divisive politics and join the mainstream to achieve their realistic aspirations. Division of the country into fiefdoms or giving land and police powers to Eelamists is no way to achieve lasting peace in Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka simply does not have space nor the security measures necessary to entertain such wishful thinking that only bring luxuries to a selected few!

It is time, Sinhalese of all hues, be they UNP, SLFP, Buddhist or Christian unite behind Pohottuwa to take the country away from the cannibalistic politics of today, for together we can prosper as a nation. It is time the Sinhalese demanded from Pohottuwa that it cannot be ‘Politics as Usual’ as it used to be. It is time they got rid of the useless riff-raff, the traitorous, self-serving and the bribe-taker lot among them and move forward with only those who can be trusted to make way for progress. Pohottuwas must leave space only for the best in the SLFP, the UNP and those among minorities who aspire to prosper together.

Other nations such as Malaysia and Singapore sorted similar problems right at the beginning of their independence from Colonial Powers. This is why these countries prosper and Sri Lanka not! Big and powerful nations respect their strengths and politics!

UNLESS THE SINHALESE UNITE AS ONE, BECOME SELF SUFFICIENT IN THEIR BASIC NEEDS AND SECURITY. THERE IS NO SOLUTION TO THE MINORITIES. THIS IS THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL TRUTH BEHIND POLITICS IN SRI LANKA. This is what ailed Sri Lanka for the last 70 years. It is only the United Sinhalese who can accommodate those peaceful intentions of the minorities and take the nation towards progress! No solution or agreement, call it what may provided by 50% Sinhalese will be valid in the days, months and years ahead!

The so-called International Community are at the door calling for ‘democracy and human rights’.  This bogus cry is now seen to be fake as the fake news their media propagate.  It is their system of governance that made  the 1% own the 99% of world’s wealth. They would rather make Sri Lanka unstable, divided,  a failed state and divide the spoils rather than try to negotiate with a weak state. On the other hand they would support a country that is strong politically and militarily. They say Nature abhors a vacuum and so is politics. They are onto Sri Lanka because they find Sri Lanka divided, unstable and vacuous. United we can stand, divided certainly it is oblivion, death, and destruction a la Libya, Iraq and Syria!

We must provide India the security she needs south of the Palk Straits! It is only a strong Sri Lankan military which can provide this assurance and not a weak Sri Lanka! Senior Indian politician Subramaniam Swamy put it succinctly – We can trust the words of Mahinda Rajapakse. He is a strong man and we can depend on what he promises”.

 Time is of the essence, let us not bungle it this time! All patriots, be they UNP or SLFP, who wish well for Mother Lanka, unite behind Pohottuwa! Mahinda Rajapakse, Gotabhaya Basil are better leaders than any other currently in Sri Lanka. They can deliver what all Sri Lankans needs today – Peace and Prosperity!

By Noor Nizam – Peace and Political Activist, Political Communication Researcher, SLFP Stalwart and Convener – “The Muslim Voice”. 13th., November 2018.

An INTERIM ORDER is a temporary court order, intended to be of limited duration, usually just until the court has had an opportunity of hearing the full case and make a final order. The stay orders have been issued effective until December 7. The Supreme Court has fixed the case for argument on December 4, 5 and 6. On the 7th., December, the court will give the verdict. “WE HAVE TO WAIT TILL THEN TO THE HEAR THE VOICE OF JUSTICE”. The learned judges of the Supreme Court have acted very wisely on this matter by giving and “interim stay order” on the dissolution of parliament for now. This wise judgement has eased  the tense political situation in the country and will allow “JUSTICE” to be “FAIR” by everyone.

They have created an opportunity to all to place their arguments before the 3 member bench of judges for 3 days (4th., 5th., and 6th., November 2018) before giving the final decision of the court.

The 19 submissions in SUPPORT of the DISSOLUTION submitted on the 12th., November 2018 as stated by the media, will now be taken for consideration/deliberation/argument by the 3 bench judges on the 4th., 5th., and 6th., November 2018.

As an experienced “Political Communication Researcher” and my 49 years of experience in Politics in Sri Lanka, I can see that the Learned Supreme Court Bench of Judges will “NOT SHUT DOWN” the Constitutional Right of the Elected Head of State of Sri Lanka – President Maithripala Sirisena. The verdict on 7th., November 2018 will “LEAN” towards in “FAVOUR” of the President’s decision, by the grace of God AllMighty. This is my personal view and expression. THE VOICE OF “JUSTICE” IS NOT OVER YET”.  WE HAVE TO WAIT. Muslim Politicians like Rauf Hakeem, Rishad Bathiudeen, Mujeebu Rahuman, Marikkar and Azad Sally or the ACJU or National Shoora Council should “REFRAIN” from making “DRASTIC” statements on this issue, WHICH CAN BE DETRIMENTAL to our community at large, whatever political party we maybe, till such time, the verdict is announced, Insha Allah.

By Dr Kamal Wickremasinghe Courtesy The Island

November 13, 2018, 8:59 pm

The political events of the last fortnight that created a change in power structures in the country may bear significance in the short term, but will be unlikely to mark a significant turn in historical terms. In a nutshell, the events marked a simple ‘path correction’ triggered by the apparent dawning on the President of the dishonesty and anti-national agenda of the 2015 conspiracy. The realisation appears to have prompted him to use his executive powers to free the country from the hold of foreign-financed NGOs and local political agents of foreign vested interests.

