A Way Out Of The Crisis To Save Sri Lanka’s Democracy
Prof. S W R de A Samarasinghe
Sri Lanka’s democracy is at a crossroads. Its future is now primarily in the hands of the Supreme Court, President Maithripala Sirisena, Mahinda Rajapaksa and his SLPP, and Ranil Wickremesinghe and his UNP.
Verdict in favour of dissolution
The Supreme Court verdict due to be given on Saturday December 8th has to either confirm the constitutionality and legitimacy of President Sirisena’s decision to dissolve parliament or reject the decision as an illegitimate decision that violates the constitution. If the decision goes in favour of Sirisena, in effect, it will also be a decision in favour of Mahinda Rajapaksa. Such a decision is likely to have the following consequences.
1. In confirming the constitutionality of the dissolution, the Supreme Court will contradict the viewpoint of many of the leading constituitonal scholars and lawyers who have publicly stated that President Sirisena’s action was in violation of the letter of the Constitution. Such a verdict may call into question the validity of constituitonal governance.
2. The events in the last six weeks clearly demonstrate that such a decision will go against the spiritof democracy. The parliament has demonstrated that a majority of the MPs are for the continuation of the government that existed before October 26. The Parliament has also demonstrated on more than ne occasion that Mahinda Rajapaksa does not enjoy the support of a majority (minimum of 113 MPs) in parliament.
3. The dissolution of parliament at this juncture is not a victory for “people’s sovereignty” or democracy as some would claim. People’s sovereignty is protected when governance accords with the rule of law. Arbitrary action, in this instance the sudden holding of elections, by the executive branch to suit its narrow political goals is not a triumph for people’s sovereignty or democracy. It is the exact opposite. Such elections are held in banana republics and tin pot dictatorships to acquire a veneer of legitimacy for undemocratic governments. Sri Lanka’s 88-year-old democracy belongs to a more genuine tradition of democracy, and it would be a great tragedy if that tradition were to be abandoned starting with this crisis.
4. The Judiciary is the co-equal third branch of government in a democracy. One of its greatest constitutional obligations is to resolve disputes that can arise between the Legislative Branch and the Executive Brach of government. In the present crisis, so far, the Judiciary has acted with remarkable restraint, honour and integrity as the defender of the last resort of our democracy. If the Supreme Court legitimizes the dissolution of parliament, the judiciary will lose its credibility and standing as the defender of democracy not only in the eyes of a large number of the Sri Lankan public but also in the eyes of the entire democratic world.
Verdict against dissolution
