Colombo: Ending a bitter, two-week long power struggle with two men claiming to be the prime minister of Sri Lanka, President Maithripala Sirisena has announced snap general elections for January 5, 2019. This is the latest in a series of questionable actions he has taken in a bid to overcome an unprecedented crisis of his own making – one that has plunged the island into deep political uncertainty.
With the surprise installation of Mahinda Rajapaksa as prime minister on October 26 without prior intimation to serving premier, Ranil Wickremesinghe, President Sirisena caused a political storm that raised many eyebrows and made the world question Sri Lanka’s democratic credentials.
In the two weeks that passed, Wickremesinghe, who refused to vacate ‘Temple Trees,’ the prime minister’s official residence, repeatedly demanded that parliament be reconvened so he could demonstrate his majority. But Sirisena insisted on retaining Rajapaksa – a bitter political rival with whom he broke ranks to run for the presidency in 2015. Rajapaksa strived to cobble a majority he publicly claimed to have, though in actual fact he did not. Instead of showing a parliamentary majority by mustering the support of 113 MPs, the SLFP-SLPP combine sought to demonstrate public support for Rajapaksa’s installation and for Sirisena’s unconstitutional move through a well-attended public rally on November 5. Meanwhile, parliament stood prorogued, while several legislators openly switched sides and were rewarded with portfolios.
Despite boastful claims, the dissolution of parliament is proof enough of Rajapaksa’s lack of a majority. Political insiders claim that an angry Rajapaksa at a recent meeting demanded Sirisena show the ‘numbers’ and was livid when he learned that there was no demonstrable majority. Pushed to the wall, Sirisena’s only option was to dissolve parliament, one-and-a-half years ahead of schedule.
However, even as Gazette extraordinaire 2096/70 of November 9, 2018 was being dispatched for printing, an undeterred Sirisena swore in three more cabinet ministers. For the world to see, it was business as usual until the announcement of the dissolution came, a few hours later.
In response to the dissolution, the UNP said on Twitter: “This dissolution by the president is illegal and goes against the constitution. We will fight this to ensure that democracy reigns supreme in the country.”
For a man credited with measured decision-making, President Sirisena has, in the past two weeks, managed to show a streak of vengeful authoritarianism coupled with a lack of respect for the constitution. He has summarily ‘ousted’ a serving prime minister, installed a popular former president in his place, sought to muster a working majority in the house to justify that decision amidst allegations of horse-trading and stoically refused to convene parliament – thereby making a mockery of the parliamentary system.
Also read: The Political is Personal: An Essay in Despair from Sri LankaA self-declared ‘one-term president’ who pledged to restore public faith in the executive by implementing a reformist ‘good governance’ agenda, Sirisena showed no qualms in acknowledging Wickremesinghe as his prime minister in the immediate afterglow of electoral victory in January 2015. Yet, this marriage of political convenience – cobbled together to defeat Rajapaksa – was expected to be an uncomfortable one from the start.
Wickremesinghe is a West-leaning liberal who believes in free-market policies while Sirisena represents the populist aspirations of the Sinhala majority, much like Rajapaksa. In addition to the differences in political ideology, Wickremesinghe made matters worse when he took control of the national agenda, continuously alienating Sirisena.
Yet that does not explain the events of the past fortnight when Sirisena resorted to repeated assaults on democracy and the constitution. If anything, his actions now show that the powers of the executive perhaps require further checks and balances, given the way the legislature has been devalued, together with the office of the prime minister.
In trying to prove his point – and his unfettered executive powers – the president said he invited at least two politicians to occupy the prime minister’s chair – before handing it over to Rajapaksa.
Addressing a massive public rally on November 5, Sirisena revealed that he had offered the post first to the speaker of parliament, Karu Jayasuriya, and second, to senior UNP politician Sajith Premadasa. This attempt to secretly seek replacement prime ministers indicates that the president has been plotting to overthrow Wickremesinghe for some time.