The President’s sacking of the former prime minister and the appointment of a new one is ‘water under the bridge’ now and the focus is firmly on the upcoming elections. Judging by recent displays of political will by the people, the impending elections are likely to put the current complaints and debates to rest. The outgoing government has no worthy record of performance to base an election campaign on, and their inability to prove charges of large scale financial corruption and crimes of the Rajapaksa regime in courts of law have eaten in to their credibility in the eyes of the people. The robbery of the Central Bank as well as their protection of its perpetrator in Singapore has reduced any remaining chances of winning votes at an election. The broad public response of apparent relief, and even celebration at community level, points strongly to an electoral ‘bloodbath’ for the UNP and its friends at the election.

In contrast to the reaction of the general public, sundry NGO operators have been reacting to the President’s actions ‘madder than cut snakes’, adopting abusive, vitriolic language. The reaction of the former prime minister has been typically immature, essentially throwing a tantrum by way of squatting at Temple Trees. Further complicating matters, the parliamentary speaker brought his partisan behaviour from within Parliament to the wider political arena. In fact, the structure of the ‘forces’ against the measures adopted by the President and the strategy adopted by them have gone a long way to justify his actions.

The strategy adopted by the UNP and the NGOs appears an attempt to redress the lack of popular sentiment behind their ‘protests’ by pointing to alleged violations of a largely ‘imaginary’ democratic ideal: they keep alluding to a particular conception of democracy that is a meaningless caricature when viewed against their own behaviour in power. Attempts to absurdly mischaracterise the sacked government as one that responded to the wishes of the majority — on salient issues like the proposed new constitution and trumped up US charges of war crimes — has only drawn the ridicule of the people.

Evaluating the charge that the President’s actions somehow violated the ideals of democracy needs to be done against the background of democracy as a system of government that primarily concerns popular sovereignty through collective decision making, more broadly than under aristocracy or monarchy, for example. At the heart of the charge that the President somehow usurped the powers of the legislature is the issue of the relationship between people’s sovereignty that represents the true ideal of democracy, and the legislature that came into existence as a workable apparatus and mechanism to bring peoples’ sovereignty into operation: it needs to be remembered that the first Athenian democracy that came about around 550 BC involved a direct democracy in which ‘every’ eligible citizen — free men who had completed military service, and no women or slaves — was allowed to vote on each piece of legislation. It was this ‘direct democracy’ that later evolved into parliamentary democracy, essentially as a workable mechanism that enabled exercise of popular sovereignty as a physical act by the people in larger populations, by delegating it to a smaller group of representatives.

By their objections to the dissolution of parliament and declaration of an election, the UNP and the NGOs appear to have conveniently forgotten that government conducted through representatives is only a substitute designed to overcome the impracticality of carrying into effect ‘the will of the people’ by the entire body of qualified citizens. Denouncing the dissolution of parliament and declaring an election as an undemocratic act therefore, essentially disregard the central institution of democratic representative government, derived solely from the consent of the governed, through the mechanism of free and fair elections. Viewed in this light, the dissolution of parliament and holding elections are the ultimate restoration of democracy.

The alleged unconstitutionality of President’s actions

A considered look at the second line of attack launched by the UNP, the JVP and the NGOs, of the alleged unconstitutionality of the dissolution of parliament by the President shows they have no legal or political ‘leg to stand on’.

It needs to be noted that views on the constitutionality or otherwise of governmental action depends on certain ‘methods’ or ‘modes’ of interpretation of a particular meaning of a provision within the constitution; As has been noted by the legal writing educator Professor James Raymond — after dissection of the sharply divided opinions of judges of the High Court of Australia in Kartinyeri v Commonwealth, relating to the interpretation of the meaning and ambit of the ‘races’ power in s 51(xxvi) of the Australian Constitution as amended by referendum in 1967 — ‘the canons and rules of interpretation are soft logic’, persuasive only to people who prefer the result they support or at least have no reason to resist them.

Such largely subjective interpretations of constitutions however, take place within the boundaries set by certain conventions: one such highly relevant convention to the interpretation of the currant Sri Lankan constitution is that legal texts of the constitution ought to be given the original public meaning. Another such principle is ‘purposive’ interpretation that prescribes that the instrument being considered must be treated as an integrated whole, without resorting to narrow or pedantic constructions that limit the amplitude of its powers.

It was settled by the US Supreme court case of South Dakota v. North Carolina that ‘no single provision of the constitution is to be segregated from the others and to be considered alone but that all provisions bearing upon a particular subject are to be brought into view and to be so interpreted as to effect the greater purpose of the instrument’. Similarly, an exclusionary clause in any of the entries should be strictly and therefore narrowly construed;

The reliance of the UNP, JVP and the NGOs interpretations of the constitution solely on the 19th Amendment they engineered in 2015 ignores the highly relevant legal principle that the constitution is irreducible to a single amendment. The 19th Amendment may have structurally modified the constitution, but does not systemically abolish the sovereignty of the people, signified through a Presidency directly elected by the populace as a whole.

