By Veeragathy Thanabalasingham 

No matter how many times President Ranil Wickremesinghe asserts the presidential election will be held on schedule as mandated by the constitution, opposition parties are not convinced of his sincerity and believe he would come up with a ploy to delay the election at any moment. This scepticism is shared by the general public who believe the government will employ all means necessary to delay the election for as long as possible.

This belief gained credence when reports emerged of a public debate initiated by some politicians on the need to abolish the Executive Presidency (EP) ahead of an election.

Those favouring this line of thought include Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) parliamentarian Dr Rajitha Senaratne, who is now at loggerheads with the Leader of the Opposition, Sajith Premadasa. Speaking the launch of the new electoral reforms campaign by the National Movement for Social Justice (NMSJ), led by former Speaker Karu Jayasuriya, he called for the immediate abolishment of the presidential system of governance ahead of any election.

The NMSJ has declared its mission as aiming to create public awareness about electoral reforms, and this included the abolition of EP. Although Jayasuriya has asserted he would never lobby for the postponement of any election, many question why election reforms are being talked about at this particular juncture when there are credible concerns about attempts to postpone the presidential election.

Adding further weight to these concerns are allegations that President Wickremesinghe is mobilizing the support of NGOs to initiate a dialogue on the need for constitutional amendments to abolish the EP. Reportedly former President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga is also part of this move.

In what is being perceived as a move to stem the speculation the President’s Media Division (PMD) issued a statement saying that the presidential and parliamentary elections would be held on schedule as mandated by the constitution.  It also noted that the Cabinet has approved a proposal to allocate Rs10 billion for the presidential election to be held this year and funds would be allocated in the 2025 budget for the parliamentary elections scheduled for next year.

As if to discredit the statement, Udaya Gammanpila, leader of the Pivithuru Hela Urumaya, addressing a media conference at his party office, outlined the alleged strategy he suspects the government would adopt to postpone the presidential election.

Noting that the Supreme Court has already determined that a constitutional amendment to abolish the executive presidency must be approved by a two-thirds majority in Parliament and approval of the people in a national referendum, the latter as detailed in Article 80 of the constitution, he said, “But if someone files a petition against the validity of the referendum results, the president cannot certify the amendment bill until the Supreme Court decides whether the outcome of the referendum is valid. In other words, if a person challenges the validity of the referendum, the executive presidency will not be abolished pending the Supreme Court determination.”

Gammanpila went on to explain that in such a scenario the incumbent president can remain in power until the dissolution of Parliament in August 2025. Although the Referendum Act states that every endeavour should be made to conclude the hearing of petitions within six months, he said it was not mandatory.

Pointing to arguments that the present constitution is in operation until the president certifies the Constitutional Amendment and as a result, the executive presidency would still be in operation and hence, there would be no barrier to holding the presidential election, he said though technically, it is true it was not pragmatic. He urged opposition parties not to fall into the trap and help the government avoid the next presidential election.

Abolition of the EP is indeed an often repeated, boring story. The last in a long list of attempts made in October last year by Justice Minister Dr Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe who is reported to have submitted a cabinet paper proposing parliamentary elections be conducted in a mixed method that includes the old First Past the Post (FPP) system and proportional representation, whereby 160 of the 225 members of parliament would be elected through the FPP system and the remaining 65 based on the proportion of votes received by political parties.  He had also recommended that a Yes or No referendum be held to determine whether the executive presidency should be abolished and a parliamentary system of government, with an executive prime minister, be reintroduced.

The proposal was vehemently criticized by opposition parties who deemed it an attempt by the government to disrupt the national elections, compelling Dr Rajapakshe to not only give up the idea but also claim he had never submitted such a proposal to cabinet in the first place.

Meanwhile, the SJB and the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP)-led National People’s Power (NPP) have said the Parliament elected at the next general elections with a new mandate from the people should decide on the abolition of the EP, claiming they will not tolerate any attempt to postpone national elections.

While there is no provision in the constitution for postponing the presidential election, the government also does not have the two-thirds majority in Parliament to amend the constitution. Legal experts argue that postponing elections would require a constitutional amendment passed by a two-thirds majority in Parliament and approved by the people in a national referendum.

