{"id":51073,"date":"2016-01-14T20:55:06","date_gmt":"2016-01-15T02:55:06","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/?p=51073"},"modified":"2016-01-14T13:24:03","modified_gmt":"2016-01-14T20:24:03","slug":"is-the-unp-slfp-cohabitation-destined-to-end","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/2016\/01\/14\/is-the-unp-slfp-cohabitation-destined-to-end\/","title":{"rendered":"Is the UNP SLFP Cohabitation Destined to end"},"content":{"rendered":"

Kelum Bandara\u00a0Courtesy The Daily Mirror<\/em><\/span><\/h2>\n

The initiative for constitution making did not take\u00a0passage through Parliament last Tuesday because the debate was adjourned till January 26. \u00a0The Government, comprising the United National Party (UNP) and a segment of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP), intended to adopt it \u00a0on January 9 at a special parliamentary session to initiate the process of evolving a new Constitution to coincide with the first anniversary of \u00a0 President Maitripala Sirisena in office
\n.<\/em>\u00a0\"\"<\/strong><\/p>\n

It did not come to pass as originally planned because political parties and groups including the SLFP section in alliance with the government had strong reservations about the content of the resolution. \u00a0The Joint Opposition sought a radical departure from the original resolution and insisted on strict adherence to the procedure laid down in the present Constitution and the parliamentary standing orders. \u00a0Alongside the SLFP faction in government also wanted to propose certain changes to the resolutions.<\/p>\n

Subsequently, it was found that the two sets of amendments had a partial overlap. The SLFP ministers agreed to incorporate the Joint Opposition amendments in theirs. The debate got underway in the House on Tuesday, but the resolution was not put to a vote at the end of the day.
\nIn principle, the Joint Opposition, acting under the leadership of former President Mahinda Rajapaksa \u00a0 objected to the creation of a body called the \u2018Constitutional Assembly\u2019 as proposed in the resolution.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/strong>It also asserted that the present Constitution had no provision for it. In proposing a Constitutional Assembly, \u00a0 reference was made to political circles in the \u2018Constituntional Assembly\u2019 \u00a0 appointed by the government of Ex-Prime Minister the late Sirimavo Bandaranaike in the 1970s, as a precedent. Yet, critics of the present resolution took the view that Mrs. Bandaranaike\u2019s move was distinguishable from the body proposed today. \u00a0 At that time, the Joint Opposition said she had asked for a mandate in her manifesto to appoint a Constitutional Assembly to evolve a constitution.<\/p>\n

Her political front secured a two-thirds majority at the election as a singly entity. Likewise, according to the Joint Opposition, there was clear rationale behind the move by Mrs. Bandaranaike\u2019s government \u00a0 at that time as explained by then Minister Colvin R. de Silva that it was just a constitutional exercise to sever the country\u2019s link with the British Crown and transferring the sovereignty of the country to the people. \u00a0That effort took the form of a constitutional revolution at that time.
\nHowever, the Joint Opposition has seen the present situation in a different light. \u00a0In its amendments to the resolution at hand, it has stressed that the process of evolving a new Constitution should be done within the framework of the present Constitution and parliamentary standing orders.
\nThe Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna(JVP) , a political party \u00a0with six parliamentary seats, also wanted changes in the
\noriginal resolution.<\/p>\n

The government initially thought that it would be smooth sailing to initiate the constitution-making process concurrently with the first anniversary of \u00a0 President
\nSirisena in office. \u00a0\"\"<\/p>\n

Ahead of the January 9th session, a series of meetings were conducted by government leaders with other parties seeking consensus on the content of the resolution. First, it was a meeting with Prime Minster Ranil Wickremesinghe that was followed by meetings with President Sirisena and Speaker Karu Jayasuriya . The meeting with the Prime Minister took place at 6.30 pm on that day when the parties expressed reservations about the resolution and revealed the amendments they intended to suggest<\/p>\n

Later the Joint Opposition met with the President at 8.00 pm on the same day. \u00a0 Communist Party leader D.E. W. Gunasekara while presenting his views strongly asked, Why does the government deviate from the procedure laid down in the Constitution?\u201d He charged that the government was leading the whole process into a muddle from the very beginning.<\/p>\n

<\/div>\n
\"\"<\/div>\n

Kandy District MP Keheliya Rambukwella also speaking on behalf of the Joint Opposition said it [Opposition] was not opposed to the abolition of the Executive Presidency and the enactment of electoral reforms, but that all should be done in a lawful manner. He asked the government not to get tied up in procedural tangles unnecessarily. Joint Opposition Leader Dinesh Gunawardane said the resolution contravened standing orders.
\nIt was also found then that the amendments, proposed by the Opposition and SLFP ministers in the government had a partial overlap. But, the Joint Opposition viewed that the SLFP amendments \u00a0 did not
\ngo deep enough.<\/p>\n