Good management needs freedom to operate

A reasonable critique of the particular measures adopted by the President, however, needs to be based on a broader view of his functions as the president elected by the people, beyond the confined framework of the constitution. Viewed in this light, though it is frightening to speculate at times, there are strong parallels between the running of a state and the running of a large business, albeit with some crucial differences relating to the primary objectives: a national leader is required to create and maintain the optimum conditions for the perpetuation of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness by the population whereas a company executive’s sole aim would be to make money for its shareholders. Also, what is considered ‘efficient’ in the private sector is usually defined by profit, and social programmes a political leader may be required to deploy would be rarely profitable.

In broad terms, however, the roles of a nation’s president and its prime minister are analogous to the roles of a chairman of the board and the chief executive officer (CEO) of a large business organisation: chairman of the board at the head of the company sets the infrastructure and agenda necessary to ensure the effective working of the group while the CEO has the responsibility for the day-to-day management of the company and putting into effect the decisions and policies of the board. Just as national leaders are bound by a constitution, a company CEO is bound by corporate governance codes covering the superintendence of management responsibilities and accountabilities, strategic plans and work programmes.

Monitoring of CEO performance around performance targets and formal and informal performance reviews of the CEO is one of the main functions of the chairman of the board. Performance-related CEO departures caused by company performance and the board’s wish for a new CEO to reinvigorate the company are quite common.

The sacking of Prime Minister Wickremesinghe by President Sirisena is broadly similar to this situation, and few would disagree that the Prime Minister would not have survived for longer than three and a half years under performance review mechanisms in the private sector. This view provides a more sober view of the President’s actions as well as providing an argument for increased ‘degrees of freedom’ he should have in terms of unfettered constitutional powers to ‘hire and fire’ prime ministers as necessary to achieve national economic development.

There is little doubt that the president’s actions are in the best interests of the nation and focus now needs to be on the future.

Weimar Republic, Plato and yahapalana regime

Looking back at the events that precipitated between November 2014 and the election of the previous government in August 2015, and the time since then, conjure up images of a bad dream from which the nation has just woken up.

In historical terms, the yahapalana government closely resembled the experience of the Weimar Republic, the short-lived government of Germany formed in 1919 — at the chaos after the 1918 defeat of Germany in WW1 and the Kaiser’s abdication, named after the assembly that adopted its new constitution met at Weimar— to 1933, promising to give Germany a government that truly represented the views of the whole country.

The defeat in the war came as a huge surprise to the German people, and accusations that the German army had been ‘stabbed in the back’ by the politicians. Many Germans resented the government for signing the armistice agreeing to its conditions in November 1918 – they called them the November criminals. The yahapalana governments notorious co-sponsoring of the US war crimes allegation bears resemblance to this particular act of the Weimar Republic

Another similarity relates to the hurried action on drafting a new constitution at the behest of external forces. In the Weimar republic, after quelling the initial violence, 25 men including the famous sociologist Max Weber and politician Friedrich Naumann hurriedly crafted a new constitution between February and July 1919 which became law on August 11. Sri Lankans are fortunate that the process remained incomplete at the time of the sacking of Ranil.

The spirit of Weimar combined moods of extraordinary liberalism with a sinister willingness to search for and worship strange gods and occasional flashes of perverted vileness that are almost beyond description. On the positive side, it was a period considerable achievement in science and technology – Einstein worked in Berlin, and the next generation of scientists including Werner von Braun.

Similar to the yahapalanaya government, the Weimar Republic rejected traditional morality. It was a series of countercultures, communes and ‘alternative societies’ including nudism, dissociating itself from cultural conventions, and traditional values. Ironically, it was such attitudes and the values, that enabled the taking root of National Socialism immediately after, with many young Germans seeing National Socialism as the actualisation of their dreams of an alternative society. Sri Lanka was fortunate that the large scale perversion of the traditional Sri Lankan social system by some elements within the yahapalanaya government was averted before it caused extensive social damage.

In another sense, the demise of the yahapalanaya government signifies the worst fears about certain forms of democracy expressed by Plato who came to despise democracy following his friend and mentor Socrates was put to death by hemlock by a jury of 500 Athenians in 399 BC. Plato would later describe the trial of Socrates in his first essay, The Apology, as being judged by a jury of children.

Plato predicted in Republic a common trajectory democracy follows, containing within it what he considered serious dangers. He predicts that the people in a society with an enormous socioeconomic gap, where the poor remain poor and the rich become richer off the blood and sweat of others will long for freedom and liberty, sparking a revolution rallying behind one man, or a few men, whom they believe to be their saviour.

The people will supplant a democracy with sacred responsibilities to bring liberty to the land, making the newly appointed leaders nervous about the longevity of their own regime. The democratic leaders will then resort to projects aimed at managing expectations by distracting the people. To ensure their power, the leaders will create laws to bolster their position. Leaders will eventually become unpopular, with those who once supported this ruling class beginning to rebel against it. Hated by the people, these leaders will request heavy personal protection, elected by the people, yet protected from them. The leader born from democracy and propped up by the demand for liberty becomes a tyrant, creating another phase of the vicious cycle.

The yahapalanaya government broadly confirmed to Plato’s vicious cycle of democracy, worsened by its awful or non-existent economic management skills or programs. The president was right to act the way he did.

Continuing on the path of correction

The events of the previous fortnight proved the need for a constitution that empowers the executive to act decisively, rather than creating chaos through weakening of the executive by stealthily transferring executive powers to prime ministers who do not have the ability to win the trust of the people. Those who clamour for abolishing the executive presidency, without exception, are doing so due the realisation that they will never be able to win the position.