Scepticism about the government’s claims of holding elections as scheduled was upped another notch when former president Mahinda Rajapaksa, a staunch supporter of the EP, added his voice to the pro-abolishing group, saying it would be desirable to do away with the presidential system of governance.

Although abolishing the presidential system was his campaign promise when he ran for president the first time around, it is well documented what he did in his second term to further strengthen and entrench the executive presidency when he introduced the 18th Amendment to the Constitution, doing away with the two-term limit of the president. Fortuitously, the public did not give him a mandate for a third term. But it is such a person, covetous for power, who is now speaking in favour of abolishing the EP, claiming the whole country wants it.

In a similar vein, another former president, Maithripala Sirisena, has also said his Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) would support any moves to abolish the EP via a constitutional amendment.

However, as usual, there has been no reaction from President Wickremesinghe, apartment from the statement issued by the PMD to the effect that the presidential election will be held on time.

History of Broken Promises

Sri Lanka is mired in a sea of breached promises. Not a single president who came to power pledging to the people that the EP would be abolished during his/her term in office has kept their promise.

J.R. Jayewardene, who introduced the EP, did not seek to amend the constitution to do away with the two-term limit or to abolish the EP, as there was nothing left for him to do in politics when his second term ended. At 70 plus years, Jayawardena was an elder statesman when he assumed the role of Sri Lanka’s first executive president in 1978.  One can’t help but wonder if he would have included the two-term limit clause in the constitution if he had been younger.

President Ranasinghe Premadasa was assassinated before the end of his first term. At the beginning of her second term in 2000, Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga attempted to amend the constitution to abolish the EP, with the intention of continuing in power as an executive prime minister. She could not succeed in that endeavour.

Mahinda Rajapaksa wanted to stay in power for a long time by bringing in the 18th amendment which did away with the term limits of a president. In January 2015, he ran for a third term but lost to the common opposition candidate Maithripala Sirisena, who campaigned on, among other promises, the promise to abolish the EP. Not only did he renege on his promise after coming to power, but his party also recommended the EP be retained when they submitted their proposals when the ‘Yahapalanaya’ government headed by Wickramasinghe and himself began the process of drafting a new constitution. To his credit though, the 19th Amendment to the Constitution, adopted during his tenure significantly curtailed the powers of the president.

Wickremesinghe, defeated in two consecutive presidential elections, supported two opposition common candidates both of whom promised to abolish the EP. In 2013, his United National Party released a policy document said to be the basis of a new constitution that included the proposal to abolish the EP.

In 2018, a draft constitution prepared and released by a group of experts appointed by the Maithri-Ranil government declared the Parliament should elect the president. In the same year, the Anura Kumara Dissanayake-led JVP introduced a constitutional amendment bill that would allow Parliament to elect a non-executive president.   The Sajith Premadasa-led SJB also proposed constitutional amendments in 2021 that would allow Parliament to elect a non-executive president.

This is the history of failed attempts and broken promises to abolish the EP which has been in existence for more than 45 years.

Wickremesinghe, who ceremoniously opened the new session of Parliament after assuming office as president in 2022, said in his policy statement that he would hand over the responsibility of forging a consensus on whether or not to abolish the EP to the People’s Assembly, which he intended to appoint. But that Assembly has never seen the light of day and he has not mentioned it since.

If Wickremesinghe truly wanted to abolish the EP, he could have done so by negotiating with the opposition parties in the immediate aftermath of ‘Aragalaya’, the people’s uprising. Abolition of the much-hated EP was one of the main demands in the cry for system change during the uprising.

In the ensuing period, though there have been signals from the government indicating interest in abolishing the EP, opposition reciprocation has been minimal, due to suspicions of it being a ploy to delay elections.

As it has not been possible to abolish the EP through legitimate political processes so far, political observers question why political parties are reluctant to work together to abolish the EP, which has been largely responsible for the country’s ills, using the rare opportunity brought about by strange circumstances.

Perverse as it may sound, they deem supporting the move to abolish the EP a clever political strategy, keeping in mind the long-term interest of the people and the country, irrespective of the government’s motives. Sacrificing an election they argue, will prove inconsequential compared to the untold suffering people have faced so far under the authoritarian system of governance ushered in by the EP.  Over to you leaders of the opposition parties, it is your call now.

–– Veeragathy Thanabalasingham is a senior journalist and Consultant Editor, Express Newspapers Ltd