At 11.00 pm on the same day, the Speaker called for the meeting of party leaders. There, \u00a0 the main opposition Tamil National Alliance (TNA) led by R. Sampanthan spoke in support of the original resolution. \u00a0The party insisted that the original one should not be altered or changed. \u00a0At this point the discussion heated up particularly after the Prime Minister, accompanied by Minister Malik Samarawickrama, arrived. \u00a0\"\"<\/p>\n

The Prime Minister took on the JVP leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake who criticised the resolution in principle. The PM said, \u00a0You are trying to hold a gun to my head. You all are the ones who wanted it. I am the only person here who voted for the 1978 Constitution of then President J.R. Jayewardene.\u201d
\nThe JVP leader did not agree and that led to a heated exchange of words. Finally, no consensus was reached on the matter at hand. \u00a0After that, 31 MPs of the Joint Opposition met at the residence of former Minister Prof. G.L. Peiris \u00a0 the following day. They decided to insist that their amendments are incorporated in the resolution. [ It is learnt that these amendments were drafted by Prof. Peiris on behalf of the Joint Opposition.] \u00a0 They acted accordingly during the
\nsession on Tuesday. After Tuesday\u2019s parliamentary session, the opposition group met at the same place. Former President Mahinda Rajapaksa had also attended it and reportedly had hailed the role played by the party\u2019s parliamentary group. \u00a0He said that a group of local authority members that met him recently asked for support to prevail upon the government to conduct the local government elections as early as possible.
\nIt transpired that this group was planning to conduct a protest rally soon.<\/p>\n

\"\"The New Left Front Leader Vasudeva Nanayakkara presented a concept paper highlighting the need to transform the Joint Opposition into a political movement with an identity and a set of policies distinguishable from others. Rather than forming a new party, he said it would be a better option to retake control of the SLFP and the United People\u2019s Freedom Alliance (UPFA). However, the proposal met with little support.<\/p>\n

In the meantime, the UNP, in an obvious reference to the move made by the Joint Opposition, said it was nothing but political hypocrisy to criticise the proposed Constitution even before its provisions were worked out. Highways and Higher Education Minister Lakshman Kiriella said though these elements talked about attempts to compromise the sovereignty of the country and the recognition of Buddhism as the foremost religion, no such provision
\nhad been made.<\/p>\n

During the previous rule, the 18th Amendment was passed. It was done surreptitiously. Nobody spoke a word against it. When the provincial council system was introduced, it was criticised as a move for the partition of the country. But, nothing has happened. Critics even enjoy power at the provincial councils today,\u201d he said. He added that it was a good opportunity to work out a solution to the national question that plagued the country for over 50 years.<\/p>\n

New party to be\u00a0formed soon<\/strong><\/h3>\n

Some recent political developments point towards efforts underway to form a new political party ahead of the local authority elections. \u00a0Former Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa once made a remark of that intention publicly, and his brother former President Mahinda Rajapaksa said the emergence of a new political party \u00a0 would be inevitable unless the SLFP followed the present leadership. However, it still remains uncertain who will lead this front.<\/p>\n

What is clear is that it will enjoy the blessings of the former president. Also, recent remarks made by Minister S.B. Dissanayake that the SLFP and UNP cannot be parties in the same government for long had created feelings that \u00a0the present cohabitation between these two main parties may end soon.
\nThe UNP and SLFP are two parties with differring policies. They cannot stick to each other for long politically,\u201d he had said at a press conference.<\/p>\n

These remarks have given rise to speculation that a chasm is developing between the two parties in the government and that they may part ways. \u00a0 However, such a parting cannot be anticipated soon. Probably, policy differences between them might surface over the new
\nconstitutional exercise.
\n\"\" – See more at: http:\/\/www.dailymirror.lk\/102937\/is-the-unp-slfp-cohabitation-destined-to-end#sthash.Xg9f58zJ.dpuf<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Kelum Bandara\u00a0Courtesy The Daily Mirror The initiative for constitution making did not take\u00a0passage through Parliament last Tuesday because the debate was adjourned till January 26. \u00a0The Government, comprising the United National Party (UNP) and a segment of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP), intended to adopt it \u00a0on January 9 at a special parliamentary session […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[12],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-51073","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-forum"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/51073","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=51073"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/51073\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=51073"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=51073"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=51073"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}