The President needs to continue on the path of correction he began. The first step should be reversal of the 19 Amendment to the constitution, restoring the presidential powers. Only a strong president could be expected to effectively launch and manage a national development programme that meets the countries dire needs.

Those who oppose executive presidency while literally ‘worshiping’ the neon lights of Singapore should be asked to study the model of government administered by Lee Kwan Yu.

Editorial Courtesy The Island

November 13, 2018, 9:37 pm

The Supreme Court has issued an interim order suspending the dissolution of Parliament till Dec. 07. This is not what President Maithripala Sirisena and his allies bargained for. His rivals have declared victory prematurely. People are agog with curiosity; thankfully they remain calm and quiet. The sooner this dispute is brought to an end, the better. It has overshadowed all other issues. Nobody seems to care two hoots about the economic front.

Parliament has to be reconvened today as scheduled prior to its dissolution, and what the situation will be in the House is anybody’s guess. Will President Sirisena prorogue it further? Will the UNP and its allies try to secure a division and/or thwart such an attempt?

The court case at issue is not yet over and the SC judgment is likely to be given next month. What is justice to the winner is not to the liking of the losing side, which always cries foul. Judicial verdicts may help resolve disputes legally but do not lead to reconciliation. Hence the need for settling disputes through negotiations without taking them to courts if consensus is to be achieved! However, as for the issues consequent to the Oct. 26 government change, one may argue, the disputants remained intransigent and Parliament found itself in a gridlock and, therefore, the matter had to be taken to courts. It behoves all of them to sheath their poniards, swallow their pride and discuss a future course of action to hoist the country from the current political mire of their making, for, as things stand, the crisis is not like to go away in the foreseeable future. The warring politicians owe it to the people who stump up colossal amounts of money to maintain them.

The unfortunate situation which has led to the ongoing divisive legal battle arose because men of mature years in politics failed to act wisely. They let their personal animosities take precedence over their duty by the country. The Oct. 26 government change would not have happened but for a personality clash between President Sirisena and ousted PM Ranil Wickremesinghe. The outcome of the current legal battle is bound to complicate the political situation further. One can only hope that sanity will prevail.

In countries, blessed with statespersons, difficulties the people face make rulers sink their differences and join forces to find solutions, but in this land like no other, political leaders’ personal differences cause difficulties for the people.

Democracy and progress derive sustenance from the wisdom and altruism of rulers. When selfish, power hungry leaders are elected it is only natural that democracy and progress elude a nation. This, we have seen under successive governments during the last several decades.

This legal battle may be over with the SC determination, but all will not be quiet on the political front. Speculation is rife that President Sirisena is coming under increasing pressure from his allies to go for a referendum to consult the people directly on the issue. The general consensus is that the President is constitutionally empowered to do so. Whether this is possible or the President will consider this an option remains to be seen.

Meanwhile, there were some ugly scenes near the Superior Courts Complex in Colombo, on Monday, with groups of restive political activists shouting. Last so many years have seen protests, silent or otherwise, near courts in Colombo and in other parts of the country. No organised crowds must be allowed to enter court premises and areas adjacent thereto under any circumstances.

By Neville Ladduwahetty Courtesy The Island

Dr. Jayampathy Wickrmaratne is reported to have stated: “President Maithripala Sirisena cannot dissolve Parliament to overcome the current constitutional crisis caused by the unconstitutional sacking of PM Ranil Wickremesinghe”. The report also states: “It is a golden rule that in interpreting a Constitution, the Constitution as a whole must be looked at, not one provision in isolation” (The Island, 10th Nov. 2018).

If the Constitution is to be looked upon as a whole, there is a need to visit the very foundation on which the Constitution is founded. It starts with sovereignty being with the People. Article 3 of the current Constitution states: “In the Republic of Sri Lanka sovereignty is in the People and is inalienable. Sovereignty includes the powers of government, fundamental rights and the franchise”. Thus, the fundamental premise is that the sovereignty of the People is to be held in trust by their elected representatives, and implemented through the organs of government.

Article 3 of the 1972 Constitution also stated that “Sovereignty is in the People and is inalienable”, but it did not include fundamental rights and franchise. Furthermore, Article 4 of the 1972 Constitution stated that “The Sovereignty of the People is exercised through a National State Assembly of elected representatives of the People”. Consequently, the National State Assembly as the “the supreme instrument of State power” exercised the legislative, executive and judicial powers of the People thus making Sri Lanka a Parliamentary Democracy.

This, however, is not the case with the current Constitution. Article 4 that spells out the “powers of government” states that the legislative power of the People shall be exercised by Parliament (Article 4 (a); the executive power of the people shall be exercised by a President directly elected by the People (Article 4 (b) and the judicial power of the People shall be exercised by Parliament through courts, tribunals etc. Article 4(c).

Furthermore, since sovereignty is inalienable each of the above powers must and should remain separate and equal. In addition, they cannot be transferred, relinquished or removed without the expressed consent of the People. This makes Sri Lanka a presidential democracy. This then should be the starting point to address the charges made by Dr. Jayampathy Wickramaratne.