As all attempts to have parliament reconvened fell on deaf ears, speaker Jayasuriya went public with his misgivings. In a statement on November 5, he said:
“At a time it has been brought to my attention by the majority that the lawful summoning of parliament has been prevented and the rights of the MPs have been usurped, in the name of justice and fair play, I have to make my stance known to the world.
As the majority is of the opinion that all changes made in the parliament are undemocratic and inconsistent with traditions of parliament and as the majority of parliament have requested that the status that existed before these changes were made shall be accepted, I wish to emphasise that I am compelled to accept the status that existed previously until such time they and the new political alliance prove their majority in parliament.”
Jayasuriya’s statement irritated the president, insiders say, even though he had shown a readiness to reconvene parliament on November 14, two days prior to the scheduled date.
Wickremesinghe’s errors
Going back to what precipitated this political crisis, Wickremesinghe is certainly not without blame.
Drunk with power after years in opposition, he took over decision-making completely, alienating not just the president but also members of his SLFP. For all intents and purposes, he was the sole decision maker. With Ranil’s UNP installed in the role of executor of his vision, Sirisena ended up getting marginalised in a government he officially led.
Besides exercising overall control, Wickremesinghe made a fatal mistake when his government was accused of corruption through a highly questionable treasury bond issuance by his handpicked governor of the Central Bank, Arjun Mahendran. He soft-pedalled the issue and made no effort to assist the probe into the bond scam, testing Sirisena further.
Ranil Wickremesinghe. Credit: Reuters
In recent months, Wickremesinghe’s management of the economy came under severe criticism. There were public protests, many backed by Rajapaksa supporters, against his insensitive slapping of taxes as the rupee plummeted in value. Various groups rose up in rebellion as the cost of living skyrocketed, and thus, a groundswell of public opinion was building up, creating the backdrop for the sacking of Wickremesinghe, who was increasingly seen as a ‘servant of the West’. For Sirisena, it seemed an opportune moment to undermine his authority – or better still, replace him with a populist leader who easily connects with people.
Yet, in all of this, some questions remain unanswered.
In recent history, there has not been such an intense debate on the constitutionality of presidential decision-making, scrutiny over a single constitutional amendment and attempts to verify the authenticity of its translation. Why would President Sirisena, once a sworn enemy of Rajapaksa, take such a hit for the sake of his rival? After all, the moot question was Rajapaksa’s ability to occupy the position.
Also read: The Second Coming of Sri Lanka’s Mahinda RajapaksaFor his part, what could have propelled Mahinda Rajapaksa to make this move? A leader with tremendous mass appeal in the south of the country, his popularity has been undented by allegations of large-scale corruption by his family. He held regular elections, won them and left presidential office – with a smile – and had a good chance of making a strong comeback a year-and-a-half later. So what made one of Sri Lanka’s most charismatic and powerful politicians seek a backdoor entry to power?
Mahinda Rajapaksa. Credit: Reuters/Dinuka Liyanawatte
More importantly, what were the undisclosed conditions of this new alliance? What was at stake for both Sirisena and Rajapaksa to make this move?
In 2015, an emotional Sirisena claimed he risked his life by running for the presidency and challenging the powerful Rajapaksa clan. He swore that even if Rajapaksa won a majority in parliament, he (Sirisena) would not appoint him prime minister. Yet, the same Sirisena has overcome his reluctance and reached out to Rajapaksa in his bid to replace Wickremesinghe.
Analysts are convinced there is more to the new partnership than what meets the eye, besides a desire to win the next general election and run for presidency another time.
That is why the two have been mobilising people to show their strength instead of summoning parliament. And that is why Sirisena has called for early general elections.
The decision may have been inevitable but will prove expensive for a nation reeling under a massive debt burden. It will also be violent and more divisive.
Despite its chequered political history, Sri Lanka has always been a democracy and its people take pride in that fact. There has always been a peaceful transfer of power and there is healthy opposition to any open tampering with the law of the land.
Sirisena is fond of saying political leaders the world over should emulate Nelson Mandela, especially his willingness to walk away from power. Sadly for Sri Lanka, Maithri has shown he is no Madiba.
Dilrukshi Handunnetti is a Colombo-based journalist and lawyer.