The inability to appreciate the difference between the two systems has caused legal and academic experts to keep on describing Sri Lanka as a Parliamentary democracy, when in fact it has been a Presidential democracy for the last forty years. A key aspect of this difference is that while parliamentary democracies cannot function without a majority presidential democracies could function independent of a majority since powers are separate. In such an instance the lack of a majority in Parliament only hampers the passage of legislation.

The perception that Sri Lanka is a parliamentary democracy is perhaps the reason for interpreting Article 33A that states: “The President shall be responsible to Parliament for the exercise, performance and discharge of his powers, duties and functions…” to mean that the Executive is “answerable” to Parliament. Such an interpretation is seriously flawed because it ignores the inalienability of the sovereign powers of the People.

SACKING of PRIME MINISTER

The so-called “unconstitutional sacking” of Ranil Wickremesinghe must be viewed from the background material presented above. Chapter VIII titled “The Cabinet of Ministers” in the 19th Amendment sets out the relationship between the President as the Head of the Cabinet of Ministers and the Cabinet. Accordingly, it is the President who appoints the Prime Minister as one “who in the President’s opinion is most likely to command the confidence of Parliament”, Art. 42 (4). However, it is the President who “determines the number of Cabinet of Ministers and the Ministries and the assignment of subjects and functions to such Ministers (Art. 43(1). The only change in the 19th Amendment from what existed earlier is that the appointment of Cabinet Ministers, State Ministers and Deputy Ministers “shall be on the advice of the Prime Minster”.

Notwithstanding this, Article 43 (3) states: “The President may at any time change the assignment of subjects and functions and the composition of the Cabinet of Ministers. Such change shall not affect the continuity of the Cabinet of Misters and the continuity of its responsibility to Parliament”. Since the identical provision was provided in the 1978 Constitution the comment by late Prof. A. J. Wilson was: “This section therefore empowers the President to even dismiss his Prime Minister and or reshuffle his Cabinet without consultation with the former, because it states that ‘such changes shall not affect the continuity of the Cabinet of Ministers and the continuity of its responsibility to Parliament” (The Gaullist System in Asia, The Constitution of Sri Lanka, 1978, p.44).

The President did not arbitrarily “sack” PM Ranil Wickramasinghe. The sacking occurred as a result of the National Government with an Executive of 93 ceasing to exist following the withdrawal of the UPFA from the coalition. This precipitated a constitutional necessity to reconstitute the Executive and limit it to 70 and assign new subjects and functions. This necessity coupled with the deep discontent in the country regarding the direction and control of the government, unparalleled corruption and the sale of national assets, motivated the President to appoint a new Prime Minister who had the proven ability to give a new direction to his government. Therefore, the sacking of the Prime Minister is not a political coup or political crisis but a precipitation of a series of events that required Presidential intervention in keeping with the Constitution.

DISSOLUTION of PARLIAMENT

Article 70 (1) of the 1978 Constitution entitled the President to “summon, prorogue and dissolve Parliament” until paragraph (1) was repealed and substituted with the provision that the President “shall not dissolve Parliament until the expiration of a period not less than four years and six months … unless the Parliament requests the President to do so by a resolution passed by not less than two-thirds of the whole number of Members…”. This means that Parliament could secure a two-third majority at anytime within the four and half years, and “request” the President to dissolve Parliament This amounts to powers the President has as Head of State being transferred to another organ of government, i.e., the Parliament thereby violating the inalienability of the executive powers of the People. However, the fact that 33 (2) (c) is incorporated within Article 33 (2) means the President’s power to dissolve Parliament was not restricted and the repeal of Article 70 (1) has no relevance.

Despite this, there are three special circumstances, namely, “If Parliament rejects the Statement of Government Policy, or the Appropriation Bill or passes a vote of no confidence in the Government the Cabinet of Ministers shall stand dissolved …and for the President to appoint a new Executive” (Article 48 (2). How many times is this process to continue before Government operations break down and the country comes to a standstill? The inclusion of Article 33(2) (c) in Article 33(2) enables the President to overcome such challenges (SLR -2002 Vol. 3, para. 102). Since Article 33(2) states that the powers listed are “In ADDITION (emphasis added) to powers, duties and functions expressly confirmed …” Article 33(2) (c) overrides Article 70. Furthermore, it could also be applied to 33 (2) (f). This empowers the President, if he so chooses, to engage in “acts of appointment of Prime Minister and other Ministers, the Chief Justice and this other judges of the Supreme Court, the President of the Court of Appeal…” thereby overriding limitations imposed on such appointments by the 19th Amendment. Clearly, under no circumstances could the entirety of Article 33 (2) be categorized as “general powers”, as asserted by Dr. Wickramaratne.

CONCLUSION

The flawed understanding that the system of Government in Sri Lanka is a Parliamentary Democracy is the reason for the outcry to reconvene Parliament to establish who has the majority. The fact that the Constitution provides for the “powers of government” to operate separately under the collective rubric of the sovereignty of the People makes the system in Sri Lanka a Presidential Democracy. It is a matter of deep regret that this distinction is not understood.

It is unrealistic to expect the International community to be aware of Sri Lanka’s constitutional complexities when such awareness does not exist among Sri Lanka’s own legal and academic fraternities. Their common shrill is that Parliament should be reconvened to establish majorities and minorities in the misguided hope that establishing majorities would resolve all issues. This has caused the situation in Sri Lanka to be internationalized and to be described as a political coup or a political crisis on grounds that the measures adopted by the President were undemocratic and unconstitutional.

The explanation for the prevailing constitutional confusion is the ad-hoc incorporation of new provisions into what had existed, with the objective of transforming a Presidential Democracy into a Parliamentary Democracy without the consent of the People at a Referendum. Another parallel is the incorporation of provisions for devolution from a Parliamentary Democracy in India into a Presidential Democracy in Sri Lanka, notwithstanding the inherent incompatibilities. It is only through an understanding of these fundamentals that Sri Lanka could hope to emerge from this confused state.

By : A.A.M.NIZAM – MATARA .

The UNP suffering from perennial electrophobia and utterly fearful of facing voters in elections its Paroxetine JVP ,JHU Muslim Com-gross TPA. Dollar voracious NGO vultures and pro-tiger terrorist sympathiser Rajan Hoole, despite being a member of the so-called Independent election commission (perhaps on behalf of the Tamil diaspora) and some others have submitted petitions at the Supreme Court against the dissolution of Parliament and calling for ele4ctions by President Sirisena.  Hoole should have resigned from his post before he submitted the petition and if fail to so even now belatedly the government should take swift action to remove him as otherwise people will lose faith on the independent nature of the Election Commission. Reports indicate that this pro terrorist Hoole has refrained from signing the letter authorising officials to proceed with carrying out election related activities and thereby creating a conflict between Election and Commissioner General of Elections and hence Hoole should not only be dismissed but also taken into custody on the charge of obstructing legitimate government activities.

The hearing of the petitions by a three-member panel of Judges led by the Chief Justice Nalin Fernando started yesterday and is being continued.  Despite these petitions of election phobia addicts Maha Nayake Theroes, prelates of other religions have wholeheartedly and enthusiastically welcomed the election saying that it has offered an opportunity for them to get rid of the butterfly clan and the foreign slavish quislings from the political arena of this country and replace them with national minded, patriotic and progressive people and revive the country as it was in the yore.

In the Supreme Court the Attorney General Mr. Jayantha Jayasuriya making his submission ns asserted that the action taken by the President was legal and was in consistent with the constitution and has asked the Courts to dismiss all petitions.  During his submission the AG has cited all constitutional clauses that validate the action taken by the President to ensure the law and order sovereignty of the people.

The Supreme Court, in the meantime gave it ruling this evening by issuing a Stay Order on the gazette dissolving Parliament and calling for elections until 7^th December and said that they will take up hearing of the petitions on 4^th, 5^th,and6^th of December. Many political analysts and politicians have welcomed this decision as the time frame given to call for nominations from 19^th to 26^th November and hold election on 5^th January were insufficient for selection of candidates and prepare for a detailed Manifesto.  Government sources said that thy are in the process of presenting a joint manifesto and the relevant works are being carried out.  They said that the new Manifesto will have many concessions including granting of car permits every five years, expediting the work of development projects which had been suspended by the Ranil Wickremasinghe government and extensive review of foreign slavish trade agreements. .

Government sources indicated that there will be no more Ranil era even if the Supreme Court gives a verdict in favour of the UNP and its proxies.  Legal experts apprised that in such an event the government can call for a referendum for they people to express their franchise and it will only delay the election by about one month or by a maximum 40 – 50 days.

Meanwhile Ranil Wickremasinghe has said that Parliament will resume sittings tomorrow the original date of reconvening the Parliament by President Sirisena before he issued a gazette notification to dissolve parliament and call for a snap election. He has said in his usual arrogance that he will prove his majority when they meet tomorrow despite the fact that the can appoint anyone regardless of majority as the Prime Minister as he did so om 9^th January in which he appointed Ranil who had only 41 clears as Prime Minister instead of Mr. D.M,.Jayaratne who had 146 members with him at that time.

Reports said that the double-tongued dollar voracious JVP leadership held their Il Maha Semarum” November commemoration in Colombo today)(Nov. 13^th). They hold two commemoration events – April 5th– in respect of those idea in 1971 and Nov. 13^th in respect of over 60,000 died in 88 – 90 period, including some of my relations, school mates and neighbours.  A neighbour of mine became insane when his two sons got killed reported by Rajitha Senaratne’s PRRA outfit and subsequently died in that status. Many eye witness accounts have said that JVP leader Rohana Wijeweera was thrown into  Cremation Chamber alive when he was arrested at Ulapane St. Mary’s Estate and brought to Colombo.   On the day he was supposed to have been killed the then Minister of National Security Ranjan Wijeratne in an interview with BBC and in response to a question whether Wijeweera’s  killing has been informed to the President said that they do not need to inform President about the killing of a dacoit.  The JVP current leadership despite their collaboration with the UNP has not taken any action to verify about this death.  The JVP hold these commemorations for their self aggrandizement and for fooling their village members and make them hire buses spending from their hard-earned money to ferry the people to them in Colombo and other main towns.

The last genuine leader of the JVP the late Mr. Somawansa Amerasinghe told media once the present JVP leadership under dollar voracious Anura Kumara and his cabal is shamelessly money slavish and Anura Kumara who is reportedly owns a palatial residence in Ireland was given Rs. 25 Million by UNP stalwart and UNP financier Malik Samarawickrema to help their party in the 2015 General Elections.  Ranil also helped Anura Kumara in numerous ways and he functioned as an advisor to Ranil having an office in the Temple Trees and Anura Kumara has allegedly advised Ranil on persons to be prosecuted by the notorious FCID and on what charges.  NFF leader Mr. Wimal Weerawansa, PHU leader Mr. Udaya Gammanpila and the famous Buddhist monk Ven. Uduwe Dhammaloka Thera had to serve long terms under custody perhaps due to instigations of Anura Kumara.

(To be continued)

කීර්ති තෙන්නකෝන්

පාර්ලිමේන්තුව මැතිවරණය පැවැත්වීමට නොහැකි තත්වයක් උද්ගත වන්නේ නම්, ජනාධිපති සහ මහින්ද රාජපක්ෂ කණ්ඩායම සතු දුර දිග අවිය ‘ලංකාවේ පළාත් සභා සහ පාර්ලිමේන්තු මැතිවරණය එක වර පැවැත්විය යුතුය ද?‘‘ යන ජනමත විචාරණය (ලාම්පු කළ ගෙඩි සෙල්ලම) කරළිය පැමිණෙනු ඇත.

මෙම සති අන්තයට පෙර ජනාධිපතිවරයා අවාසිදායක තීන්දුවක් ලැබේ නම්, නොවැ. 16 දින ජනමත විචාරණ ගැසට් නිවේදනය අපේක්ෂා කළ හැකිය.  අඩුම කාලයකින් පැවැත්විය හැකි මැතිවරණය ජනමත විචාරනය බැවින් එය ද, ජනවාරි මුල් සතියේ දී පැවැත්වීමට හැකියාව ඇත.

සටහන – 1982 දී ලංකාව ඡන්ද එපා යැයි ඡනමත විචාරණයක දී ඡන්ද 31,41,223 ක් ලබා දී ඇත.  ඡන්දය අවශ්‍ය බවට පැවසූවේ 26,059,83 ක් බැවින් ලංකාවේ මැතිවරණ සිතියම වසර 5 කට අකුළනු ලැබීය. 

Dr Ruwan M Jayatunge

Freddie Mercury ‘s  musical hit Bohemian Rhapsody carried a numerous metaphors and symbolism that transformed the band into a global phenomenon. Bohemian Rhapsody” song was written by Freddy Mercury which had no chorus but consisted of   six sections: introduction, ballad, guitar solo, opera, rock and outro. Bohemian Rhapsody could be considered as an enigmatic philosophical song that was not decoded completely. Up-to-date Bohemian Rhapsody remains a puzzle.  This song has fatalistic lyrics. Some argue that Bohemian Rhapsody echoes Mercury’s personal traumas reveling the complexity of his inner mind. This song represents a self-explanatory portion of Freddy. Perhaps Bohemian Rhapsody could be the musical version of Albert Camus’s novel The Stranger.

Albert Camus’s novel The Stranger involves a complex character named Meursault. For Camus, life has no rational meaning or order. As Albert Camus stated, the nakedness of man faced with the absurd was highlighted in his novel. Meursault’s philosophy of absurdism, atheism, determinism, nihilism, and stoicism are well marked in Bohemian Rhapsody. Bohemian Rhapsody divulges a life and attitude, which possess no rational order.

Bohemian Rhapsody begins with the powerful vocals of Freddy, which describes the clashes between his inner fantasies and realities. He was born in Zanzibar to an Indian Parsi Family and raised in England. He was exposed to three different cultures and in each culture; his biopersona (biological component of his personality) was suppressed creating a colossal guilt in him.  The society that he lived expected him to live an artificial life less then his expectations. Mercury felt trapped and found no escape.

Is this the real life
Is this just fantasy
Caught in a landslide
No escape from reality
Open your eyes
Look up to the skies and see
I’m just a poor boy, I need no sympathy
Because I’m easy come, easy go,
Little high, little low
Anyway the wind blows, doesn’t really matter to me – to me

In the second part Freddy talks about a murder which could be treated as a metaphor. Metaphor and allegory were powerful literary and conceptual tools which often used by him to create melody, rhythm and philosophy. Like Meursault he reaches self-knowledge by committing a murder.

Mama, just killed a man,
Put a gun against his head,
Pulled my trigger, now he’s dead,
Mama, life had just begun,
But now I’ve gone and thrown it all away
Mama, ooo,
Didn’t mean to make you cry
If I’m not back again this time tomorrow
Carry on, carry on, as if nothing really matters

In the third section, Freddy talks about his destitution and hidden death wish contrary to his insensible desire to live. In Bohemian Rhapsody Camus’s philosophy of the absurd is written in every line.

The imaginary character of Albert Camus’s novel The Stranger – Meursault was a social deviant. He was an absurd man. The struggle to find meaning where none exists is what Camus calls, the absurd.  The absurd man will not commit suicide and he wants to live, without renouncing any of his incongruous hopes. The doomed character recounts in Bohemian Rhapsody reminds a nihilistic man that was narrated in Camus’s novel The Stranger.

Too late, my time has come,
Sends shivers down my spine
Body’s aching all the time,
Goodbye everybody – I’ve got to go –
Gotta leave you all behind and face the truth
Mama, ooo –
I don’t want to die,
I sometimes wish I’d never been born at all –

The Opera Section begins with a powerful  vocal presentation. Freddy Mercury uses the name of a fictional character – Scaramouch that was created by Rafael Sabatini.

I see a little silhouetto of a man,
Scaramouch, scaramouch will you do the Fandango
Thunderbolt and Lightning – very very frightening me-
Gallileo, Gallileo,
Gallileo, gallileo,
Gallileo Figaro – Magnifico –
I’m just a poor boy nobody loves me
He’s just a poor boy froma poor family
Spare him his life from this monstrosity
Easy come, easy go – will you let me go

In the subsequent part, the singer utters a name Bismillah which means the God. It is a poetic phrase translated as in the name of the God, most gracious and most compassionate.

Bismillah! No, – we will not let you go – let him go –
Bismillah! We will not let you go – Let him go
Bismillah! We will not let you go – Let him go
Will not let you go – Let me go
Will not let you go – Let me go
No, no, no, no, no, no, no-
Mama mia, mama mia, mama mia let me go –
Beelzebub has a devil put aside for me, for me, for me.

The final part of the song is the rock section. In this branch Freddy’s emotional struggle and apathy is emphasized. However, he is ready to accept the consequences.

So you think you can stone me and spit in my eye
So you think you can love me and leave me to die
Oh Baby – Can’t do this to me Baby
Just gotta get out- just gotta get right outta here –
Nothing really matters
Anyone can see
Nothing really matters, nothing really matters – to me

In Bohemian Rhapsody the meaninglessness of all endeavors are emphasized in the final line.  According to the theory of Absurdism that was introduced by the French Algerian philosopher Albert Camus there is a fundamental disharmony that arises out of the co-presence of man and the universe. Man has a desire for order, meaning, and purpose in life, but the universe is indifferent and meaningless; the Absurd arises out of this conflict. Meursault was always aware of the meaninglessness of all endeavors in his life so as the nihilistic man of the Bohemian Rhapsody.

Lanka Lead News

අතිගරු ජනාධිපති මෛත්‍රීපාල සිරිසේන මහතා විසින් පාර්ලිමේන්තුව විසුරුවා හැරීම නිත්‍යානුකූල නොවන බවට ශ්‍රෙෂ්ඨාධිකරණය තීන්දු කළහොත් වහාම ජනමත විචාරණයකට යා යුතු බව මහාචාර්ය පූජ්‍ය මැදගොඩ අබේතිස්ස හිමියෝ පවසති.

අද(13) පෙරවරුවේ විද්වත් භික්ෂු සංසදය විසින් පැපිලියාන සුනේත්‍රාදේවී පිරිවනේ කැදවා තිබූ මාධ්‍ය හමුවකට එක්වෙමින් උන්වහන්සේ මේ බව කියා සිටියේය.

මෙහිදී අදහස් දැක්වූ ආචාර්ය පූජ්‍ය කපුගොල්ලැව ආනන්දසිරි හිමි

”මැතිවරණ කොමිසම ස්වාධීන ආයතනයක්. කොමිසමේ සාමාජිකයෙක් වන රාජන් හූල් කියන නිලධාරියා ශ්‍රේෂ්ඨාධිකරණයට ගිහින් තියෙනවා ඡන්දයක් එපා කියලා. කොහොමද ස්වාධීන ආයතනයක සාමාජිකයෙක් පක්ෂපාතී වෙන්නේ.”

නීතිවේදී ශාස්ත්‍රපති පිටවල උපාලි හිමි

අපේ මතකය දිව නොව එදා 974 පටන් ගත්තේ ධර්මයට පාලනයකින් අවසන් කළේ ”අ” යන්නත් එකතු කරලා. යහපාලනය පටන් ගත්තේ යහපාලනය කියලා. මේ තීන්දුව යම් විදියකින් ඔවුනට අවාසි වුණොත් ඔවුන් කියනවා ජනතාවට බලන් ඉන්න අත්විඳින්න පුළුවන් දරුණු ඉරණම කියලා. ඔවුන් කියනවා ලේ ගංගාවක් මතින් හරි වුන්ගේ ජයග්‍රහණය කෙසේ හෝ ලබා ළඟා කර ගන්නවා කියලා. ලේ ගංගාවක් කියන්නේ යහපාලනය අවසානයේ යම්ක් යමපාලනයක් බවට පත් වෙනවා.

තවද මෙම මාධ්‍ය හමුව සඳහා ජාතික විද්වත් භික්ෂු සංසදයේ සාමාජික භික්ෂූන් වහන්සේලා වන ශාස්ත්‍රපති හෑගොඩ විපස්සි හිමි, ශාස්ත්‍රපති මතුගම සුමන නන්ද හිමි, ශාස්ත්‍රපති මාවනැල්ලේ පවර හිමි සහභාගි විය.

lanka C news

පාර්ලිමේන්තුව හෙට (14) දිනයේදි නැවත රැස්වන බව හිටපු අගමැති රනිල් වික‍්‍රමසිංහ මහතා පවසයි.

තමන් හෙට දිනයේදී පාර්ලිමේන්තු බහුතරය පෙන්වීමට සූදානම් බවද ඔහු සදහන් කරයි.

වික‍්‍රමසිංහ මහතා මේ බව කියා සිටියේ අරලිය ගහ මන්දිරයේදි මාධ්‍ය අමතමිනි.